PC 2007/07/23~~~ ~
YVi aPY tlW.11 ~"~9 ~~.N~}f ~~9 6P Bd 11 .:
Council Chamber, City Hall
200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California
Q Chairman: Kelly Buffa
® Chairman Pro-Tempore: Joseph Karald
® Commissioners: Gail Eastman, Stephen Faessel,
Cecilia Flores, Panky Romero, Pat Velasquez
® Call To Order
m Brief Presentation on Flouring Element update
a Preliminary Plan Review 1:00 P.NI.
Staff update to Commission on various City developments and issues
(As requested by Planning Commission)
Preliminary Plan Review for items on the July 23, 2007 agenda
m Recess To Public Hearing
® Reconvene To Public Hearing 2:30 P.M.
® Pledge Of Allegiance
® Public Comments
® Consent Calendar
® Public Hearing Items
a Adjournment
You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following
e-mail address: ptanninacommissionno anahem.net
H:ldocslclericallagendasl(072307).doc (07/23/07)
Page 1
Anaheim Planning Commission Ar~enda - 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 v/ith 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.
Reports and Recommendations
1A.(a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARAT
(b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT n
(c) TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2005-156
(Tracking No. SU82007-00048)
Agent: Otis Architecture
16871 Seawitch Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92649
Location: 321. 405, 425, 431. 509 and 511 North Dale
Requests retroactive time extension to comply with conditions of
approval for the following applications:
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05064 - to permit an expansion of
an existing Church consisting of a new administration building, multi-
purpose hall, and religious school.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005-156 - to combine six lots into one lot
1 B. (a)
(b)
Request review and approval of revised second unit deficiencies area
map.
Zoning Code Amendment Resolution No.
H:\docslclerical\agendas\(072307). doc
Project Planner;
(mnewland@anaheim. net)
Project Planner.
(mnewland@anaheim.net)
(07/23107)
Page 2
Agent: City of Anaheim
200 South Anaheim Boulevard #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Mina~tes
1G. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission
Meeting of July 9, 2007 (Motion} {
Public Hearinca Items:
2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
2b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-00455 Request far continuance
2c. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2007-00198 to August 6, 2007.
2d. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
2e. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05200
2f. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP P1O. 17116
Owner: La Vue LLC
30622 La Vue Street
.Laguna Niguel, CA 92677
Agent: Mehdi Ebrahimzadeh
30622 La Vue Street
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677
Location: 1556 West Katella Avenue: Property is approximately
0.78-acre, having a frontage of 130 feet on the south side
of Katella Avenue and is located 170 feet west of the
centerline of Bayless Street.
General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00455 -Request to amend the land
use element map of the General Plan redestgnating the property from the
General Commercial designation to the Medium Density Residential
designation.
Reclassification No. 2007-00198 -Request reclassification of the
subject property from the T (Transition) zone to the RM-3 (Multiple-Family
Residential) zone.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2D07-05200 -Request to construct a 14-unit
attached residential planned unit development with modification to
development standards and waiver of setback between buildings.
Tentative Tract Map No. 17116 - To establish a 1-lot, 14-unit airspace
attached residential condominium subdivision.
Project Planner.
Continued from the July 9, 2007, Planning Commission meeting. (kwongz®anaheim.net)
General Plan Amendment No
Reclassification Resolution No.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
H:\docslclerical\agendasl(072307).doc (07/23/07)
Page 3
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3fi.
3g.
Owner: 2130 Dupont Company
2130 East Dupont Drive
Anaheim, CA 92806
Japos INC.,
Wind-Dor INC.,
2220 East Orangewood Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92808-3110
Agent: Sheldon Group
901 Dove Street, Suite 140
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Location; 2210.2220 East Oranoewood Avenue. 2130 ~ 2231
Dupont Drive*;
Area A: Property encompasses approximately 820 acres
located at the confluence of the Interstate 5 Freeway and
the SR-57 Freeway, in the City of Anaheim in Orange
County, California.
Area B: This rectangularly-shaped, 3.8 acre property is
located at the southeast and southwest corner of Dupont
Drive and Orangewood Avenue with a frontage of 362 feet
on the south side of Orangewood Avenue and frontages of
452** feet on the east side of East Dupont Drive and 445**
feet an the west side of West Dupont Drive.
*Advertised as Dupont Circle.
'*Advertised as 296.
General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445 -Request to amend the
Land Use Element of the General Plan to increase the maximum office
and/or retail square footage permitted in The Platinum Triangle and to
remove the maximum floor area ratio (FAR) in The Platinum Triangle
Mixed Use Overlay, Orangewood District.
Zoning Code Amendment No. 2007-00060 -Request to amend The
Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone (Chapter 18.20 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code), to establish the Orangewood District.
Miscellaneous Permit No. 2007-00202 -Request to amend The
Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to establish the Orangewood
District.
Reclassification No. 2007-00207 -Request to rescind the Resolution of
Intent to reclassify the property to the 0-H zone and request to reclassify
properties from the I (Industrial) zone to I (PTMU Oveday-Orangewood
District) (Industrial, Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay -Orangewood
District) zone for Area B.
H:ldots\clerical\agendas\(072307).doc (07123!07)
Page 4
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05222 -Request to permit a building
height over 100 feet up to 311 feet for a proposed 20-story office building
.and to permit the sales alcoholic beverages in a .proposed restaurant for
Area B.
Development Agreement No. 2007-00001 -Request to adopt a
Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Steadfast
Investment Properties and 2130 Dupont Co. fora 591,500 square foot
office building with 8,500 square feet of commercial uses for Area B.
Continued from the July 9, 2007, Planning Commission Meeting.
General Plan Amendment Resolution No.
flfliscellaneous Resolution No.
Reclassification Resolution No.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. _
Development Agreement Resolution No.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d.
2007.00035
Owner: BP West Coast Product, tLC
4 Center Point Drive
to Palma, CA 90623
Agent: Fred Cohen
CJC Design
1205 North Red Gum Unit A
Anaheim, CA 92806
Location: 1700_West La Palma and 1017-1031 North Euclid Street:
Property is approximately 1.1 acre parcel located at the
southwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Euclid Street
with frontages of 171 feet on the south side of La Palma
Avenue and 270 feet on the west side of Euclid Street.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05195 - Request to cpnstruct a
service station with aself-serve car wash and convenience market with
beer and wine sales with waiver of maximum number of freestanding
signs.
Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2007.00035 -
Determinatfon of :Public Convenience or Necessity to permit sales of beer
and wine for off-premises consumption within a proposed service station
convenience market. Property is approximately 1.1 acre parcel located at
the southwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Euclid Street with
frontages of 171 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue and 270 feet
on the west side of Euclid Street.
Continued from the July 9, 2007 Planning Commission meeting.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
Determination of Public Convenience Resolution No.
H:ldocs\clericallagen dasl(072307). doc
Pmjerf Planner.
(kwong2@anaheim. net)
Project Planner
(ethien@anaheim. nett
(07/23/07)
Page 5
5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
5b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT Request for continuance
5c. RESOLUTION OF UNCERTAINTIES to September 5, 2007.
5d. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05209
Owner: Brandon Rainone
Outer Spring Volcano LP
3364 East La Palma Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92806-2814
Agent: Brandon Rainone
3364 East La Palma Avenue
Anaheim., CA 92806
Location: 3364 East La Palma Avenue: Property is approximately
2.7 acres, having a fronkage of 252 feet on the north .side of
the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway, and is accessed via a 652
foot long, 32 foot wide ingress/egress easement on the
south side of La Palma Avenue, 1,240 feet east pf the
centerline of Shepard Street.
Request to remodel of an existing bowling facility including an expansion
for a management office and permit telecommunications towers with
waivers of (a) minimum number of parking spaces, (b) maximum letter
height. (c) maximum floor area ratio, (d) required landscaping adjacent to Project Planner.
(ethienQanaheim.vet)
a freeway, and (e) maximum size and quantity of freeway oriented wall
signs.
Continued from the May 30, and the June 25, 2007, Planning
Commission meeting.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
6b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
6c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05213
6d. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17175
Owner: The Vineyards Apartments. LLC
4901 Birch Street
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Agent: Ron Cole
4901 Birch Street
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Location: 56D1 East Orangethoroe Avenue: Property is
approximately 13.3-acre with a frontage of 555 feet along
the north side of Orangethorpe Avenue, located 460 west
of the centerline of Imperial Highway.
Continued from the July 9, 2007, Planning Commission Meeting.
Condittonal Use Permit No. 2007-05213 - Request to permit the
conversion of an existing 304-unit apartment complex to an attached Project Planner.
airspace residential condominium planned unit development complex with (skoehm®anaheim,nef)
modification to standards and waiver of setbacks between buildings.
H:\docs\clericallagendas\(072307).doc (07!23/07)
Page 6
Tentative Tract Map No. 17175 - To establish a 1 lot, 304 unit airspace
attached residential condominium subdivision.
Continued from the July 9, 2007 Planning Commission Meeting.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
7a. CEOA SUBSEQUENT EIR iVO. 332 AND ADDENDUM
(PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED)
7b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05227 Request for continuance
7c. FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2007.00006 to August 20, 2007.
Owner: Lennar Platinum Triangle, LLC
25 Enterprise
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656-2601
Agent: George Tellez
Lennar Platinum Triangle
25 Enterprise
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
Location: 7404 East ISatelia: Property is approximately 3.7-acre and
is within an approximate 41.4-acre property, generally
located between Katella Avenue and Gene Autry Way,
extending from State College Boulevard to just west of
Betmor Lane.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05227 - To modify setback
requirements to construct amixed-use project in Development Area C of
the A-Town Metro project.
Final Site Plan No. 2007-00006 -Requests review and approval of a pm/ect P~annen
final site plan fora 5-story, 166-unit, mixed use development, including (twniteQananeim.net)
15,275 square feet of commercial uses in Development Area C of the A-
Town Metro project.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
Final Site Plan Resolution No.
H:\docs\clericallagendas\(072307).doc (07123/07)
Page 7
8a. CEQA EIR NO. 331 (PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIEDI
8b. DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT AREA 5 Request for continuance to
(Mls2oo7-00204) August zo, zoo7
8c. FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2007-00007
8d. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP F1O. 17102
8e. SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. 2007-00003
Owner: Irvine Land Company
550 Newport Genter Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Agent: John Sherwood
Irvine Community Development Company
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 90660
Location: Property is approximately 291-acre portion of the Mountain
Park Specific Plan located east and southeast of the
southern terminus of Gypsum Canyon Road, and bordered
on the north by the Riverside Freeway.
Development Area Plan for Development Area 5
(MIS2007-00204) -Review and approval of a Development Area Plan for
Development Area 5 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan..
Final Site Plan No. 2007-00007 -Review and approval of a final site
plan for Development Area 5 of the Mountain Parlc Specific Plan.
Tentative Tract Map No. 17102 - To establish 153 single-family
detached lots, B:Large-Lots for a maximum of 617 single-family detached
cluster units and 13 Large-Lots for a maximum of 825 single-family
attached units, a public water reservoir, three private parks and
associated streets and landscaping.
Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 2007-00003 -Review and
approval of a specimen tree removal permit to remove 53 trees as part of
the Mountain :Park Master Specimen Tree Removal Permit.
Miscellaneous Resolution Permit No.
Final Slte Plan ReSelUtion NO. Project Planner.
Specimen Tree Removal Resolution No. (skoenmQananeim.ner)
H:ldots;clerical\agendas\(072307).doc (07/23/07)
Page 8
9a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1PREVIOUSLY-APPROVEDI
9b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
9c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4177
(TRAC'IGING NO. CUP 2007-05221)
Owner: Price-James Company
110 N. Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60606
Agent: EMI
ATTN: Rod Wilson
4737 West 156~h Street
Lawndale, CA 90260
Location: 1303-1371 North Euclid Street: Property is approximately
6.42 acres and is located at the northwest corner of Medical
Center Drive and Euclid Street.
Request to amend conditions of approval to permit afreeway-oriented Pro%ect Planner.
electronic readerboard sign in conjunction with an existing automotive (kwong2Qanaheim.net)
dealership with waivers of (a) minimum lot size for an automotive
dealership to permit afreeway-oriented sign (b) maximum area for the
face of sign., (c) maximum permitted height of afreeway-oriented sign.`
'Advertised as "within 300 feet of single-family residential".
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
10a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
10b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
10b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMR NO. 2007-05226
Owner: N + P Desai-2000 III, LP
B & G Singh-2000 III, LP
23800 Via Del Rio
Yorba Linda, CA 92887-2726
Anaheim Redevelopment Agency
201 South Anaheim, Boulevard, Suite 1003
Anaheim, CA 92805
Agent: John Dodson
1330 Olympic Boulevard
Santa Monica, CA 90404
Location: 1112 North Brookhurst Street and 2157-2165 West
La Palma Avenue: Property is 1.5 acres, having frontages
of 266 feet on the north side of La Palma Avenue and 86
feet on the east side of Brookhurst Street and is located
190 feet east of the centerline of Brookhurst Street.
Request to expand an existing commercial retail center and to construct a
drive-through coffee shop with waivers of (a) maximum structural height,
(b) minimum landscape setback abutting a residential zone, (c) minimum Project Planner.
structural setback abutting a residential zone and (d) minimum number of (kwong2Qanaheim.net)
required parking spaces.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
H:\does\clericallagendas\(072307).doc (07/23107)
Page 9
11a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 1
11b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05225
Owner: Carlos Hernandez
122 East La Palma Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92801
Agent: Yesenia Hernandez
122 East La Palma Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92801
Location: 760 North Anaheim Boulevard: Property is approximately
0.34-acre and is located at the southeast corner of North
Street and Anaheim Boulevard.
Request to establish an automotive repair facility.
Project Planner:
(dsee@anaheim.net)
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
12a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 1
12b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
12c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05228
Owner: Anaheim Redevelopment
P.O. Box. 3222
Anaheim, CA 92803-3222
Agent: Anaheim Redevelopment Agency
201 S. Anaheim Boulevard Suite 1003
Anaheim, CA 92805
Location: 1234 South Anaheim Boulevard: Property is
approximately 1.2 acres and is located south and east of
the southeast comer of Anaheim Boulevard and Ball Road.
Request to establish an automotive dealership with waiver of minimum
landscaped setback.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Project Planner.
(dsee@anaheim.net)
Adjourn To Monday, August 6, 2007 at 1:00 P.nfl. for Preliminary
Plan Review.
H:\dots\clerical\agendasl(072307).doc (07!23/07)
' Page 10
t;EBZI'IFE~>~;TIQf~ ®F P05TING
I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at:
11:00 a.m. Juiy 19. 2007
(TIME) (DATE)
LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAI' CASE AND
COUNCIL ~ ISPLAY KIOSK
'.
SIGNED:
-'
If you challenge any one of these City of Anaheim decisions in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in a written
correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
RIGHTS OF APPEAL 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 10:00 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:\docs\clerical\agendas\(072307).doc (07!23/07)
Page 11
SCH~®l~L.~
2007
August 6
August 20
September 5 (Wed)
September 17
October 1
October 15
~- October 29
November 14 (Wed)
November 26
December 10
December 24 (Cancelled)
H:idocs\clerical\agendasl(072307).doc (07/23/07)
Page 12
~~ L-~ BU~n~a Pb ak h'~TY LIMITS
eo.®.e®s. ®..®e.®..®..®..®..®..®..®..®..®..®o
ANAHEIM CITY LIMITS
T
CUP 194
CUP 2006-05167
CHURCH
~ RM-4
RCL 2000-00028
W
t- RCLfi3-64,58 "
~ CUP fi45
~ CUP 503
D VAR 1770
,...
STOCKTONI
m T
`O CUP 194
1 DU
1
~ IR
BAYLOR AVE
_ S
y
RSQ W N U N U
DU EACH ¢ ~ ~ ~ ~j
O ~ ~
CORNELL PL O
I CIR
DRACP,ENA DR
KENDOR CIR
Tentative Parcel Map No: 2005-156
TRACKING NO: TPM2007-00048
Conditional Use Permit No: 2006-05064
TRACKING NO: CUP2007-05219
Requested By: SAINT JOHN THE BAPTIST CHURCH
321, 405, 425, 431, 509, and 511 North Dale Avenue
STANLEY PL
RUSSELL PL
Subject Property
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1"= 200'
Q.S. No. 12
I !_
10318
City of Anaheim
hLANNIIVG ®EPAI2'Cn/IEIVT
Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of
July 23, 2007.
1. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
A. (a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREV
(b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-0!
(Tracking No. CUP2007-05219)
(c) TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.2005-156
(Tracking No. SUB2007-00048)
Agent: Otis Architecture, 16671 Seawitch Lane, Huntington Beach, CA 92649,
Attn: Karen Otis
Requests :retroactive time extension to comply with conditions of approval for the
following applications:
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05064 - To permit an expansion of an existing Church
consisting of a new administration building, multi-purpose hall, and religious school.
Tentative Parcel Mao No. 2005-156 - To combine six lots into one lot.
www.anaheim.nel
ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and
MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby determine that the
previously-approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental
documentation for subject request.
Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve the request for a
two (2) year retroactive extension of time for apreviously-approved conditional use permit for
the expansion of an existing Church consisting of a new administration building, multi-
purpose hall and religious school with waivers, for a period of two (2) years to expire on
May 16, 2009; and,
Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve a extension of time
to comply with the conditions of approval for apreviously-approved tentative parcel map to
combine six lots into one lot for a period of one (1) year to expire on May 16, 2009, .based on
the following:
(i) That this is the second request for an extension of time for the conditional use permit
and the first request for an extension of time for the tentative parcel map and would not
extend the entitlement beyond the two extensions authorized by the Code.
(ii) That there have been no changes to the General Plan and Zoning Code that would
affect this project. No additional information or changed circumstances are present
which would contradict the facts used to support the required findings for approval
of this extension of time.
(iii) That the property is being maintained in a safe, clean and aesthetically pleasing
condition with no unremediated code violations on the property, as confirmed by an
inspection of the property by the Community Preservation Division.
CUP200&05064 Excerpt
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
P.0. Box 3222
Anaheim. California 92803
TEL (714)765-5139
Attachment - R&R 1-A
RESOLUTION NO. PC2006-29
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05064 BE GRANTED
(321, 405, 425, 431, 509 and 511 NORTH DALE 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
LOT 40 OF TRACT NO. 3099, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 95, PAGES 33 AND 34 OF
MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN
BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 11 OF
MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY,
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 12, SOUTH 95.00 FEET FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 12; THENCE WEST 145.00 FEET
PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH
18.00 FEET PARALLEL WITH SAID EAST LINE; THENCE EAST 40.00 FEET PARALLEL WITH
SAID NORTH LINE; THENCE SOUTH 9.00 FEET PARALLEL WITH SAID EAST LINE;
THENCE EAST 105.00 FEET PARALLEL WITH SAID NORTH LINE TO SAID EAST LINE;
THENCE SOUTH 9.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPT THE EAST 40.00 FEET THEREOF.
THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND
MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS
PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 11 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE
OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS
BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTERI DISTANT
NORTH 0° 11' 30" WEST 491.27 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID
NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE
NORTH 0° 11' 30" WEST ALONG SAID EAST LINE 173.33 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89° 49' 30"
WEST PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH 4INE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; A DISTANCE OF 264..00 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 0° 11' 30" EAST 173.33 FEET TO A LINE PASSING THROUGH THE POINT OF
BEGINNING AND PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 12; THENCE NORTH 89° 40' 30" EAST
264.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING..
EXCEPT THEREFROM THE SOUTH 86.665 FEET.
THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP' 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND
MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS
Cr\PC2006-29 -1- PC2006-29
PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 11 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE
OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, DISTANT
NORTH 0° 11' 30" WEST 491.27 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID
NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH 0° 11' 30" WEST, 86.665 FEET ALONG SAID
EAST LINE; THENCE SOUTH 89° 40' 30" WEST, 264.00 FEET PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH
LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH 0° 11' 30" EAST 86.665 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 89° 40' 30" EAST 264.00 FEET PARALLEL WITH SAID SOUTH
LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND
MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS
PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE II OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE
OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE EAST LINE OF SAIp NORTHEAST QUARTER, DISTANT
NORTH 0° 11' 30" WEST 316.27 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID
NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH 0° 11' 30" WEST, 175.00 FEET ALONG SAID
EAST LINE; THENCE SOUTH 89° 40' 30" WEST PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID
NORTHEAST QUARTER, 264.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0° 11' 30 EAST PARALLEL TO THE
EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, 175.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89° 40' 30"
EAST 264.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPT THEREFROM THE SOUTH 105 FEET THEREOF
THE SOUTH 105 FEET OF THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN
BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 11 OF
MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY,
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS;
BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE EAST LINE OF SAID 'NORTHEAST QUARTER, DISTANT
NORTH 0° 11' 30" WEST 316.27 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID
NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH 0° 11' 30" WEST, .175.00 FEET ALONG SAID
EAST LINE; THENCE SOUTH 89° 40' 30" WEST PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID
NORTHEAST QUARTER, 264.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0° 11' 30 EAST PARALLEL TO THE
EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, 175.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH
89° 40' 30" EAST 264:00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
THE .NORTH 20.00 FEET OF THE EAST 264.00 FEET'OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 12 AND THAT
PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION
12, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP
RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 11 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 12; THENCE NORTH 0° 11' 30" WEST 316.27
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 69° 40' 30" WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID
NORTHEAST QUARTER, 396.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0° 11' 30" EAST PARALLEL WITH
-2- PC2006-29
THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, 316.27 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 12; THENCE NORTH 89° 40' 30" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, 396.50 FEET
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on March 20, 2006, at 230 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 use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by
Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.04.030.040 with the following waivers:
(a) SECTION NO. 18.04.070.010. Maximum structural height
35 feet permitted; 39 feet 4-inches proposed)
(b) SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of oarkino spaces
1492 required; 195 proposed and recommended by
the City's Independent Traffic Consultant)
2: That the above mentioned waiver (a) is hereby approved based on the finding that the
additional height is necessary for proper proportion of the building and that there are existing waivers granted
on the property for similar features at a greater height than what is requested for this expansion. The
additional height areas are architectural elements that are a part of the identity of the church, would be
compatible with the existing church building and would not negatively impact the surrounding properties.
3. That the parking waiver (b) is hereby approved based upon a parking analysis prepared by
Traffic Safety Engineers Inc. and reviewed by the City's Independent Traffic Engineer providing evidence
that adequate parking exists on the property for the expanded church facility on the site.
4. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-street
parking spaces to be provided for the church and accessory operations 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 the church and accessory operations because the parking study
indicates that the peak parking demand for off-street parking spaces is lower than the quantity provided for
the project site (76 spaces needed and 195 spaces proposed)..
5. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic
congestion and will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in
the immediate vidinity of the use because the church expansion will have adequate parking to accommodate
the project's peak parking demands.
6. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and
competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use
because as indicated In the parking study, adequate parking tc accommodate the anticipated project peak
parking demand will be provided on-site.
7. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed if any, will not impede vehicular
ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the
proposed use because the project site is physically separated from adjacent private properties. Furthermore,
it has been determined by the parking study that adequate on-site parking spaces are being provided.
-3- PC2006-29
8. 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;
9. 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 Ciry of Anaheim.
10. That 4 people indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that a letter
was received in opposition, prior to the meeting. A person spoke in general with suggestions and relayed
concerns pertaining to zoning issues. A person spoke in favor of the subject request; and a person spoke in
favor of the request and pointed out some concems pertaining to the Cypress trees facing the back of the
subject property and noise issues.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Planning Commission
has reviewed the proposal to expand and existing Greek Orthodox Church to permit a new administration
building with waiver of maximum structural height and minimum number of parking spaces; and does hereby
approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the indepehdentjudgment 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 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.
heath and safety of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That this religious institution with amulti-purpose building, school and administration offices shall
operate consistent with assumptions contained in the approved parking study. 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 City'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 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.
3. That all church activity, including the use of the parking lot, shall cease by 10:00 p.m., Sunday through
Thursday; 11:00 p.m. on Friday; and 2:00 a.m. on Saturday; provided that there must be an on-site
security guard to monitor the parking lot activities for anyactivity past 10:00 p.m. to limit noise impacts
to adjacent properties.
4. That no portable signs shall be utilized to advertise the church.
5. Any additional signs shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. Any
decision by staff regarding signs may be 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 mainteriance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty four
(24) hours from time of occurence.
-4- PC2006-29
That prior to the 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
• Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious
areas; maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced
br "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas.
• Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area .
Management Plan.
• Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in DAMP.
• Describes the Tong-term operation and maintenance requirements far the Treatment Control
BMPs.
• 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.
8. That prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall
• Demonstrate that all structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and
installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications.
• Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non-structural BMPs described in the
Project WOMB
• Demonstrate thaf an adequate number of copies of the approved Projects WQMP are available
onsite.
• Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural
BMPs.
9. That prior to demolition of any existing buildings a demolition permit shall be obtained from the Building
Division.
10. That the developer shall submit street improvement plans to the Public Works Department,.
Development Services Division and a bond shall be posted to guarantee that Dale Avenue is improved
per Public Works Standard Detail 160-A prior to issuance of a building permit. The improvements shall
be consWcted prior to final building and zoning inspections.
11. 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 any sign or wall/fence location.
12. That the locations for future above-ground utility devices including, but not limited tc, electrical
transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications and cable devices, etc.., shall be shown on
plans submitted for building permits. Plans shall also identify the specific screening treatments of each
device (i.e. landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.).:.
13. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or
abandonment's of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through Water
Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department.
14. That since this project has a landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet; a separate irrigation meter
shall be installed in compliance with Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information
shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
15. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to curent Water Service Standards
Specifications. Any water service and/or fire line that does not meet curent standards shall. be
-5-
PC2006-29
a
upgraded for continued use if necessary or abandoned if the existing water service is no longer
needed. The owner/developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water
service of fire line.
16. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground and outside of the street setback area iri a'
manner fully screened from all public streets. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault
shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water 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 and alleys. Said information sFiall be
specifically shown on plans and approved by the Water Engineering Department.
17. That the legal property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim (Water
Engineering Division) an easement twenty (20) in width for waters service mains and or an easement
for large meter and other public facilities.
18. That plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval showing
conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436 and 470 pertaining to
parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and
maintained in conformance with said plans.
19. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works
Department 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 one-gallon size clinging vines planted on maximum three-foot centers
or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building
permits.
20. That the legal owner of subject property shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities
easement (dimensions will vary with electrical design) along/across high voltage lines, low voltage
lines crossing private property and around all pad mounted transformers, switches capacitors, etc.
Said easement shall be submitted to the Ciiy of Anaheim prior to connection of electrical service.
21. That at no time shall there be any outdoor storage on the site for the church:
22. That prior to the issuance of a building permit Park in Lieu fees of $5,388..14 shall be paid for the
residential unit.
23. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense.
24. That all air-conditioning facilities and other ground-mounted equipment shall be properly shielded from
view and sound buffered from adjacent residential properties. Such information shall be specifically
shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
25. That all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the buildings shall be
fully screened by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials. Said information shall be
specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits
26. That this Conditional Use Permit is granted subject to approval of Reclassification No. 2006-00174 and
the approval and recordation of Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005-156 now pending.
27. That each individual building shall be clearly marked with its appropriate building number and address.
Marking shall be positioned so they are easily viewed from vehicular and pedestrian accessways
throughout the complex. Main building numbers shall be a minimum height of 12" and illuminated
during hours of darkness. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building
permits.
-6- PC2006-29
28. That prior to application for water meter, fire line or submitting the water improvement plans for
approval, the developerlownersholl submit to the Public Utilities Water Engineering an estimate of the
maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This
information will be sued 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
be done in accordance with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules and Regulations.
29. That an Emergency Listing Card, Form ADP-281 shall be completed and submitted in a completed
form to the Anaheim Police Department. -
30. That four (4) foot high address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of the building in contrasting
color to the roof material. The numbers shall 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.
31. That No Trespassing 602(k) P.C. signs shall be posted at the entrance to the parking lot and located in
other appropriate places.
32. That all entrances to the parking area shall be posted with appropriate signs per 22658(a) C.V.C to
assist in removal of vehicles at the property owner's request.
33. That the property owner shall submit a letter requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 941
(to temporarily permit church offices, a language school and limited church services in an existing
residential structure, and the eventual construction of permanent church facilities on a portion of
subject property) and Conditional Use Permit No. 786 (to establish a church edifice and educational
unit on an L-shaped portion of the site) to the Planning Services Division.
34. That within thirty (30) days from the date of this resolution, a sign plan shall be submitted to the
Planning Services Division for review and approval of the existing freestanding wood sign.
35. That final landscape plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval
incorporating minimum 24-inch box size trees and vines on a trellis adjacent to the proposed storage
building, plans shall also indicate a tree that is more appropriate in canopy spread. in place of the Live
Oak trees within the 15 foot landscape setback adjacent to the single-family residences. Any decision
by staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item.
36. That separate services and/or events shall not be held simultaneously within the sanctuary and multi-
purpose building resulting in an increase in parking demand.
37. 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 10 and as conditioned herein.
38. 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. 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 30
and 35, 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.
39. That pdor 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. 7, above-mentioned shall be complied with.
Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section
18.60.170
-7- PC2006-29
40. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 8, 10, 26, 28, 29, 30 and 37,
above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
41. 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 competentjunsdiction, 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 commencement of the activity or 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
March 20, 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
(ORIGINAL SIGNED BY GAIL EASTMANI
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
(ORIGINAL SIGNED BY ELEANOR MORRIS)
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 March 20, 2006, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BUFFA, EASTMAN, FLORES'KARAKI, PEREZ, ROMERO, VELASOUEZ
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
,2006.
(ORIGINAL SIGNED BY ELEANOR MORRIS)
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-8- PC2006-29
Attachment - R8R 1-A
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF ANAHEIM
Code Enforcement Division
DATE: JULY 18, 2007
TO: MARIE NEWLAND, PLANNER
FROM: JESSE PENUNURI #1014, CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER
SUBJECT: 405 N DALE AVE.
On July 13, 2007, I conducted an inspection of the property located at 405 N. Dale Ave. The
inspection was in regards to a lazge steel container that was on the back o£ the property. The
container was removed and there aze no other violations at the property.
If you have .any further questions, please contact me at ext. 4148.
Attachment - RJR 9-A
CitS~ of Anaheim
Planning Department
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Anaheim. CA 92805
Attn: Della Herrick
Hi Della,
In regazds to the Saint John the Baptist Greek Orthodox Church, we would like to request
a 2 yeaz extension so we can complete the Construction Documents and necessary fund
raising for the project.
I have enclosed the fee of $1500, the DTF Form, and labeled photographs of the church.
Please let me know if you need anything else.
Thank you,
Karen Otis
Otis Architecture, Inc
714-846-0177
a~9Y
~''G o 2p0~
~~49TN~NGo
~L'T
16A71 GEd WITCH LANE HHNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA 92649 TEL: 714 846 0177 fAX: 714 846 2817 EMAIL: OTISARCN®AOL.COM
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--***
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING AREAS OF SEWER AND PARKING DEFICIENCIES
RELATING TO SECOND UNITS AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS
RELATING THERETO
WHEREAS, on September 29, 2002, the State of California Legislature approved Assembly
BiII No. 1866 which, among other things, amended Government Code Section 65852.2 requiring cities to
permit second units in single-family and multiple-family residential zones; that the State law identifies criteria
under which a second unit is to be permitted, requires a ministerial approval process and limits the
requirements cities may impose on the construction of such second units; and
WHEREAS, as of July 1, 2003 .the law requires cities to allow second units in residential zones
without discretionary action, although cities may adopt ordinances creating specifications and standards for
second units subject to compliance with Government Code Section 65852.2; and
WHEREAS, cities may prohibit second units in areas which are determined to be significantly
impacted by insufficient capacity pertaining to traffic circulation, parking, public utilities and/or other
infrastructure and which deficiency would be exacerbated by the construction of second units; and
WHEREAS, as on May 13, 2003, the Anaheim City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5857,
establishing a process for ministerial approval of second units and creating specification and standards for
such units (the "Second Unit Ordinance"); and
WHEREAS, the Second Unit Ordinance permits second units, subject to the standards
identified therein, in all residential areas of the City, excluding only the areas established by Planning
Commission and/or City Council resolution as deficiency areas which are significantly impacted by
insufficient capacity for sewers, traffic circulation, parking, public utilities, or similar infrastructure needs; and
WHEREAS, on June 16, 2003, the City Planning Commission approved Revision No. 1,
Revision No. 2 on December 13, 2004, and Revision No. 3 on February 22, 2006 to said Second Unit Sewer
and Parking Deficiencies Map, and made findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public meeting at the Anaheim Civic
Center, Council Chamber in the City of Anaheim on July 23, 2007, at 2:30 p.m:, to hear and consider said
proposed Code Amendment and the proposed Second Unit Sewer and Parking Deficiencies Map, 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 Section 65852.2 of the Government Code authorizes cities to use criteria such as
adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of second units on traffic flow to determine areas
where second units may be permitted;
2. That the Second Unit Ordinance provides that second units shall not be permitted in any area
of the City identified by resolution of the Planning Commission and/or the City Council as being significantly
impacted by insufficient capacity for traffic circulation, parking, public utilities and/or other infrastructure.
Cr/PC2007- -1- PC2007-
3. That following review and analysis of sewer capacity throughout the City, as discussed in the
Staff Reports to the Planning Commission dated April 21, 2003, June 16, 2003, December 13, 2004 and
February 22, 2006, which discussion is incorporated herein by this reference, certain areas of existing
deficient sewer capacity, which would be exacerbated by allowing second units, have been identified, based
on the following:
a. Second units, which are housing units, would result in a probable increase in the amourif
of discharge into the sewers generated by the addition of a new dwelling unit compared to
a minor expansion of an existing unit, which would be permitted;
b. Allowing unanticipated second units in neighborhoods that are currently deficient in sewer
capacity will overburden the existing sewers;
c. Permitting second units in said identified areas may lead to sewer spills into the City's
storm drain system, which may constitute a hazard and would subject the City to severe
penalties under its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") Permit;
d. Permitting second units in said identified areas would constitute a health and safety
hazard, and would have adverse impacts on the public health, safety and welfare.
4. That the Public Works Department has completed The Combined Central Anaheim Area
Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers study which determined that a number of sewer lines within the study areas
are currently operating close to their maximum capacity and identified locations in which additional
development should be limited.
5. .That as a clean up effort, non-residential areas have been removed so that only areas zoned
for single-family ormultiple-family residential uses would be identified on the map.
6. That based on the above-described review and analysis of sewer capacity throughout the City,
a Second Unit Sewer and Parking Deficiencies Map, dated July 23, 2007 has been prepared identifying
areas in the City which are already burdened with sewer capacity and parking deficiencies and are not
suitable for the construction of second units without negatively impacting the existing :neighborhoods and
having adverse impacts on the public health, safety and welfare.
7. That the Planning Commission anticipates that the Second Unit Sewer and Parking
Deficiencies Map will be reviewed and updated from time to time to ensure that the map continues to reFlect
areas where second units should not be allowed and to remove areas which would no longer be negatively
impacted by the creation of new second units because improvements to the infrastructure or other changed
circumstances have eliminated the previously identified deficiency.
8. 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: The Planning Commission
concurs with staffs determination that the proposed project is statutorily exempt under Public Resources
Code Section 21080.17 and California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")Guidelines Section 15282(1),
which exempt ordinances for second units to implement the provisions of Government Code Sections
65852.1 and 65852.2; and that this project is also exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15305, which
provides that minor alterations in land use limitations that do not change land use or density in areas with an
average slope of less than 20 percent are permitted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based on the foregoing, the Anaheim City
Planning Commission does hereby approve the "Second Unit Sewer and Parking Deficiencies" Map,
Revision No. 4, dated July 23, 2007, on file with the Planning Department of the City, which identifies those
certain locations having existing significantly deficient sewer capacity and/or existing significantly deficient
on-street parking capacity where second units shall not be permitted and that said map shall replace the
previously revised and approved "Deficiency Area" Map, Revision No. 3, dated February 22, 2006.
-2- PC2007-
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
July 23, 2007. 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
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby
certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning
Commission held on July 23, 2007, by the fallowing vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
.2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
_3_ PC2007-
~~ m
m
Q,
m ~
~.1 ~ m
~ m rL
U > I-
U
N ¢
w W
~o O
F
y
z SU MAC LAN E
W
W
K
~ RS
2
V) -
Z 1 DU EACH
Q RMa
RCL 6659-2
LU RCL 2002-0000:
Z CUP 200d-0d6F
~ TCUP T003-04@f
Q CUP 2002-0483:
U
VACANT
PRESCHOOL
GG
iACO9ELL CI-5&~
REST. urwdc
AGENCY
.a
m
1
RS-2
DU EAI
t DU EACH
RCL fifi-67-13
RCL BS-06-06 GG C-G
RCL Wb1-06 RCL 62-Gi-1
(Res of Intent to CL) i
RCL 7@-79-23 RC4-7 2 CUP 2fi73
RCL 82-63~fi5 DUTCH
RCL fi0-61-58 2001 SOCIAL
60bi•58 04499 CWe
S@b&2 CUP 409@
CUP 3299 CHURCH
CUP 3214
VAR 4769
CONDOMINIUM
OU
KATELLA AVENUE
~130'~
G-G
CL 5669-
~ Gc
C~ RCL @465-02
T
nj ~ T L- {
I CL 5659- CUP 27@2
1 OU -.TTM 911fi
F ~ LAUNORY~ FARi~NF I RpL 2007-0@1.
Hero rvo.
KIMBERLY AVE
VART673
V.AR 8 33 RS-2
O.G:F :D. 1 DU EACH
TRENTON PL
x
U
y w RS-2
tt 1 DU EACH
o H
' W
W
0_
F-
~
HOLGATE PL
W
@3 ~ R52
m 1 Du ACH
1
GUP
( ~' CUP
RCL 61-62-119 m CUP
C-G I T-CUP 2004-04629 m
R
~ CL 6f-62-1
n"aincc ~
4 CUP 2e00-04293 nrv~
m VAR
~ ~
t
no'--m~
GG ~ RCL 5659-fi ~~ 32 iJU
RCL 64-65-105 U W ~
T-CUP 2003-04872
~~
~ Rs-z
CUP 410 ~ v
i 4 Gu EACH
CUP 3846 ~ N
CUP 3741 W
CUP 3665 ~
CUP 3687 Q ~ T
VAR 3569
m
CUP 3426
~ ~ STODDARD
1 O U ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
CUP 702
VAR 4266 x
U ~_ 0 h
VAR 2360 N ~ A
~ v ry O~ /
\
TPM 02-260
~ ~
t O
E
CH
~
oj
~ /J
\\
STRIP MALL o o (
^\
/
General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00455
Reclassification No. 2007-00198
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05200
Tentative Tract Map No. 17116
Requested By: LA VUE LLC
1556 West Katella Avenue
Subject Property
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 58
10302
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2002
Item No. 2
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d:
2e.
2f, (Motion for Continuance)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This 0.78-acre property is identified as 1556 West Katella Avenue. The property owner
and applicant is Mehdi Ebrahimzadeh representing La Vue LLC:
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of the following applications:
(a) General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00455 - to amend the Land Use Element Map of
the General Pian redesignating the property from the General Commercial
designation to the Low-Medium Density Residential designation.'
(b) Reclassification Nb. 2007-00198 - to reclassify the property from the Transition (T)
zone to the Multiple-Family Residential (RM-3) zone.
(c) Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05200 - to construct a 14-unit attached single-
family residential condominium complex under authority of Code Section Nos.
18.06.030:040.0402 (Dwellings-Single-FamilyAttached) and 18.06.160 with waiver
of the fbllowing:
CODE SECTION 18.06.090.050 Distance between building walls.
Withdrawn by applicant:
CODE SECTION 18.40.060.030 Imorbvement of a private street.
28 foot wide street, 4 foot sidewalk, 6
foot food wide parkway requirod; 28 foot
wide sheet, no parkway and sidewalk
proposed)
(d) Tentative Tract Mao No. 17116 - to establish a 1-lot, 14-unit airspace attached
residential condominium subdivision,
'Advertised as Medium Density Residential
.BACKGROUND:
{3) This property is currently vacant and is located within the Transition (T) zone. The General
Plan designates this property and the property to the south for Low Density Residential
land uses: Properties to the north (across Katella Avenue) and west are designated for.
General Commercial land uses and properties to the east for Medium Density Residential
land uses.
Case Planner: Kim6edy Wong
Srgpa2007-00455kiw 62507. Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 2
(4) This request was continued from the June 25, and July 9, 2007, Planning Commission '-
hearing to allow the applicant additional time to modify the site plan.
(5) On behalf of the applicant, Mehdi Ebrahimzadeh, Michael Morcos and George Behnam, the
architects, have submitted the attached letter dated July 17; 2007, requesting a
continuance of this item to the August 6, 2007, Commission. meeting ih order to allow.'
additional time to modify the site plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
(6) Staff recommends the Commission, by motion, continue this item to the August 6, 2007,
Planning Commission meetino as recuested by the aoolicant.
Case Planner. Kim6edy Wong
Srgpa2007-00455k1w_62507 Page 2
Page l of 1
Attachment -Item No. 2
Kimberly Wong
From: George Behnam [gbehnam@sbcglobal.nel]
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:42 AM
To: Kimberly Wong
Subject: Katella Project
Follow Up Fla g.: Follow up
Flag Status: Red
Hello Kim,
Regarding 1566 W. Katella project for Mr. Mahdi Zadeh we are requesting to rescheduling to
August 6th
If you have any question please call me
Regards
Michael
George Behnam, Architect
1150 E. Orangethorpe Ave,
Suite 109
Placentia, Ca 92870
voice 714.572.2384
fax 714.572.2385
e-mail gbehnam@sbcglobal.net
7/1 712 0 0 7
Item No.
.~
~w
N
III ( Mj \\\
AreaA
Address; The Platinum Triangle
Interstate 5 Freeway and SR-57 Freeway
~p~ vws n,v
LFFlLE ryry 11~~
FCL d10C.EVIZ9
~t~~-1S
I(PrMUI PLL ~SZd]
W.P1M bLOflt FAM
ORANGEWOOD AVENUE
i
Pa masm
ilm ~ PIISSFm
.Im."a.• a ov:monm
BZ~LLIfm.
IryMl HWAS
R2fi66].1~ E
FamBJm
R(YS6r81
NO.fl11M 2 z
w Zwuuwm
EMN.LING. re(PnAU)
rRMS NVGfl6rODIUM
OFRNPHEIM
a1HWNG
aaeoons 9 y
NPdul ~ - 1
~.ssser.u -a=.
aro.AUi' s pey•
$a~
,m,<~, w a
a `~
¢ -y v
irv~PU^ ari~ ~ ~ 3 E
L.o-e>,.
~ilmuN" P ~i.~ia~o m, O
"ui im''a.'a:
x~o. m~ax°.ii r"'cua'ieeaa]v ~
Areaa
Address: 2210.2220 EasbOrangewocd,
2130-2231 Dupont Ctrcle -proposed Plagnum Tower
General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445
Zoning Code Amendment No. 2007-0060
Miscellaneous Permit No. 2007-00202
Reclassification No. 2007-00207
CondlOonal Use Penntt No. 2007-05222
Development Agreement No. 2007-00001
Requested By. 2130 DUPONT COMPANY
JAPOS INC.
Interstate 5 Freeway and SR-57 Freeway
2210-2220 East Orangewood, 2130-2231 Dupont Circle
FA IPfMUI
1CL 90<L%Z9
iLL ®L0.1i
NLl ®b1d]
GIPZ~00
G1P]50
FNCB SrODNA
nvucrtL
I ~
aa. aaanmxr
~R~CL&S7_jUH) GG ;
FLL RAOdB pp
ILL Sfi193 ~QI~.15~) > P~r,~~onNl
EAVILINU. iCL 1I.]&C9 ~ Puwav.u
FliMS ILL B,L)-11 N P6TJ1131
"~IhI6U05 m ~~~~
a1apNG/ 0 ALE ~ mn~ixxo~~
I ' 1 -Y~
s°® d` \
LI~~ ILL miwM2r
~'" r'~+l'~SY3'I !
~ fLL t)-]9-0B
c a:L ~srna
P`~iso°0' ~ /1
~ acsicE 3 l///'\\\\1
p I Et4a.
W1mmaAl
_ L\ TOWNE CENraE PLALE p~
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE.-~ 1 V
Platinum Tower
Subject Property
'Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: Graphic
Q.S. No. 119
10307
Area A
Address: The Platinum Triangle
Interstate 5 Freewayand SR-57F2eway
i~
N
Afe$,B :;~~'~: ~
TAWNE(CENTftE1PlA
Address: 2210-2220 East Orangewood, .,~,~„
ALL PROPERTIES ARE tN THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE
ot~
2130-2231 Dupont Circe -proposed Platinum Tower ~ „~,r 3
General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445
Reclassification No. 2007-00207 Subject Property
Condllional Use Parmlt No. 2007-05222
Date: JUIy 23
2007
Development Agreement No. 2007-00001 ,
Miscellaneous No. 2007-00202 Scale: Graphic
Zoning Cade Amendment No. 2007-00060 Q.S. NO. 'I19
Requested By: CITY-INITIATED
Interstate 5 Freeway and SR-57 Freeway
2210-2220 East Orangewood, 2130-2231 Dupont Circle -proposed Platinum Tower 10307
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 3
3a: PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED CEQA SUBSEQUENT EIR NO: 332
AND THIRD ADDENDUM (Motion)
3b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-00445 (Recommendation Resolution)
3c. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2007-00060 (Recommendation Motion)
3d. AMENDMENT TO THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE MASTER.
LAND USE PLAN (MIS2007-00202) (Recommendation Resolution)
3e> RECLASSIFICATION: NO: 2007-00207 (Resolution)
3f. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO: 2007-05222 (Resolution)
3g. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO.` 2007-00001 - (Recommendation Resolution).
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) Area A: The Platinum Triangle encompasses approximately 820 acres as identified in the
attached map:
(2) Area B: This 3.8-acre property. is identified as 2210-2220 East Orangewood Avenue and
2130 & 2231 Dupont. Drive': The property owner is Japos Inc: and 2130 Dupont Company,
the developer is Steadfast Investment Properties, and the applicant is the Sheldon Group:
(3) The subject property is located within The Platinum,Triangle Master Land Use Plan area
and the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone:.-1t is currently zoned Industrial (I).
"Advertised as Dupont Circle.
REQUEST::
(4) The applicant requests approval of the following:
General Plan' Amendment No. 2006-00445 - to amend the Land Use Element of the
General Plan to increase the maximum office andlor retail square: footage permitted in the
Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay (Area'A) and to remove the'maximum floor area ratio
(FAR) in The Platinum Triangle Mixed UseDverlay.
Zonino Code Amendment No; 2007-00060 - to amend the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use
Overlay Zone to establish the Orangewood bistrtct (Chapter 1820 of theAnaheim
Municipal Code).
Amendment to The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Permit No.
2007-00202)'- to amend The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to establish the
Orangewood District.
Reclassification No: 2007-00207 -.request to rescind the Resolution of Intent to reclassify
Area B to the Office-High (O-H) Zone and request to reclassify properties from the
Industrial (I) zone to Industrial -Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone: Orangewood
DisUict (I-PTMU Overlay -Orangewood District).
Conditional Use Permif No. 2007-05222 - topermit a proposed 20-story office building 311
feet in height under authority of Code Section No. 18.20.050 (Structural Heights) end to
permit the sales of alcoholic beverages in a proposed restauranfunderautnority of Code
Section No. 18.20.030:040.0402 (Alcoholic Beverage Sales - On Sale) for Area B.
Case Planner. Kimberly Wong
srGPA2006-00445k1w Page 1
Staff Report to the
Plahning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 3
cs x*~ +,'t ..~X' r ~ r,~rsr^ ~' .~
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALi
(8) The applicant proposes to construct a 20-story, 311-foot high, 606,500 square foot
professional office and Petailbuilding. The project also includes the construction of a 7.5
story above-ground parking structure.
Page 2
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
.July 23, 2007
Item No. &
(9) The site plan indicates the building will be located adjacent to Orangewood Avenue and
"East Dupont Drive and the parking structure will be 60 feet behind the office building. The
plan also shows conformance with the minimum setback requirements as indicated in the:
table below° Code permits a maximum of 75% lot coverage and ti7% is proposed.:
_Direction Code Required /Proposed Code Required /Proposed
Buildin Setback Landsca 'e Setback
North (adjacent to 12' Feet 6.12 Feet P.12' Feet / 12 Feet
Orangewood
Avenue
East (adjacent to 10 Feet / 15-23 Feet < 10 Feet / 15-23 Feet
East Dupont
Drive
West (adjacent to 10 Feet / 15-79 Feet 10 Feet / 15-79 Feet
West Dupont
Drive
Sduttr (adjacent 5 Feet / 5 Feet 5 Feet / 5 Feet
to industrial
'Under proposed Zoning Code Amendment
(10) Access to the site would;be provided via two (2) sets of driveways each along East end
West Dupont Drive. An emergency fire access driveway would alsd be provided aldng
West Dupont Drive. A driveway along EastDupont Drive wouldprovide access to the
subterranean oading and trash dock.
(11) The parking structure plans show one (1) level of subterranean parking with a corridor
entrance into the building and 6.51evels of above-ground parking. The plans indicate a
total of 2,001! parking spaces. The total numtier of propdsed spaces exceeds the code
requirement of 1,870 spaces.
(12) The office building floor plans show 596,500 square feet of office development and 10,000
square feet of commercial development. The: main entrance to the building would be
located at ground level on the south side of the building facing the,parking structure. There
would be no entrance on Orangewood Avenue, The first floor would include an entrance
lobtiy with two (2) restaurants on the west side of the building and"offices on the east. The.
remainder of the building would consist of offices. The floor plans'do not indicate specific
tenants or tenant improvements'at this time.
(13J The office building elevation plans show a 311-foot high, 20-storybuilding as depicted`
below. Code permits a maximum height of 700 feet'with additional height permitted by
conditional use permit. The building meets the architectural design requirements of the:
PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone. The proposed post-modem stylebffice building
would incorporate a brdwn and black the granite base and tan concrete walls with blue
reflective glass in the central area. An aluminum-clad eyebrow awning is proposed at the
top of the tower, with matte-finished dark gray mullions and a solid cornice at the top of the
building
Page 3
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 3
(14) The parking. structure'elevations`indicate a'6.5-story above-grade parking structure: The
parking structure meets the architectural design requirements bf the PTMLUP and the
PTMU Overlay Zone. by providing a variety of architectural enhancements? Layered
landscaping of a talt hedge at the base of the structure with a backdrop' of tall pine trees
would screen the appearance from East and West Dupont Drive. The top levelsbf the
structureantl driveway entrances would be screened with a decorative wire mesh
extending 5-feet from the structure's concrete walls'to provide shadow and articulation.
The wire mesh would support clinging vines to create a green wall effect. The structure's
concrete walls would match the colors of the office building. ?he elevation of the parking
structure facing the office building would consist of blue reflective glass masses at the
corners and at the elevator core: A roof top solar panel landscaping system is proposed on
the tap floor of the parking structure.
Page 4
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2002
Item No. 3
.~ ~„- ~ ~ ~ ; f ~s r r
~ ~
,..n s ~ ~~r ~~ ~- rJ F~ ~~ ~~
~' ~, ~ ~ x 4 -P. f l f ~ "-
JF s d ~ ~ o-> ~. /.~ ~ ~,5 ~~` .r .~,, l ~~ >
n
~ S -
.,,?~,~ ~ r7.F' ri'~r `~ i r~e^ G~ s'~'~i""4„ ~'.r`4 * l~~r°by? r-? ~ v
»,~~ t~~tH ~ ~ ~ ~~/~! a ~y r ~ ~~ Fk ~~ ~"~ fir- of-r 2
qp~{
r4u4~ of~4 Iat~ t t '3 ~~~ .3^ r ~~~ ~~p K'~~a sr~ ~
.~ r u`s.,: ~,=.o ~~
,p3~- ., ~~~~./ vi"+ -^' - r`
xvh Eo3l+~~,?l ci"„,x,
f ,~ ~~ i- a 2N' , . ,. S• s~,.,X ~~ rg ~4', ,"-:-nS s k t .~
!4 9 ! / 1 /'
~~ t~~~
~~
,~ ~ ,~~
~ ~~. ~`
~~ ~~~ ~ w
5,
Parking Structure Elevation facing West/East Dupont Drive
(15) Thelandscape plan depicts an outdoor plaza containing outdoor furniture, decorative
paving, a water feature, and enhanced landscaping. An outdoor seating area is proposed
in front of the restaurahtfacing West Dupont Drive; defined by a low decorative fence and
landscaped planters with small evergreen. trees to protect the dining area for the restaurant.
The andscape palette includes a variety of gees, shrubs, and groundcoveq' in compliance
with the landscape requirements of the PTMU Overlay Zone and PTMLUR Landsdaping in
thepublic rights-of-way along Orangewood Avenue and East and West Dupont Drive meet
PTMLUP guidelines.
(16) The`sign program indicates the conceptual location of proposed wall and monument signs
for the office'building._ Altftough specific tenants have not yet been identified, plans
propose a total of ten (10) wall signs, with three (3) wall signs on the north elevation'facing
Orangewood Avenue; two (2) wal(signs oh the south elevation facing the parking structure,
two (2) wall gns on the east elevation facing East Dupont Drive; and three (3f wall signs
on the wesf elevation facing WestDupontbrive. Code permits a maximum of three (3)
walls signs for'each building elevation. The program also indicates a two (2) monument
signs, one each at the cdmers of West and East Dupont Drive: The program also indicates
directional signage.
(17) The developer. is seeking LEED certification for the project.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO 2006-00445 MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO': 2007-00202
" AND ZONING CODEAMENDMENTNO: 2007-00060 DISCUSSION:
(18) The maximum square footage of 1;735,000 office development and no retail development
is pecified in the General Plan Land Use Element; the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use
Plan, and the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone. This'request would add 62,050
square feet of office and 10,000 square feet of retail development; increasing office
development to 1,797,050 square feet and adding 10.,000 square feet of retail
Page 5
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 3
development. TheYequest also includes deleting the maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of
2.00. This project complies with Code requirements of a maximum Iotcoverage of 75%.
(19) .The applicant requests amending The Platinum Triangle MasterLand Use Plan to add the
Orangewood District Section`3.7 ("Orangewood bistrict") and Figure 10A ("Orangewood
btstrict Underlying Zoning and'Location Map") of the' Master Land Use Plan would be
modified to describe and show the boundaries of the. new district. The Orangewood District
is proposed to be an Office District and is an implementing zone of the High Density Office
land use designationcf the General Plan.
(20) The proposed Zoning Code Amendment to he PTMU` Overlay Zone (Chapter 18.20 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code) wouldestablistt developmeht standards for the prdposed
Orangewood District:'. Staff supports these'amendments as they. complywith the
requiremehts of the PTMU Overlay Zone and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan
design guidelines.
RECLASSIFCATION N0. 2007-00207bISCUSSION:
(21) On August 17, 2004, the Planning Commission approved a resolution of intent to reclassity
the property,. along with otheFprdperttes in The Platinum Triangle, from the I (Industrial)
zone to the 0-H (High';Intensitybffice) zones. The property owner wouldneed to fihalize
the zone; otherwise the existing' Industrial zoning on the property remains'in place.
(22) The applicant is requesting to rescind the resolution of intent, and requests the property to
be reclassified to The Platinum Triangle Mized-Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone in addition to
their current Industrial`zone, thafis to the Industrial -Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay
(1-PTMU) Zone. The property owner requests approval of the Orangewood District The
PTMU Orangewood District is an!implementing zone of the High Density Office land use
designation and would be consistent witfi tfie General Plan.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05222 DISCUSSION:
(23) The projecPrequires approval pia conditional use permit for a structural height of 311 feet.
Although the proposed office tower is notbf similar scale as existing structures in the
vicinity; it is in conformity with The Platinum Triangle FSEIR which anticipated projects
within The Platinum Triangle would exceed 300 feet::
(24) The property owner/developer is'required to demonstrate that the buildings will not create
adverse shade/shadow impacts'to residential, recreational, outdoor dining or pedestrian
areas. The submitted hade and shadow plan indicates the proposed 20-story building
would impact the Orangewood Condominiums, on'Orangewood Avenue during the winter
months, However, plans indicate the shade and shadow of thebuilding would not impact
any one unitmore titan 50% df the day, and would comply with:}equired'mitigation for the
project.
(25) The project includes a request for a conditional use permit for the sale of alcoholic
beverages in conjunction with a proposed restaurant: The applicant has indicated that a
specific tenant hasnot been idehtified for this site at this time.. An outdoor dining area with
low fencing is proposed as part of the restaurant. The Policebepartment indicates that this
property is located within Reporting District 2228, which has a crime rate of eightypercent
(80%) below the City-wide average: if is also within census tract number 761.01, which
has a population of 5,264. Based upon this population, 6 on-sale AlcoholiaBeverage
Control licenses are permitted, and there are presently 4 licerses. The Police Department
supports the request for alcoftolic beverage sales within the proposed restaurant because it
is not anticipated to negatively impact tfie surrounding businesses or neighborhoods.
Page 6
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 3
;.Specific conditions of approval based on recommendations of the Police Department have
been incorporated into the conditional use permit.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00001 DISCUSSION:
(26) Development in the PTMU Overlay Zone requires the Planning Director's approval'of a
development agreement between the property owner. and the Cityand' a final site plan.
showing conformance with the provisions of the PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone L
The approved site plan will be incorporated into the Development Agreement as an exhibit.
(27) The propdsed Development Agreement conforms to the standardized Platinum Triangle
Development Agreement:. Further, the project exceeds the minimum 250,000 square feet
of office development and therefore satisfles the eligibility requirements to enter into a
Development Agreement.
(28) On July 5, 2007, the Planning Director approved Final Site Plan No. 2007-00005, subject to
the approval of the related general plan amendment, amendment to the PTMLUP, zoning
code amendment, roclassification, conditional use permit, and development agreement:
The Final Site Plan, including elevations and color material boards; was reviewed and
recommended for approval by the City's architectural consultant. The approved Final Site
Plan is attached as "Exhibit B" of the Development Agreement.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(29) Staff has reviewed the Initial Study/Addendum prepared for the projectand finds thaf the
CEQA ThirdAddendum to thepreviously-certified Platinum Triangle Fihal SEIR, is
adequate to serve as the required environmehtal documentation.
FINDINGS:
(30) 'Prior to making a recommendation to City Council for approval of the requested General
Plan Amendment, the Planning Commission shag make the following findings:
(a) ' Theproposed amendment maintains the internal consistency of the Generat Plan;
(b) The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health,
safety, convenience, or welfare of the City;
{c) The proposed amendment would maintain the balance of land uses within the City;
and
(d) ; The subject property is physically suitable to accommodate the proposed
modification, including but not limited to access, physical constraints, topography,
provision of utilities, and compatibility with surrounding land uses.
(31) Prior to approving an amendment to The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan,.
c, Planning Commission shall make the following findings:
(a) The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals and policies for. the
development of The Platinum Triangle as set forth in the City of Anaheim General
Plana
(b) Theproposed amendment is consistent with the goals and policie5set forth in The
Platinum Triangle MasterLand Use Plan.
Page 7
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 3
(c)_ The proposed amendment will result in development of desirable character that will
be compatible with proposed development in the surrounding area:'
(d) The proposed amendment Pespects environmental, aesthetic and historic resources
consistent with economic realities:
(32) Prior to approving a conditional use permit, Planning Commission shalt make the following
findings
(a) 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 18.66.040 (Approval Authority);
(b) :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) The size and shape of the site for the use is adequate td allow the full development
of the proposedLse in a manlier not detrimehtal td the particular area or to the health
and safety;
(d) The traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets
and highways designed and improved tobarry the traffic in the area; and
{e) The granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will
`not be detrimental to the healttr and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
{33) Prior to making a recommendation to City: Council forapproval bf a Development
Agreement, Planhing Commission shall determinewhether the applicaht has demohstrated
eligibility td enter into the Development Agreement by finding the project satisfies one or
more of the eligibility requirements set forthbelow:
(a) The project shall occupy at least 50 acres; or
(b) Upon completioh; the project shall result in the construction of at least 250 dwelling
units, 250,000 square feet of commercial-office space, or 250,000 square feet of
industrial space; or
{c) The project will be constructed in phases over an anticipated period of not less than 5
years, or
(d) If the Planning Director finds that the public health, safety or general welfare of the
citizens of Anaheim will best be served by accepting an application for consideration by
the Planning Commission and City Council,
Tfte Commission must also determine whether the proposed Agreement is consistent with
the General Plan, compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for
the applicable zoning district, compatiblewith the orderly developmeht of property in the
surrounding area; and not otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of
the citizens of Anaheim'.
RECOMMENDATION:
(34) 'Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions:
Page 8
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007.
Item No. 3
(a) By motion, recommend that the City Council determine that previously-certified
SEIR No. 332 and its Third Addendum are adequate to serve as the required
environmental documentation for this project..
(b) By resolution, recommend that the City Council aoordve General Plan Amendment
No. 2006-00445.
(c) `By motion, recommend that the City Council aoprove Zoning Code Amendment No.
2007-00060.
(d) By resolution, recommend that the City Council ap rove the proposed amendment
to the PTMLUP (MIS2007-00202).
(e) By motion, aoorove Reclassification No. 2007-000207..
(t) By resolution, ap rove Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05222.
(g) By resolution, recommend that the City Council aoorove Development Agreement
No. 2007-00001.
Page 9
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"'
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ADOPTING AND RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-00445 PERTAINING TO
THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE ANAHEIM GENERAL PLAN
(THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE)
WHEREAS, the first Anaheim General Plan was adopted in 1963 and has been subsequently
amended over the years as conditions warrant; and that the City Council adopted a comprehensive update to
the General Plan on May 25, 2004;
WHEREAS, the adopted General Plan envisions an area of the City of Anaheim known as the
The Platinum Triangle as a thriving economic center that provides residents, visitors and employees with a
variety of housing, employment, shopping and entertainment opportunities that are accessed by arterial
highways, transit systems and pedestrian promenades (set forth in Goal 15.1 of the Land Use Element); and
WHEREAS, The Platinum Triangle comprises approximately 820 acres located at the
confluence of Interstate 5 and SR-57 Freeways in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
generally east of Interstate 5 Freeway, west of the Santa Ana River channel and SR-57 Freeway, south of the
Southern California Edison easement, and north of the Anaheim City limit area; and
WHEREAS, the City did receive a verified petition for General Plan Amendment Nd. 2006-
00445 requesting an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan to increase the square footage
of office and commercial uses permitted in The Platinum Triangle from 1,735,OOp to 1,797,000 square feet of
office development and from 0 to 10,000 square feet of commercial development, as further set forth in Exhibit A
(Table LU-4: General Plan Density Provisions far Specific Areas of the City), which exhibit is attached hereto
and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full; and
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Anaheim Civic
Center, Council Chamber, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, on July 23, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public
hearing having been duly given as required bylaw and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim
Municipal Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against said General Plan Amendment and to
investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due consideration, inspection, investigation and study
made by itself, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, DOES HEREBY
FIND:
1. That the evidence presented substantiates that the proposed amendment to the Land Use
Element of the Anaheim General Plan is necessary, and will further the goals of said Plan by providing
commercial and office uses consistent with the Office High designation and maintaining the internal consistency
of the General Plan.
2. That the proposed amendment would be consistent with and assist in the implementation of the
goals and policies for The Platinum Triangle pertaining to Office High approved by the City Council as apart of
the comprehensive General Plan Update on May 25, 2004.
3. That proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety,
convenience, or welfare or the citizens of the City and would maintain a balance of land uses within the City.
4. 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 General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445 and, by its motion, did find and determine
and recommend that the City Council find and determine, pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and based upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial
Cr\PC2007-0 -1- PC2007-
Study/Addendum conducted pursuant to CEQA for General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445, and the
requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of
the CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence received at the public hearing, that previously-certified FSEIR No. 332
and the Third Addendum to FSEIR 332, together with the Updated and .Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program
No. 106A for The Platinum Triangle, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 145, are adequate to serve as the
required environmental documentation for General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445 and satisfy all of the'°"
requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for said General
Plan Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to the above findings, fhe Anaheim
Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council of the City of Anaheim adopt General Plan
Amendment No. 2006-00445 pertaining to the Land Use Element, to increase the maximum square footage
permitted for office and commercial uses in The Platinum Triangle from 1,735,000 to 1,797.,000 square feet of
office development and from 0 to 10;000 square feet of commercial development, as further set forth in Exhibit A
(Table LU-4: General Plan .Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City).
AND 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
July 23, 2007. 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
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss
CITY OF ANAHEIM 1
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
July 23, 2007, by the following vote of the members therepf:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
2007.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
SENIOR SECRETARY. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-2- PC2007-
[DRAFY]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"`
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
RESCIND, IN PART, RESOLUTION NO. 2004-180 AND THAT PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NO.
2007-00207 BE GRANTED, UNCONDITIONALLY
(2210-2220 EAST ORANGEWOOD AVENUE AND 2130 AND 2231 DUPONT DRIVE)
WHEREAS, The Platinum Triangle comprises approximately 820 acres located at tte
confluence of the Interstate 5 Freeway and the SR-57 Freeway in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State
of California, generally east of the Interstate 5 Freeway, west of the Santa Ana River channel and' SR-57
Freeway, west of the Santa Ana River channel and SR-57 Freeway, south of the Southern California Edison
easement, and the north of the Anaheim City limit area and which area is further depicted in Figure "LU-5: Areas
of the City with Special Density Limitations" of the City of Anaheim General Plan and which Figure is
incorporated herein as if set forth in full; and.
WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004, the City Council of the City of Anaheim adopted The Platinum
Triangle Master Land Use Plan by its Resolution No.2004-178 and The Platinum Triangle Standardized
Development Agreement by its Resolution No. 2004-179, and on August 24, 2004, the City Council adopted the
Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone by Ordinance No. 5935; and
WHEREAS; on August 17, 2004, the City Council did adopt its Resolution No. 2004-180
approving Reclassification No. 2004-00127, declaring .and indicating its intention tc amend the Zoning Map of
the City of Anaheim and to rezone and reclassify certain properties, as described therein, from the I (Industrial),
C-G (General Commercial), O-L (Low Intensity Office) and PR (Public Recreational) Zones to the O-H (High
Intensity Office) Zone; and
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified petition for (i)
General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445 to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to increase the
maximum office square footage permitted in The Platinum Triangle and to remove the maximum floor area ratio
(FAR) in The Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone, Orangewood District, (ii) Miscellaneous Case
No. 2007-00202 to amend The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to establish the Orangewood District,
(iii) Zoning Code Amendment No. 2007-00057 to amend the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay
Zone (Chapter 18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) to establish the Orangewood District, (iv) Conditional Use
Permit No. 2007-05222 to construct a 20-story, 311-foot,. high-rise office building and to permit sales of alcoholic
beverages for on-premises consumption in a proposed restaurant, (v) Reclassification No. 2007-00207, and (vi)
approve and adopt Development Agreement No. 2007-00001; and
WHEREAS, Reclassification No. 2007-00207 requests that the Anaheim City Planning
Commission recommend that the City Council rescind, in part, Resolution No. 2004-180 pertaining to
Reclassification No. 2004-00127 as it pertains to the subject property, and reclassify the subject property from
the I (Industrial) Zone to the I (PTMU Overlay) (Industrial -Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay) Zone; and
WHEREAS, the subject property encompassed by Reclassification No. 2007-00207 comprises
approximately 3.8-acres of real property located in The Platinum Triangle, as more particularly described in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, generally known as 2210-2220 East
Orangewood Avenue and 2130 and 2231 Dupont Drive; and.
WHEREAS, on July 23, 2007, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did hold a publichearing
pertaining to Reclassification No. 2007-00207, notice of said 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 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 its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and
determine the following facts:
CR\PC2007- -1- PC2007-
1. That subject property, which comprises approximately 3.8-acres, is currently developed with
industrial buildings; and that the Land Use Element of the Anaheim General Plan designates the property for
Office-High land uses.
2. That rescinding, in part, the resolution of intent to reclassify the above-described property to the
O-H (High Intensity Office) Zone is required in conjunction with the proposed reclassification of the subject
property to the I (PTMU Overlay) (Industrial -Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay) Zone.
3. That General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445 to amend the Land Use Element of the General
Plan to increase the maximum office square footage permitted in The Platinum Triangle and to remove the
maximum floor area ratio (FAR) in The Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone, Orangewood
District; Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00202 to amend The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to
establish the Orangewood District; Zoning Code Amendment No. 2007-00057 to amend the Platinum Triangle
Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (Chapter 18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) to establish the Orangewood
District; Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05222 to construct a 20-story, 311-foot, high-rise office building and to
permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption in a proposed restaurant; and approve and
adopt Development Agreement No. 2007-00001 are being considered in conjunction with Reclassification No.
2007-00207.
4. That the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone, as proposed for
amendment, designate the subject property as "I (PTMU Overlay) (Industrial -Platinum Triangle Mixed Use
Overlay) Zone, Orangewood District."
5. That the Anaheim General Plan designates subject property for Office High land uses and the.
proposed I (PTMU Overlay) (Industrial -Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay) Zone is an appropriate
implementation zone for this land use designation as the proposed establishment of the Orangewood District
implements the Office High land use designation.
6. That the proposed reclassification of subject property is necessary and/or desirable for the
orderly and proper development of the community.
7. 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 area
8. 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 City Planning
Commission has reviewed Reclassification No. 2007-00207 and, by its motion, did find and determine and
recommend that the City Council find and determine, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act ("CEQA"), and based upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial Study/Addendum
conducted pursuant to CEQA for Reclassification No. 2007-00207, and the requirements of CEQA, including
Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the.
evidence received at the public hearing, that previously-certified FSEIR No. 332 and the Third Addendum to
FSEIR 332, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A for The Platinum
Triangle, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 145, are adequate to serve as the required environmental
documentation for Reclassification No. 2007-00207 and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no
further environmental documentation need be prepared for said Reclassification.
NOW., THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend that the City Council rescind, in part, Resolution No. 2004-180 pertaining to Reclassification No.
2004-00127 as it pertains to the subject property, and reclassify the subject property from the I (Industrial) Zone
to the I (PTMU Overlay) (Industrial -Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay) Zone.
-2- PC2007-
BE IT FURTHER 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 I (Industrial) Zone and to incorporate said described
property into the I (PTMU) (Industrial -Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay) Zone.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the approval of Reclassification No. 2007-0207 is contingent
upon the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445, Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master
Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00202), and Zoning Code Amendment No. 2007-00060, now
pending.
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 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 July 23,
2007. 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
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
July 23, 2007, by the follpwing vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
2007
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
_3_ PC2007-
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"`
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
AN AMENDMENT TO THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE MASTER LAND USE PLAN
{MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2007-00202)
WHEREAS, The Platinum Triangle comprises approximately 820 acres located at the
confluence of the Interstate 5 Freeway and the SR-57 Freeway in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange,
State of California, generally east of the Interstate 5 Freeway, west of the Santa Ana River channel and
SR-57 Freeway, south of the Southern California Edison easement, and north of the Anaheim City limit
area and which area is further depicted in "Figure LU-5: Areas of the City with Special Density Limitations"
of the City of Anaheim General Plan and which Figure is incorporated herein as if set forth in full; and
WHEREAS, the adopted General .Plan envisions The Platinum Triangle as a thriving
economic center that provides residents, visitors and employees with a variety of housing, employment,
shopping and entertainment opportunities that are accessed by arterial highways, transit systems and
pedestrian promenades (set forth in Goal 15.1 of the Land Use Element); and
WHEREAS, the recently adopted General Plan Includes policies in the Land Use Element
and the Community Design Element to implement the vision for The Platinum Triangle including providing
for more detailed planning efforts to guide the future development of The Platinum Triangle; encouraging
mixed-use projects integrating retail, office and higher density residential land uses; encouraging a
regional inter-modal transportation hub in proximity to Angel Stadium of Anaheim; maximizing and
capitalizing upon the view corridor from the Santa Ana (I-5) and Orange (SR-57) Freeways; maximizing
views and recreation and development opportunities afforded by the area's proximity to the Santa Ana
River; developing a comprehensive Mixed-Use Overlay Zone and Design Guidelines to implement the
vision for The Platinum Triangle; providing for a mix of quality, high-density urban housing that is
integrated into the area through carefully maintained pedestrian streets, transit connections, and arterial
access; developing a Public Realm Landscape and Identity Program tp enhance the visibility and sense
of arrival into The Platinum Triangle through peripheral view corridors, gateways, and specialized
landscaping; developing a strong pedestrian orientation throughout the area, :including wide sidewalks;
pedestrian paths, gathering places, ground-floor retail, and street-level landscaping; encouraging
extensive office development along the highly visible periphery of the area to provide a quality
employment center; developing criteria for comprehensive property management agreements for
multiple-family residential projects to ensure proper maintenance as the area develops; and, identifying
and pursuing opportunities far open space areas that serve the recreational needs of Platinum Triangle
residents and employees; and
WHEREAS; on August 17, 2004, the City Council of the City of Anaheim adopted The
Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (hereinafter "PTMLUP") by Resolution No. 2004-178 and The
Platinum Triangle Standardized Development Agreement by Resolution No. 2004-179 and on August 24,
2004, the City Council adopted the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (hereinafter
"PTMU Overlay Zone") by Ordinance No. 5935; and
WHEREAS, the PTMLUP provides for the implementation of the General Plan vision,
goals and policies for The Platinum Triangle and serves as a blueprint for future development and street
improvements within The Platinum Triangle, including setting forth planning principles, development
intensities, conceptual street, park and potential new signalized intersection locations and streetscape
designs including, but not limited to, landscaping, lighting fixtures and street furniture and identifying the
existing AmtraklMetrolink Station and the conceptual Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center
(ARTIC) location; and
WHEREAS, on April 26, 2005, the City Council approved Amendment No. 1 to the
PTMLUP by Resolution No. 2005-54 (Miscellaneous Case No. 2003-00071) establishing boundaries of
Sub Areas A and B in the Gateway District of The Platinum Triangle in conjunction with the Archstone
Gateway Project; and
-1-
WHEREAS, on September 13, 2005, the City Council approved Amendment No. 2 to the
PTMLUP by Resolution No. 2005-188 (Miscellaneous Case No. 2005-00113) to increase the maximum
allowable commercial square feet in the Katella District of The Platinum Triangle by 5,604 square feet in
conjunction with the DR Horton Project; and --
WHEREAS, on October 25, 2005, the City Council approved Amendment No,.3 to the
PTMLUP by Resolution No. 2005-208 (Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00089) to adjust the boundaries of
the mixed-use districts to include the .North Net Fire Training Center site in the PTMU Overlay Zone
Gateway District and add 325 units to said district (321 of said units were designated for the North Net
Fire Training Center site); to modify the PTMU Overlay Zone commercial density to add 210,100 square
feet of additional commercial square footage including a total of 190,100 square feet designated for future
required ground floor commercial uses along Market Street and Gene Autry Way and 20,000 square feet
designated for other commercial uses in the Katella District (in the area east of State College Boulevard);
and, additional technical refinements and clarifications, including, but not limited to, refinements to street
cross-sections and density descriptions to reFlect the above-noted changes; and
WHEREAS, on October 25, 2005, the City Council approved Amendment No. 4 to the
PTMLUP by Resolution No. 2005-212 (Miscellaneous Case No. 2005-00111) to change 10.4 acres from
the Office High to the Mixed Use land use designation, in conjunction with the project actions for the A-
Town Metro Project; and
WHEREAS, on January 30, 2007, the City Council approved Adjustment No. 1 to the
PTMLUP by Resolution No. 2007-016 (MIS2006-00160) to amend light fixture standards, street trees and
groundcover for Market Street and Connector Streets within the Mixed Use Districts; and, add appendices
including standard details for newspaper racks; the Platinum Triangle Median and Parkway Planting
Matrix and, A-Town Metro Public Realm Landscape and Identity Program; and,
WHEREAS, on June 5,.2007, the City Council approved Amendment No. 5 to the
PTMLUP by Resolution No. 2007-081 (MIS2007-00187) to increase the maximum number of dwelling
units in the Gateway District from 2,075 to 2,142 and the maximum number of dwelling units in the
Platinum Triangle from 9,500 to 9,567; and
WHEREAS, on July 9, 2007, the Planning Commission approved Amendment No. 6 to
the PTMLUP by Resolution No. 2007- 70 (MIS2006-00162) to increase the maximum number of dwelling
units in the Gene Autry District from 1,000 to 1,699 and the total number of units in The Platinum Triangle
from 9,567 to 10,266; and
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified petition for an
amendment to The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00202) to
establish the Orangewood District; and
WHEREAS, the establishment of the Orangewood District is also contingent upon the
approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445 and Zoning Code Amendment No. 2007-00060,
now pending; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center
in the City of Anaheim on July 23, 2007., at 2:30 p.m., notice of said putilic 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 an :amendment to The Platinum Triangle
Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00202) 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, by Resolution No. PC2007- ,the Planning Commission has recommended that City
Council approve an amendment to The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case
No. 2007-00202) to (i) amend Section 3.1 "Development Intensities" and "Table 2: Development
Intensities;" (ii) establish the Orangewood District, an office district, with a maximum development
intensity of 596,500 square feet of office and 10,000 square feet of retail; and (iii) establish Section 3.7,
"Orangewood District", to assign design guidelines.
2. That the proposed amendment to The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan is cohsistent
with the goals and policies for the development of The Platinum Triangle as set forth in the City of .
Anaheim General Plan.
3. That the proposed .amendment to The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan is consistent
with the goals and policies set forth in The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan.
4. That the proposed amendment to The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan will result in
development of desirable character that will be compatible with proposed development in the surrounding
area.
5. That the proposed amendment to The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan respects
environmental, aesthetic and historic resources consistent with economic realities.
6. That "` indicated their presence at said putilic hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was. received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: The Anaheim Planning
Commission has reviewed Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00202 to amend the Platinum Triangle Master
Land Use Plan .and, by its motion, did find and determine and recommend that the City Council find and
determine, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and based
upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial Study/Addendum conducted pursuant to
CEQA far Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00202, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166
of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence
received at the public hearing, that previously-certified FSEIR No. 332 and the Third Addendum to FSEIR
332, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A for The Platinum
Triangle, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 145, are adequate to serve as the required environmental
documentation for said amendment and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further
environmental documentation need be prepared for this amendment tp the Platinum Triangle Master
Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00202).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does
hereby recommend that the City Council approve and adopt Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00202 to
amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan as set forth in this Resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land
Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00202) is granted subject to adoption of General Plan
Amendment No. 2006-00445, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2007-00060 and Reclassification No. 2007-
00207, now pending.
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. Failure to pay afl charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the
revocation of the approval of this application.
3
THE FOREGOfNG RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
July 23, 2007. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Procedures"
of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures.
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 July 23, 2007, 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
2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
4
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"'
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05222 BE GRANTED
(2210-2220 EAST ORANGEWOOD AVENUE and 2130 and 2231 DUPONT CIRCLE)
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified petition for (i)
General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445 to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to increase
the maximum office square footage permitted in The Platinum Triangle and to remove the maximum floor
area ratio (FAR) in The Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone, Orangewood District, (ii)
Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00202 to amend The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to establish the
Orangewood District, (iii) Zoning Code Amendment No. 2007-00057 to .amend the Platinum Triangle Mixed
Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (Chapter 18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) tc establish the Orangewood
District, (iv) Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05222, (v) Reclassification No. 2007-00207 to reclassify the
subject property from the I (Industrial) Zone to the I (PTMU Overlay) (Industrial -Platinum Triangle Mixed
Use Overlay) Zone and rescind, in part, the previously-approved Resolution No. 2004-180 to reclassify the
Property from the I (Industrial) to the O-H (High Intensity Office) Zone, and (vi) approve and adopt
Development Agreement No. 2007-00001; and
WHEREAS, the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone, Chapter 18.20 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code, allows building heights over 100 feet subject to the approval of a conditional use
permit, and
WHEREAS, the Conditional Use Permit, if approved, would permit a building height over 100
feet, up to 311 feet, for a proposed 20-story office building and to permit the sales of alcoholic beverages in a
proposed restaurant for certain real property situated in The Platinum Triangle area of the City of Anaheim,
County of Orange, State of California, described as:
PARCEL 15, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 30, PAGE 34 OF PARCEL MAPS,
RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY:
APN:083-272-02
PARCELS 14 AND 16, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED BOOK 30, PAGE 34 OF PARCEL MAPS,
IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY:.
APN: 083-272-01 and 083-272-07
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on July 23, 2007 at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required bylaw 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 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 311-foot structural height and the sales of alcoholic beverages in
conjunction with a proposed restaurant is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by
Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.20.050.
2. That the proposed structural height and 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. A shade and shadow plan
demonstrates that the previously-approved residential project across Orangewood Avenue would only be
Cr\PC2007- -1- PC2007-
impacted during the winter months, but any one unit would not be impacted more than 50% of the day, and
would comply with required mitigation for the project.
3. That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to health and safety...,...
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 as the proposed project has been
analyzed in a Traffic Impact Analysis dated September 2006, reviewed and approved by the City Traffic and
Transportation Manager and that the required infrastructure improvements along the adjacentstreets will be
constructed in connection with the project.
5. That sales of alcoholic beverages in a proposed restaurant is properly one for which a
conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.20.030.040.0402.
6. 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.
7. 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 Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05222 - to permit a building height between 100
and 311 feet for a proposed 20-story office building and to permit the sales of alcoholic beverages in a
proposed restaurant and, by its motion, did find and determine and recommend that the City Council find and
determine, pursuant to the provisions of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and based upon
its independent review and consideration of an Initial StudylAddendum conducted pursuant to CEQA for
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05222, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the
Califomia Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence received at
the public hearing, that previously-certified FSEIR No. 332 and the Third Addendum to FSEIR 332, together
with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A for The Platinum Triangle, and
Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 145, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05222 and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further
environmental documentation need be prepared for said Conditional Use Permit.
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 plans shall indicate compliance with a maximum building height of 311 feet as identified in Exhibit
Nos. 1 through 31 of Final Site Plan No. 2007-00005 and Development Agreement No. 2007-00001.
General Conditions:
2. That the property owner/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
Plan No. 145 as established by the City of Anaheim and as required by Section 21081.6 of the Public
Resources Code to ensure implementation of those identified mitigation measures.
3. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with .Development Agreement No.
2007-00001, and as conditioned herein.
-2- PC2007-
4. That this conditional use permit pertaining to maximum structural height shall be valid for a period of time
coinciding with the timing set forth in Development Agreement No. 2007-00001 which provides far
development of this project within five (5) years from the adoption date of Development Agreement No.
2007-00001.
5. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with Development Agreement No.
2007-00001, and as conditioned herein.
Alcoholic Beverages.
6. That at all times when the premise is open for business, the premise shall be maintained as a bona fide
restaurant and shall provide a menu containing an assortment of foods normally offered in such
restaurant.
7. That the applicant shall not share any profits, or pay any percentage or commission to a promoter or any
other person, based upon monies collected as a door charge, cover charge, or any other form of
admission charge, including minimum drink orders, or the sale of drinks.
8. That there shall be no pool tables or amusement devices maintained upon the premises at any time
unless the proper permits have been obtained from the City of Anaheim.
9. That the gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed 40% of the gross sales of all retail sales
during any three (3) month period. The applicant shall maintain records on a quarterly basis indicating
the separate amounts of sales of alcoholic beverages and other items. These records shall be made
available for inspection by any City of Anaheim official when requested.
10. That there shall be no live entertainment, amplified music or dancing permitted on the premises at any
time unless the proper permits have been obtained from the City of Anaheim.
11. That the sales of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises shall be prohibited.
12. That there shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the
exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages.
13. That the activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise
disturbance to surrounding properties.
14. That the alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a public premise (bar) type license nor
shall the establishment be operated as a public premjse as defined in Section 23039 of the Business and
Professions Code.
15. That there shall be no admission fee, cover charge, nor minimum purchase required,
16. That all doors serving subject restaurant shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and
shall be kept closed at all times during the operation of the premises except for ingresslegress, permit
deliveries in cases of emergency.
17. That the business operator shall comply with Section 242005 of the Business and Profession Code so as
not to employ or permit any persons to solicit or encourage others, directly or indirectly, to buy them
drinks in the licensed premises under any commission, percentage, salary, or other profit-sharing plan,
scheme or conspiracy.
18. That there shall be no public telephones on the property that are located outside the building and within
the control of the applicant.
19. 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
-3- PC2007-
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.
20. That extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with _-.
Section 18:60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal.
21. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extenfthat it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable Gity, 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 approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05222
is contingent upon the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445, Amendment to the Platinum
Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00202), Zoning Code Amendment No. 2007-
00060, Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05222, Reclassification No. 2007-00207, and Development
Agreement No. 2007-00001, now pending.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the property owner/developer 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, prior to the issuance of building permits or commencement of activity 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.
-4- PC2007-
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
July 23, 2007. 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
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 July 23, 2007, 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
2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-6- PC2007-
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"'
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00001 BY AND .BETWEEN
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND STEADFAST INVESTMENT PROPERTIES,
INC., JAPOS, INC., AND 2130 DUPONT COMPANY, AND
MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATED THERETO
(2210-2220 EAST ORANGEWOOD AVENUE AND 2130 AND 2231 DUPONT CIRCLE)
WHEREAS, Article 2.5 of Chapter 4 of Division 1 of Title 7 (commencing with Section 65864)
of the Government Code of the State of California (hereinafter the "Statute") authorizes a city to enter into a
contract which is called a development agreement in order to establish with certainty what regulations will
govern the construction of a development; and
WHEREAS, upon request of an applicant, cities are required to establish procedures and
requirements by resolution or ordinance for the consideration of development agreements; and
WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim (hereinafter the "City"), as a charter city, heretofore enacted
Ordinance No. 4377 (hereinafter the "Enabling Ordinance") on November 23, 1982, making the City subject
to the Statute; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 65865 of the Statute, the City heretofore
on November 23, 1982, adopted Resolution No. 82R-565 (hereinafter the "Procedures Resolution")
establishing procedures and requirements for the consideratipn of development agreements upon receipt of
an application by the City; and
WHEREAS, on May 25, 2004, the Anaheim City Council approved General Plam
Amendment No. 2004-00419 setting forth the City's vision for development of the City of Anaheim ("General
Plan Amendment"), and certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and
a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans ("FEIR No. 330"), in
conjunction with its consideration and approval of the General Plan Amendment, amendment of the City's
zoning code, and a series of related actions; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan sets forth a vision for development of Mixed Uses, Office High,
Office Low, Industrial and Institutional land uses within an approximately 820-acre area generally bounded
by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate
5) on the west, and the Southern California Edison Company Easement on the north ('The Platinum
Triangle"); and
WHEREAS, in order to carry out the goals and polices of the General Plan for The Platinum
Triangle, on August 17, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004-177, approving The Platinum
Triangle Master Land Use Plan, setting forth the new vision for The Platinum Triangle; and
WHEREAS, to further implement the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum
Triangle and pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 18.76 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, on
August 24, 2004., the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5935 amending Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code to establish zoning and development standards for the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay
Zone (the "PTMU Overlay Zone") and Ordinance No. 5936, amending the zoning map to reclassify
.approximately three hundred and seventy-flue acres within The Platinum Triangle into the PTMU Overlay
Zone as depicted in The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to provide opportunities for high quality,
well-designed development projects that could be stand-alone projects, or combined residential and non-
residential uses including office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and
other community amenities within the area; and
-1-
WHEREAS, the PTMU Overlay Zone requires a Development Agreement between the
property owner and the City of Anaheim to implement all development in the Katella, Gene Autry,
Orangewood and Gateway Districts of the PTMU Overlay Zone, except as otherwise exempt under Code;
and
WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004-179,
approving the form of the Standard Development Agreement for the PTMU Overlay Zone; and "
WHEREAS, oh October 25, 2005, the City Council certified Final SubsequenfEnvironmental
Impact Report No. 332 (FSEIR No. 332) and the'Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No.
106A in connection with its consideration of General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00420, Zoning Code
Amendment No. 2004-00036, Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00089 to amend The Platinum Triangle Master
Land Use Plan, Miscellaneous Case No. 2005-00114 to amend The Platinum Triangle Standardized
Development Agreement, Miscellaneous Case No. 2005-00115 to rescind, in part, the Resolution of Intent
pertaining to reclassification of the North Net Training Center site and Reclassification No. 2004-00134; and
WHEREAS, on June 14, 2007, pursuant to the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance, and the
Procedures Resolution (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Development Agreement Law"), Steadfast
Investment Properties, Inc., Japos, Inc., and 2130 Dupont Company, (hereinafter collectively referred to as
the "Applicant"), submitted an application to the Planning Department for approval of Development
Agreement No. 2007-00001 (hereinafter the "Application"), which included a proposed development
agreement (hereinafter the "Development Agreement") prepared in conformance with the Standard
Development Agreement for The Platinum Triangle to vest certain project entitlements and address the
implementation of the Platinum Tower Project; and
WHEREAS, the Development Agreement pertains to approximately 3.8 acres of real
property in the City of Anaheim, owned by the Applicant, commonly known as 2210-2220 East Orangewood
Avenue and 2130 and 2231 Dupont Drive, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference (hereinafter the "Property"), which is located in The Platinum Triangle
and within the Industrial (I) zone and the Orangewood District of the PTMU Overlay, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant desires to develop the property in accordance with the provisions
of the Development Agreement by developing atwenty-stgry, commercial high rise office building, consisting
of approximately 596,500 square feet of office space, approximately 10,000 square feet of associated retail
development, and a seven and one-half story parking structure, as more particularly set forth the Final Site
Plan No. 2007-00005 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05222 (referred to herein as the "Platinum Tower
Project"); and.
WHEREAS, on July 5, 2007, the Planning Director approved Final Site Plan No. 2007-00005
to provide for the development of the Platinum Tower Project, contingent upon the approval of General Plan
Amendment No. 2006-00445, Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous
Case No. 2007-00202), Zoning Code Amendment No. 2007-00060, Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05222,
Reclassification No. 2007-00207, and Development Agreement No. 2007-00001; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on July 23, 2007, 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 Development Agreement and to investigate and make
findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has demonstrated that the Platinum Tower Project meets the
eligibility requirements of the Procedures Resolution to enter into the Development Agreement by showing
that, upon completion, the Platinum Tower Project will result in the construction of a twenty-story, commercial
high rise office building, consisting of approximately 596,500 square feet of office space, approximately
_~
10,000 square feet of associated retail development, and a seven and one-half story parking structure within
a period of not more than five (5) years; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself
and in its behalf, and after due consideration of and based upon all of the evidence and reports offered. at__
said hearing, does find and determine that the Development Agreement meets the following standards set
forth in the Procedures Resolution:
1. That the Platinum Tower Project is consistent with the City's General Plan, as amended by General
Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445, in that it is in conformance with the General Plan Mixed' Use land
use designation and with the goals, policies and objectives for The Platinum Triangle as set forth in the
General Plan as amended.
2. That the Platinum Tower Project is compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations
prescribed for the applicable zoning district in that the Platinum Tower Project is in compliance with the
PTMU Overlay Zone requirements as set forth in the Final Site Plan No. 2007-00005, which has been
approved by the Planning Director, and General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00445, Miscellaneous
Case No. 2007-00202, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2007-00060, Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-
05222, and Reclassification No. 2007-00207.
3. That the Platinum Tower Project is compatible with the orderly development of property in the
surrounding area in that it is in conformance with and implements The Platinum Triangle Master Land
Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements, as proposed for amendment per Miscellaneous
Case No. 2007-00202 (Amendment to The Platinum Triangle :Master Land Use Plan) and Zoning Code
Amendment No. 2007-00057.
4. That the Platinum Tower Project is not otherwise detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of
the City of Anaheim.
5. That the Development Agreement constitutes a lawful, present exercise of the City's police powerand
authority under the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance and the Procedures Resolution.
6. That the Development Agreement is entered into pursuant to and in compliance with its charterpowers
and the requirements of Section 65867 of the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance and the Procedures
Resolution.
7. That *** indicated their presence at said public hearing in apposition; and that no correspondence was
received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning
Commission has reviewed Development Agreement No. 2007-00001 and, by its motion, did find and
determine and recommend that the City Council find .and determine, pursuant to the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and based upon its independent review and consideration of
an Initial Study/Addendum conducted pursuant to CEQA for the Development Agreement, and the
requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162
of the CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence received at the public hearing, that previously-certified FSEIR No.
332 and the Third Addendum to FSEIR 332, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring
Program No. 106A for The Platinum Triangle, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 145, are adequate to serve
as the required environmental documentation far this Development Agreement and satisfy all of the
requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this
Development Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based upon the foregoing findings and
determinations, the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approval
and adopt Development Agreement No. 2007-00001.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of ,._.
July 23, 2002
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 July 23, 2007, 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
2007_
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-4
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY
Real property in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as follows:
PARCEL 15, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 30, PAGE 34 OF PARCEL, MAPS,
RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY.
EXCEPT THEREFROM ALL RIGHTS TO OIL, GAS, AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND
MINERAL SUBSTANCES LYING UNDER OR THAT MAY BE PRODUCED FROM THE ABOVE
DESCR5IBED PROPERTY, TOGETHER WITH ALL RIGHTS TO THE PROCEEDS THEREFROM
AND ALL RENTS, BONUSES AND PROFITS ACCRUING THEREOF; WITHOUT, HOWEVER,
THE RIGHT TO USE OR OCCUPY OR TO ENTER UPON ANY PORTION OF THE SURFACE AD
500 FEET BELOW THE SURFACE, MEASURED VERTICALLY FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID
LAND, FOR THE PURPOSE OF DRILLING FOR, CAPTURING, PRODUCING, EXTRACTING,
STORING, TREATING OR OTHERWISE HANDLING OR UTILIZING SUCH OIL, GAS OR OTHER
HYDROCARBON OR MINERAL SUBSTANCES, AS RESERVED IN DEED RECORDED
OCTOBER 29, 1972 IN BOOK 10494, PAGE 484, OFFICIAL RECORDS.
APN: 083-272-02
Real property in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as follows
PARCELS 14 AND 16, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED BOOK 30, PAGE 34 OF PARCEL MAPS,
IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
EXCEPT THEREFROM ALL RIGHTS TO OIL, GAS, AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND
MINERAL SUBSTANCES LYING UNDER OR THAT MAY BE PRODUCED FROM THE ABOVE
DESCRIBED PROPERTY, TOGETHER WITH ALL RIGHTS TO THE PROCEEDS THEREFROM
AND ALL RENTS, BONUSES AND PROFITS ACCRUING THERETO, WITHOUT, HOWEVER,
THE RIGHT TO USE OR OCCUPY OR TO ENTER UPON ANY PORTION OF THE SURFACE
AND 500 FEET BELOW THE SURFACE, MEASURED VERTICALLY FROM THE SURFACE IF
SAID LAND, FOR THE PURPOSE OF DRILLING FOR, CAPTURING, PRODUCING,
EXTRACTING, STORING, TREATING OR OTHERWISE HANDLING OR UTILIZING SUCH OIL,
GAS OR OTHER HYDROCARBON OR MINERAL SUBSTANCES, AS RESERVED IN PEED
RECORDED OCTOBER 29, 1972 IN BOOK 10494, PAGE 484 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
APN: 083-272-01 and 083-272-07
-s
City of Anaheim
~LAIVI~IIIVG ®EI~AiST1VIEI~T"
Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of
July 23, 2007.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Agent: Amy Vasquez
Sheldon Group
901 Dove Street, Suite 140
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Ralph Deppisch
Steadfastlnvestment Properties,lnc.
4343 Von Korman Avenue, Suite 200
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Location: The Platinum Triangle
wwvcanaheim.nel
Request to amend Chapter 18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to establish the Orangewood
District.
ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission as reviewed the proposal to amend Chapter
18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to establish the Orangewood District and does hereby
determine that the previously-certified CEQA Subsequent EIR No. 332 and its Third Addendum and
Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 145 are adequate to
serve as the environmental documentation for this request.
Commissicner XXX offered a motion seconded by Commissioner X)OCand MOTION CARRIED, that
the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the draft
ordinance to amend Chapter 18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be adopted.
ZCA2007-00060_Excerpt
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
P.O. Box 3222
Anaheim, California 92603
TEL (714)765-5739
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00001
,~pNEIM'~..
4 ~: ~,;~.
o ~ `~a,
~~~ ~~~,
i~! i
l :~
`;:o „,
`,~Nneo .`"~.
City of Anaheim
~®LIC~ DE~A~~)~~1~~
Special Operations Division
To: Kimberly Wong
Planning Department
From: Sergeant Mike Lozeau
Vice Detail
CC:
Date: June 4, 2007
Attachment -Item No. 3
iRE: PRE 2007-00015/CUP 2007-05222
Restaurant within Platinum Triangle Type 41
2210-2220 E. prangewood Ave.
Anaheim, CA 92806
Anaheim Police Dept.
4?5 S. Herbor Blvd.
Anaheim, CA 92805
7'EL: 714.765.1401
FAX: 714.765.1665
The Police Department has received the IDC Route Sheet for the
proposed restaurant within the Platinum Triangle. The request is to
construct a 20 story office building and:parking structure and to
permit the sale of alcohol in a proposed restaurant.
The location is within Reporting District 2228, which has a crime rate of
78 percent below average. It is also within census tract number 761.01,
which has a population of 5,264. This population allows for 6 on sale
Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses and there are presently 4 licenses
in the tract. This Census Tract allows for 4 off sale licenses and there
currently are 3.
The Reporting District north of the location is 2128; it has a crime rate of
106 percent above average. The Reporting District east is in the City of
Orange. West is 2227; with a rate of 80 percent below average, and
south of the location is the City of Orange.
The Police Department recommends approval of this request. We ask
that the following conditions be placed on the CUP:
1) At all times when the premise is open for business, the
premise shalt be maintained as a bona fide restaurant and
shall provide a menu containing an assortment of foods
normally offered in such restaurant.
2) Petitioner shall not share any profits, or pay any percentage or
commission to a promoter or any other person, based upon
monies collected as a door charge, cover charge, or any other
form of admission charge, including minimum drink orders, or the
sale of drinks.
Memorandum
Kimberly Wong
Platinum Triangle Restaurant
3) There shall be no pool tables or amusement devices maintained
upon the premises at any time unless the proper permits have
been obtained from the City of Anaheim.
4) The gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed 40
percent of the gross sales of all retail sales during any three (3)
month period. The applicant shall maintain records on a quarterly
basis indicating the separate amounts of sales of alcoholic
'beverages and other items. These records shall be made
available for inspection by any City of Anaheim official when
requested.
5) There shall be no live entertainment, amplified music or dancing
permitted on the premise at any time unless the proper permits
have been obtained from the City of Anaheim.
6) The sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premise
shall be prohibited.
7) There shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including
advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or
indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages.
8) The activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this
establishment shalt not cause noise disturbance to surrounding
properties.
9) That subject alcoholic beverage license shall not be
exchanged for a public premise (bar) type license nor shall
the establishment be operated as a public premise as defined
in Section 23039 of the Business and Professions Code.
10) There shall be no admission fee, cover charge, nor minimum
purchase required.
11) That the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped with
lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and make easily
discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about
the parking lot. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and
shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably illuminate
the windows of nearby residences.
12) That all doors serving subject restaurant shall conform to the
requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and shall be kept closed at
all times during the operation of the premises except for
ingress/egress, permit deliveries and in cases of emergency.
Page 2
_a
Memorandum
Kimberly Wong
Platinum Triangle Restaurant
13) That the business operator shall comply with Section 24200.5 of°
the Business and Profession Code so as not to employ or permit
any persons to solicit or encourage others, directly or indirectly, to
buy them drinks in the licensed premises under any commission,
Percentage, salary, or other profit-sharing plan, scheme or
conspiracy.
14) There shall be no public telephones on the property that are
located outside the building and within the control of the applicant.
Please contact me at extension 1451 if you require further information.
f:V~ome~Cmni1win~2007-00015 Platinum Triangle RestaurenLdoc
Page 3
Item No. 4
CUP 502
NEIGHBORS AVE d h MEDICAL CUP 250
C-G CLINICS WATER WHEEL APT
O z CUP 758 64 DU
N ~ VAR 1775
Q u ~ C CAR VJASH I
4 DUM1EACH ~ 6 DU ~ ¢ N RAM3
Z m ~ RCL 54-55-34
Q 4 DU (Res. of Intent to ML) ---------_ --
U RCL 2002-00075 __
_ T-CUP 2003-6M1760 -~-----
RM-4 O GLEN AVE cuP2002-oass4 ~
4 OU EACH ~ T-VAR 2005-04643
W (R VACaM29) ~... ~L ~~E
W
G-G ~ _ ~ (Res. of lnl.
~ `--- CUP 11E
RcLSo-sr-62 - cuPtr
~ RM-4 VP.R 4296 ~
~ VA 1267 RESTAURANT Ra si s3-117 ----~ VAR 2sE
CUP 533 I CONDO
vAR 1575 i 53 DU
Q RESTAURANT T
Go c-c ~ w J GG CUP 2 0 02-04 5 31 ) ~
RCL 62-63-41 RCL 62-63-41 '<a ", ^ ~ RCL 62-63-41 (11 RCL 64E5-706. CUP 29 I I
RCL 60.61-06 RCL fi0.61.6 C-G Ogmm a -
.-01 CUP 2403-047 CUP 1]3 CUP 2436 > oL RCL 5354-ir ~ CUP 3751 MORTUARY I I
S TAUP 2002-04fi0/ RCL 62-63-0 tim-~- 22 VAR 2468
~ ICUP 2001-0446fi CUP 191P CUP 2436 ~e<p •sW W VAR 2$3 ~ ~--
VARh176 t CUP11910 » n ¢ MIDAS SERVICE
SMALL COMMERCIAL SHOPSIOFFICES ANO RE6TAURPNTSp ~ ' MUFFLER STATION
r-
LA PALMA AVENUE
RCL 6465-104
CUP 2007-05195 GG
cuP 2atz CL 53-54 RCI
cuP afia VAR 4323 67-68
RCL 5657-75 PCN 20Pr-00035 AR 1944 Ct~
~ T-CUP 200505048 SERVICE ~ C_G ~
i Q 7-0UP 2003-04770 STATION rr,~ c
T-CUP 2002-04517 n RCL 53-54-6 ~
3 Z ~, ~. ACLfi0.6187 N GUP 2933
] CUP 2670 CUP 2007-05195 ,
Q CUP 2442) RCL 5657-75 T-0UP 2PPi-0d473- CUP 2687
U R~STAURANIT T-CUP 2001-04473 w~CUP 7913 r VAR 1844 S O
_ CUP 327 =CUP tag SMALL SHOPS u~ F
~ ADJ 2001-00215 PCNZ007-00035'' u1
SMALLSHOPS,.' ~ Z
W
ID AVE RCL G56G.57-57 N
RM-0 VAR 3625 ~
® RCL 56-57-61 ~- VAR 3675 ~ ^
3 DU EACH VAR 990 rn
SMALL SHOPS C-C" ~
RCL 53-54-6
CUP 1800
FRANCIS DR CUP 778
3
~ RM-0 GG p
~ _ -RCL 56-57-6'1 ~ RCL 55571 .RCL 545570 R6-2
3 DU EACH VAR 1117
SMALL SHOPS RESTAURANT LIQUOR STORE
cc
RCL 6661-~ R52
VAR 2319 ry
_ GG VAR IBIS 1 UEA H /////\\\
® RCL SFr57-6'I-~' SMALL SHOPS CHIRORPRACTOR
3 DU EACH
RS-2
!~ -RCL 66%-22
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05195 '' Subject Property
Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2007-00035 Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Requested By: BP WEST COAST PRODUCTS, LLC Q.S. No. 45
1700 West La Palma and 1017-1031 North Euclid Street -Arco locos
Date ofAerial Photo:
Julv 2005
Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-05195
Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2007-OOD35
Requested By: BP WEST COAST PRODUCTS, LLC
1700 West La Palma and 1017-1031 North Euclid Street -Arco
Subject Property
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 45
10309
Staff Report to the.
Planning Commission
July 23. 2007
Item No. 4
4a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (READVERTISED) (Motion)
4b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion)
4c: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05195 (Resolution)
4d. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE
OR NECESSITY NO: 2007-00035 (Resolution)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This 1,1-acre property is identified as 1700 West La Palma and 1017-1031 North Euclid
Street. The property owner is BP West Products, LLC and applicant is theproject architect,
Fred Cohen of CJC Design.
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of the following applications:
• `' A conditional use permit to demolisfi an existing service station and construct a new
service station witft'a conveniende market and self-serve car wash under authority of
Code Section Nd.'18.08.030.040.0402 (AlcoftolicBeverage Sales'- Off-Sale,
Automotive-Service Station and Washing, Convenience Store) witft waivers of the
following provisions:
'' (a)"SECTION N0 18.08.060.0101 Minimum landscaoed setback.
WITHDRAWN
(b) SECTION N0: 18.44.10.010 Maximum wall sign area
WITHDRAWN>,
(c) SECTION NO.' 18.44.120.010 Maximum number of freestanding signs
(one signbermitted; two signs
ro used
• Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity to permit sales of beer and wine
for off-premises consumption within a proposed service station convenience market
in an area with a high crime rate.
BACKGROUND:
(3) A portion of the property is improved with an Arco service station while a portion is currently
vacant. The property isJocated within the General Commercial (C-G) zone and is
designated for General Commercial land uses in the General Plan: The properties to the
west and south are designated for General Commercial land uses, properties to the north
are designated for Corridor Residential land uses and properties to the east are designated
for Neighborhood Center land uses.
Case Planner: Elaine Thienprasiddhi Page i
Srcup2007-05195eyt.doc :
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 4
PROPOSAL:
(4) The applicant proposes to demolish an existing service station including service bays and a
small convenience market. Anew service station including a convenience market with beer
and wine sales and aself-serve car wash is proposed( Tfie siteplan indicates the pump
islands and canopy on the east side of the site, adjacent to Euclid Avenue, with the
convenience market and carwash on the west side of the site.
(5) Access to the site would be prdvided by two driveways on Euclid Avenue and one driveway
on La Palma Avenue: The site: plan indicates a tdtal of 22 spaces and Code requires 22
spaces based do 16'spaces for the convenience market (2,900 s.f. at 5.5 spaces/1,000 s.f.)
and 6 spaces for the car wash (1 plus 5 drying spaces).
(6) The floor plan shows that the convenience market will consist of a cashier station, hot food
self-serve area and several coolers. Two coolers have been identified for the sale of beer
and wine.
(7) The elevation drawings depict a 19 foot tall convenience markef building with two towers
enhanced with stacked stone, on either end;. The middle portion of thebuilding would
include a stacked stone wainscot: The car wash building would. be 15 feet in height and
include a matching wainscot.
(t3) Two monument signs are proposed, with one on each street frontage. A sign waiver is
;requested for the number of signs, since Code allows for one freestanding sign for service
stations. The maximum size would be 8 feet tall and 9 feet siz inches wide: One 20 square
foot wall sign is proposed oh the convenience market building facing Euclid Street, trc
compliance with Coder Identification and tlirectional, signage is proposedon the oar wash
building in compliance witfi Code.
(9) Landscaping will comply with Code requirements which require further enhanced
landscaping,for service station properties: This includes planters and trees along interior
property lines.
(10) The letter of operation states that the convenience market will be open 24 hours a day.
The sale of beer and wine will be available between' 6 a.m. to 2 p.m. as typically
recommended by the Police Department. These hours are cdnsistentwith ABC:
regulations. The operations will require 3 employees per shift.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(11) Staff prepared an Initial Study which concludes that there will be no significant
environmental impacts; therefore; staff recommends that a Negative Declaration be
aPProved.
EVALUATION:
(12) Service stations with car washes and convenience markets with beer and wine sales are
permitted in the General Commercial zone, subject to the approval of a conditional use
permit
Case Planner. Elaine Thienprasiddhi Page 2
Srcup2007-05195eyt.doc
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission.
July 23, 2007
Item No. 4
(13) In addition to the request for a conditional use permit for a convenience market with beer
and wine sales., the applicant has applied for a determination of public convenience or
necessity in order to obtain a Type 20, Off-Sale Beer and Wine license. Due to high.. crime
in the police reporting district, a determination of public convenience or necessity is
required from the City of Anaheim by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC).
(14) The Anaheim Police Department has submitted the attached memorandum dated June 6,
2007, stating. that the. population within the census tract allows for 4 off-sale licenses, and
there are presently 2 active licenses: This..property,is located within Reporting District 1521,
which has a crime rate of 234 percent above the City average: Additionally; all surrounding.
reporting districts have crime rates above the City average: This reporting district and.
adjacent reporting districts are depicted in the attached map. Based on the high crime in
the area, the Police Department opposesthe request. -
(15) The Planning Commission has established a policy to determine whether a determination
of public convenience or necessity is appropriate. The following is the list of factors to
consider when evaluating a request:
(a) , , How significant is the "undue concentration" 21n census tracts with a few excess
licenses, 8 may be easier to justify the need for additional licenses when considering
other factors. However, in areas with a significant number of excess licenses, the City
should carefully examine, based omsubmitted evidence and the whole record,
whether it would 6e approprete to make the requested finding.
The population allows for 4 off sale licenses and there are presently 2 licenses. The
census tract is nofoverco~centrated with off-sale licenses.
(b) ,, How close is the Proposed site to a residential nefghborhood and/or school? If
fhe site fs in closeproximiry o a residential neighborhood orschool; thenYhe decision
on whether to make fhe finding of PCN should give weight fo these sensitive land
uses.
There are no residential areas immediately adjacent to the site, however there are
r single-family neighborhbods approximately 500 to 600 feefeast and west of the site.
There is also amultiple-family neighborhood directly southwest of the site, off of
Francis Orive. The closeet school is Servite High School, which is located
approximately one-third mile west of the site.
(cy How close are other alcoho/outlets? Are outlets in close proximity or are they
spread throughout the census tract? If the outlet is located near the border of the
census tract,. is there a cluster of outlets in the vicinity of the outlet located in the
adjoining census tracts? In some areas there are a large number of businesses.
providing alcohol in close proximity. As a result, the impact is greater than if the
same number of businesses were spread throughout the census tract. In these
instances, it maybe difficult to make the finding.:
The attached Census Tract Map identifies the locations of all ABC licenses in the:
area of the project site. There are presently three;liquor stores in the immediate
vicinity of the site; to the north, south and southeast and. are identified as sites 15, 1
and 37, respectively. There are also small markets with beer`and wine or alcohol
Case Planner: Elaine Thienprasiddhi Page 3
Srcup2007-05195eyt.doc.
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item tJo. 4
sales in close proximity to the site, however, they have been identified as specialty " '
ethnic markets.
(d) ,. .
Are there similar businesses already in the area? /s this the first business of this
type or are there several similar businesses nearby? 7f the product is already
available, then it would 6e harder to justify the public need
As described in the paragraph above, there are at least three businesses nearby that
would provide the same' availability of beer and wine products. However, the
applicant statesn the Justification for Public Convenience or Necessity form that this
would'be the only service station convenienoe marketiin the immediate area..
(e) Is the sale of alcohol an integral part of the primary purpose of the business?
A "dinner house" would normally sell alcohol; however, a gas station or breakfast
cafe' would not.
As indicated. in the policy factor description, atiove, alcohol sales is not an integral
part of a gas station. However, the applicant states thaf the sale of beer and wine
would enable the business to provide a "one stop" convenience to customers as part
of the'oonvenienoe market operations.
(tJ Is there a history of alcohol-related problems in the area? Determination of PCN
in reporting districts that have a much higher than averagecrime rate will be more
difFcult fo justify: likewise, even if the proposed location is in a census tract that
does not have a higher han average crime rate, R may be"adjacent tobne or more
reporting districts that have a higher than average crime rate.
The'Police Department has responded to this location 11 times in the last year: The
calls include 4 disturbing the peace, 1'trespass, 1 petty theft, 2 lost /stolen, and 1
911 hang up, 1!medical aid; 1 violation of courtorder. The crime rate within the
subject reporting district and alf surrounding districtsare above the City average.
`(g) Are there unusual factors which are applicable to a particular loeation7 The
establishmenfmay caterto' aspecific customer such as specialty markets or
warehousesfores. In these Instances, the Planning Commission may determine that
the unusual factors are'sufhcient fo determine public convenience or necessity..
There are no unusual factors that apply to the location.
(h) Is the proposed site in an area which has both an over concentration of
licenses and a higher than average crime rate? In sucfi instances, it may 6e more
difficult to make the finding:
The crime rate is 234 percent above the City average. There is not an over
concentration in the number of licenses within the census tract.'
(i) Would a particular establishment have mitigating operational characteristics
such'as increased security, limited hours of operationor bulk sales and/or
temperatures?'-
Case Planner: Elai ne Thienprasiddhi Page 4
Srcup2007-05195eyLdoc
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 4
The. applicant states that signs wilbbe installed indicating "No consumption of -
alcoholic beverages on :premises:' Additionally, beer would not be sold in individual
cans or bottles. Thebeer and wine would be stored in coolers:
(16) The waivers pertaining to the landscape setback and maximum wall sign have been
withdrawn by the applicant as they are ho ohger Necessary.
(17) The applicant proposes mare freestanding sighs than permitted by code. Code allows for
one freestanding sign and the applicant proposes one double-sided monument sign on
each street frontage for a total of two freestanding signs,The applicaht has completed the
attached Justification for Code Waiver form, indicating that there are special circumstances
resulting from the current location of the uhderground fuel tanks utilized by the existing
service station. The tanks arelocated at the northeast corner of the property, near the
intersection of La Palma and Euclid. Uhdefhormal circumstances, the service station would
place a triangular monument sign at the corner of the property, withih the landscape,
planter. The location oftfie tanks combined with aline-of-sight triangle for comer properties
has Yesulted in a limited amount of space which is hot large enough to situate a sign at the
corner of the site. Service stations are required by the State to post gasoliheprices in
conspicuous areas,'and the applicant feels that this would not be' achieved. by a single sign
on one street frontage.. The reason for proposing two freestanding signs is to have
adequate visibility from both. adjacent streets. The applicant feelsahat they,are being
deprived of privileges ehjoyedby neighboring properties since Code allows one sign per
street frontage for properties developed with uses other hah service stations: Staff
recommends aooroval of the waiver based oh the informatioh above.
(18) -Staff recommends aooroval of the service station, convenience market and self-serve car
wash ahd dehial of the request for beer and wine sales, ihcluding the Determinatlortof
Public Convenience or Necessity. ;,
FINDINGS:`r
(19) 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 special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly
enjoyedby other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose bf any node
waiver is to prevent discrimination and`hone shalt be approved which would have the effect
of granting a special privilege not shared bybther similar properties. Therefore, before any
code waiver is granted by the Planning Commission, it shall be'shown:
a: That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size,
shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other identically
zoned properties ih the vicinity; and
b: - That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classificatioh in the vicinity.
r (20) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it mustmake a finding of fact
that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist:
Case Planner: Elaine Tttienprasiddhi Page 5
Srcup2007-05195eyt.doc
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission.
July 23, 2007...
Item No. 4
a: That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the """
zoning Cpde;br is an unlisted use as defined in Subsectiph .030 (Unlisted Uses
Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority);
b, That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or tfie growth and
developmenfpf the area in which it is proposed to pe located;
c. That the sizeand shapebf the site fbr the use is adequate to allow the full
developmenCpf the proposed use in aManher not detrmehtaf toYhe particular area
= pr to the health and safety;
d: That the traffic generated by the use willhpt impose an undue burden upoh the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and
e: 'That the granting of the conditional usepermit finder the'conditions imposed, if
any, will npt tie detrimental to the health ahd safety of the citizens of the City of
Anaheim.
RECOMMENDATION:
(21) Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions:
(a)` Bymotion, approve the Negative Declaration.
(b) Bymotion, deny waivers (a) and (b) and approve waiver (c).
(c)' By resolution approve Conditional Use Permit No: 2007-05195, irtpart, approving
the sarvice station, car wash and oonvenience'market and denying the beer and
wine sales.
(d) By resolution denv Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2007-00035.
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SUBMITTED BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND ARE
RECOMMENDED FOR ADOPTION BY THE'PLANNING COMMISSIONIN THE EVENT THE REQUEST
FOR PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY'IS APPROVED.
L That there shall be no exterior advertising or sign of any kind or type, including advertising:
" directed to the exterior from within, prpmoting'or indicating the availabilityof alcoholic beverages.
tnteriordisplays bfalcohplic beverages br signswhich'are clearly Visible tp the exteripr shall
constitute a violation of this condition:
2. That np display ofalcoholip beverages shall be located outside of a building or within five (5) feet
of any public entrance to the building.
3. That the area ofalcoholic beverage displays shalt not exceed 25% of the total display area in a
building:
4. That the sale ofalcoholic beverages shall be made to customers only when the customer is in the
building.
Case Planner: Elaine Thienprasiddhi Page 6
Srcup2007-05195eyt.doc
Staff Report tc the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 4
5. That no person under twenty-one (21) years of age shall sell or be permitted to sell any beer or
wine unless under continuous supervision of an adult 21 years of age or older.
6. That beer and malt beverages shall not be sold in packages containing less than a six (6) pack,
and that wine coolers shaft not be sold in packages containing less than a four {4) pack.
7: That the possession of alcoholic beverages in open containers and the consumption of alcoholic
beverages are prohibited on or around these premises.
S, That the gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed 35 percent of all retail sales during
any three (3) month period. The applicant shall maintain records on a quarterly basis indicating
the separate amounts of sales of alcoholic beverages and other items. These records shall be
made available for inspection by any City of Anaheim official when requested.
9. That wine shall not be sold in bottles or containers smaller than 750 ml.
Case Planner: Elaine Thienprasiddhi Page 7
Srcup2007-05195eytdoc
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"`
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.2007-05195 BE GRANTED, IN PART,
(1700 WEST LA PALMAAND 1017-1031 NORTH EUCLID STREET)
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:
THE NORTH 180.00 FEET OF THE EAST 180.00 FEET OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 4
SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO LOS COYOTES, CITY OF ANAHEIM, AS PER MAP
RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 7, ET SEQ„ MISCELLANEOUS MAP, IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
PARCEL B:
PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 508, RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 2001
AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20010930060, OFFICIAL RECORDS.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on July 9, 2007, 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 that said public hearing was continued to
the July 23, 2007 Planning Commission meeting; 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 demolish an existing service station and construct a new
service station with a convenience market and self-serve car wash under authority of Code Section No.
18.08.030.010 (Alcoholic Beverage Sales -Off-Sale, Automotive-Service Station and Washing,
Convenience Store) with waivers of the following provisions:
(a) SECTION NO. 18.08.060.0101
(b) SECTION NO. 18.44.10.010
Minimum landscaped setback.
WITHDRAWN
Maximum wall sign area.
WITHDRAWN.
(c) SECTION NO. 18.44.120.010 Maximum number of freestanding signs
(one Sion oermitted• two signs proposed)
2. That waivers (a) and (b) are hereby denied because they were withdrawn by the applicant.
3. That waiver (c) pertaining to the maximum number of freestanding signs is hereby approved
because of the limited space at the corner of the property for a freestanding monument due to the location of
existing underground storage tanks and the line-of-sight triangle required for sight visibility on comer
properties.
Cr\PC2007-0 -1- PC2007-
4. That the granting of the conditional use permit, in part, under the conditions imposed, will not
be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
5. That the request to sell beer and wine within the convenience market is hereby denied on
the basis that the existing high crime in the area would be further impacted by such sales.
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 to demolish an existing service station and construct a new service
station with a convenience market and self-serve car wash; 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 Petttipn for Conditional Use Permit, in part, 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 the legal property owner shall submit an application for a Subdivision Map Act Certificate of
Compliance to the Public Works Department, Development Services pivision for the 127' x 120' site at the
southwest comer of La Palma Avenue and Euclid Street. A Certificate of Compliance or Conditional
Certificate of Compliance shall be approved by the City Engineer and recorded in the Office of the Orange
County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit
2. That the legal property owner shall submit a lot line adjustment to the Public Works Department,
Development Services Division to merge the 127' x 120' site and Parcel 1 of Lot Line Adjustment No. 508
into one legal lot. The Lot Line Adjustment shall be approved by the City Engineer and recorded in the
office of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit.
3. That the developer shall submit street improvement plans to widen La Palma Avenue, including planting
and irrigation for the public parkway, to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division.
The parkway landscaping strips shall be constructed with the irrigation connected to the on-site irrigation
system and maintained by the property owner. Prior to issuance of a building permit, The developer shall
submit a bond prior to issuance of building permit to guarantee that the improvements are constructed
prior to final building and zoning inspection.
4. That all setbacks shall be measured from the ultimate right-of--way of 58' along Euclid Avenue. Proposed
improvements of parkway and sidewalk along Euclid Avenue shall be in its ultimate location. The parkway
landscaping strips shall be constructed with the irrigation connected to the on-site irrigation system and
maintained by the property owner. Prior to issuance of a building permit, The developer shall submit a
bond prior to issuance of building permit to guarantee that the improvements are constructed prior to final
building and zoning inspection. [Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.04.080.060].
5. That the property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim an easement 60-feet
in width from the centerline of La Palma Avenue for street widening purposes.
-2- PC2007-
6. That, prior to issuance of building permits, the contract to improve the La Palma and Brookhurst sewer
lines (within Model 99 of the Combined West Anaheim Sewer Study) shall be awarded. Prior to
issuance of certificate of occupancy, aforementioned improvements shall be completed.
7. That the parking lot of the premises shall be equipped with lighting of sufficient :power to illuminate and.....
.make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot.
Additionally, the position of such lighting shall not disturb the normal privacy and use of any
neighboring residences. Said information shall be depicted on plans submitted for building permits.
6. That all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building'shall be fully
screened by architectural devices andlor appropriate building materials. Said information shall be
specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
9. That 4-foot high street address numbers shall be displayed flat on the roof of the building in a color that
contrasts with the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible from the streets or adjacent
properties. Said information. shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
10. That a trash enclosure shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works
Department 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 one-gallon size clinging vines planted on .maximum three-foot centers
or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building
permits.
11. That an on-site trash truck turn-around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476
and maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division.
Said turn-around area shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
12. That the project shall provide for accessible truck deliveries on-site. Said information shall be
specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
13. That all new backflow equipment shall tie located above ground and outside of the street setback area
in a manner fully screened from all public streets. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a
vault shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water 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 and alleys. Said information
shall be specifically shown on plans and approved by the Water Engineering Department.
14. That all new driveways shall be constructed with ten (10) foot radius curb returns as required by the
City Engineer in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115.
15. 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 permits. Plans shall also identify the specific screening treatments of each
device (i.e. landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.).
16. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. Landscape
and/or hardscape screening of any pad-mounted equipment shall be required. Said information shall
be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
17. That the property owner submit a letter to the Planning Department, Planning Services Division
requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 484 (to legalize an existing service station and
.permit construction of steel canopies over existing pump islands), Conditional Use Permit No. 2412 (to
retain a convenience market at an existing service station) and Variance No. 2491 (waiver of maximum
-3- PC2007-
number of freestanding signs, minimum distance between freestanding signs and minimum height of
freestanding signs to construct 3 "self serve" signs).
Prior to issuance of a pradino permit, the followinn conditions shall be complied with:
18. Prior to grading plan approval, the applicant shall demonstrate that coverage has been obtained under
California's General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity by providing
a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of
the subsequent notification of the issuance ofa 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.
19. Prior to the issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department,
Subdivision Section for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that:
• 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.
• Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the`Drainage Area
Management Plan.
• Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP:
Prior to final building and zoning inspections the followinst conditions shall be complied with:
20. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall:
• Demonstrate that all structural BMPs described ih the Project WQMP have been constructed and
installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications.
Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non-structural BMPs described in the
Project WQMP
• Demonstrate chat an adequate numtier of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available
onsite.
• Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural
BMPs.
21. That, prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy,. the improvements to the La Palma and Brookhurst
sewer lines (within Model 99 of the Combined West Anaheim Sewer Study) shall be completed.
22. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or
abandonment's of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through Water
Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department.
23. That the applicant shall file an Emergency Listing Card, Form APD-281, with the Police Department.
24. That subject property shat( 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 10, and as conditioned herein.
General Conditions.
25. That the property shall 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 from the time of discovery.
26. That the petitioner.shall be responsible for maintaining free of litter the area adjacent to the premises
over which they have control, as depicted.
-4- PC2007-
27. That there shall be no amusement machines, v(deo game devices, or pool tables maintained upon the
premises at any time.
28. That there shall be no public telephones on the property that are located outside the building and
within the control of the applicant.
29. 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.
30. That extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with
Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal.
31. 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
ail 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
July 23, 2007. 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
-5- PC2007-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
CpUNTY 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 July 23, 2007,'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
2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-6- PC2007-
(n~taFT~
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"""
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
DENYING A DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2007-00035
FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE
(1700 WEST LA PALMA AVENUE AND 1017-1031 NORTH EUCLID STREET)
WHEREAS, on July 23, 2007, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 95R-134
establishing procedures and delegating certain responsibilities to the Planning Commission relating to the
determination of "public convenience or necessity" on those certain applications requiring that such
determination be made by the local governing body pursuant to applicable provisions of the Business and
Professions Code, and prior to the issuance of a license by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
(ABC); and
WHEREAS, Section 23958 of the Business and Professions Code provides that the ABC
shall deny an application for a license if issuance of that license would tend to create a law enforcement
problem, or if issuance would result in or add to an undue concentration of :licenses, except when an
applicant has demonstrated that public convenience or necessity would be served by the issuance of a
license; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive an application
for a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity to permit sales of beer and wine for off-premises
consumption within a proposed service station convenience market on certain real property situated in the
Cily of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as:
PARCEL A:
THE NORTH 180.00 FEET OF THE EAST 180.00 FEET OF THE NORTHEAST
QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO LOS
COYOTES, CITY OF ANAHEIM, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 7, ET
SEQ., MISCELLANEOUS MAP, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF
SAID COUNTY.
PARCEL B:
PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO.508, RECORDED
DECEMBER 20, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20010930060, OFFICIAL RECORDS.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on July 23 2007, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by Resolution No. 95R-134 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
determination of public convenience or necessity for an alcoholic beverage control license 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 C-G (General Commercial) zone permits the retail sales of alcoholic beverages,
including beer and wine, for off-premises consumption as a permitted accessory use subject to the
approval of a conditional use permit, and the intent of the Code is to provide such sales as convenience
for customers.
Cr\PC2007- -1- PC2007-
2. That California state law requires a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity
when property is located in a police reporting district with a crime rate above the city average; and that
Section 23958 of the Business and Professions Code provides that the ABC shall deny an application for
a license if issuance of that license would tend to create a law enforcement problem or if issuance wquld
result in, or add to, an undue concentration of licenses, except when an applicant has demonstrated that
public convenience or necessity would be served by issuance of a license.
3. That Resolution No. 95R-134 authorizes the City of Anaheim Police Department to make
recommendations related to the public convenience or necessity determinations; and when the sale of
beer and wine for off-premises consumption is permitted by the Municipal Code., said recommendations
shall take the form of conditions of approval to be imposed on the determination in order to ensure that
the sale of beer and wine does not adversely affect any adjoining land use or the growth and
development of the surrounding area
4. That the accessory sales of beer and wine will have a negative impact on the surrounding
area due to the high crime rate in the subject census tract and surrounding census tracts.
5. That the public convenience or necessity will not be served because there are multiple
alcohol outlets in the nearby vicinity of the proposed service station convenience market.
6. That the Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity cannot be made based on
the finding that the license requested is inconsistent with the Planning Commission policy for such
determinations.
7. 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 permit sales of alcoholic beverages for off-premises
consumption within a proposed convenience market and does hereby approve the Negative Declaratipn
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 Planning Commission does hereby deny
the request for a determination of public convenience or necessity at this location.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying ail 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
July 23, 2007. 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- PC2007-
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 July 23, 2007, 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
2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
_3_ PC2007-
d
t
V
y
3} o w~
rr
am
u~~~5~ ~ „a<;s~
oo
r
~ ~ ^;~ ~
m<
~
~ as ~w
a
oY,?
]y
W g~° i ~S
~555a3 ~ 4
Y a~
uu
~~~$
~~'
' ~~
~]
~~~
w3»~voa $~
w ~~
~~w= ~Qo
~"'_
z3y -
rA
B? z333-3 z
a 3333 imm
=??n~~a $w
w :3ww i333zW
~~°
:m5m
~=~° 3
s=na 33zz
$°^
°
a
n mm
_
Snn ." "' _:,. a
c _
a
~ °w z
~'fn g $S $ t~2 w o ~'a
J
U
- :°O-o
m ~ g~~~o
~u.~
C
~ w
~
3~ ~
r
i ~ a y
~~
O <a
~ Ng
S~o
~ `
izW ZW ~
~2
'~'~ g
g
3~~
Qa a
z
"~m
~
a iuv
o ~
u~
~Y
'
~
~~'„3'
S~'
°w~
~ 3a
w
iS~$ w~C
'
i
d Q
~ 33
~
gg3$ Qii._ ~
?a
~!°~~e ~ g
~
~
23yy
a'g~dF ~z6
' :~
C'"F
S
~
'
~g
aw
'~ qg~~ZO 3
`
~
9m
~~z;< ~
~
'wow
~ _ 3°muu..a~3 ~~-, "a3 ~ 8aw33
a Cd3 's
o$E"a'a$
Y~~ ^au~ 'e~si
U N
w _..n.xn^m _
~_
---_- ~
°s= °^em
6___„
~aa _
3r ,..,.,aa~ax^ _ _
$a .. e
Vic:::
n. -
~,,
~
o NOW3l U W13HVMJ ®O
A
~ ®®
~
! ~ ' ® ~'
N ~
c~ ~ ~ ® Oa0
•d
o_
~
9x® R
N d
~v
H
O a ,
O g o~fo ~ ?°~ ~ 00
~ U ~ w 9 A d a A
m
y
'
Q ~~
~yH
O F- 1 O ~ ~' ~ vOi
O cn ~ O r ® 9
CV ~ s F ~ ~a
~a
Z Z O~
I w amW
U
U v a° ~' °a
O W N O A~ O O
tl m ~ ai al `1 V e
~ N y A W N O A S
~ O~ of
~ mym
~ ~ J
e
e
e
0o S
a~ 6
ova s
dm
a00WN
o ~ NI
~1
U
e
`
s
C
c
`a m
o _
v
0
3~
E
v
v
m ~a
[ v a
B
d y
i° m
- a
'y ua ~
v c
v c
m
~j ?
y
9 Z J ~ 7 ~ L H E ¢ c
oy3 v
_ m a °
~~ $
N
O u o N N V n c. h- _.~
~ a
6Q~
O .L
O
LL x 0
NZ c
U $
Ja m
O
m
0
..
.O
~
a N
~
~ ~j
~
~ °
N i
n
r~ o 0
eh o
~ IA M
O
ei m
~ N N
~~
00
®® ®®®~
0
1
0
1
1
®®®®®q.®®®®®
v
my
~a
i ~,
v i7
£ 1y
~ c
o O
O w ~ ~
Z o ¢ .Ycn `o ~
E :~ m
~ ~ ~
c v
E
°
w ui
ii
~a _
~.. 1
A~
.. ¢...V
~
•+ l
o Z 'q'
o
ff
3 S
~ ~ °
~ a
~ ^
~ ~ '
'
n¢~ n °e'z
(0 N
t
ca ~ rn
+
m >,
a
OO a o
'
Q
i =
a ~
Q j
I
MU
O ~
F-
O ~ 'a
O~ ~ ~ N~ I
~ ~ i a
ti ~
I
5 T ~ 1S tlatlOl
O
O F"
~
N
®
a is anona
~ w
~ ® ~
U w I i
f I Z r\ ~ e r' +
Q ~ ~ r N T ~
a
B ®® ®® ®
}
I
O + w
'a
a 3
o
N ~
6!
o ~
w
z ~
m
I 1
P'~ y O
w
u z
I
I
I
I
I lslsanN~ooae ~
__
Attachment -Item Plo. 4
~SECTIt'H] 4
PET1T10NER`S STATE[V1ENT'.OF
NSTtFICA'PdONRDR VA127APfGPICODEblAVER
(NOT R&(2SIIAHD FOR EARSII~IO WAIVER)
RBQT]PSTFOR WAIVHR OFCODE SECTION: SI Gr F~) g_
(A separate'enm~ntls~requiied ioreech Cnde waiver)
PFRTAINII`]OTO: 17~ IJ. I..APc:t_Nra
Sectioaa I8.03.040.Q30 end 18.12.Qai<I ofYhe:AnefieimMunipilrel.Cie.tnguQe:th9[bafore~aay'verianco or Code waive maybe
grantui'by tip Z,orimg Admisianetor ar Plauaing Cemmi~ion, ih~,followimg.a6all beshowa:
1. '1'hRihele,etc.apecialcicumat9noa:`e~caliia:to.tle'leoimtt5'rincluding~size.®Lape•to~8*aPhy.7ocatiatror
satrouadiege,whickttlaimtapplyxo.ofhetprgpatynudcr`identical~zouing clasaificatlrntin tfx•vicinity; and
2. 'that: because of such epeclel eit~c~at~ca®. ~iict eppliwtion,df tIw rvwn ..code 'ves.tho ot, vilo
..~.$ ~P.n prolxrtY lm 1~
et~o}tid by s~r.P~Pa?Y'nnderiddnfio-l zoniag olsaaifica8on':in the mciolty;
arch apec191 circum8tanceaeauti, uud
.and
`a.
Cammiaeiva~to
x is:soughi; Silly
Amlhote spccifi].cirwmstanoca shetapply tathe.:.pttiparFy.mmatttits aubti ae ei~, ah®)w, tnpograQby, ]ocaliou or
smwtnding®7 ~I`es,_Na
S.
aaems zime:i
.." ~ lfyouraoss
~i. I. , a
~v~trra
STfTm; ;1
~3. Dufhesptx
p'1
4. .
~ - .,.. N .
~ "..RSO/MS .,ffii
tif;pum'legea cuaentty enjoyed'bjrnelglrboriug ,.
'Tbasolepacpase of
.approvalnw~hichvrc
'w6tchta f`
a~vsoecet.~ea u. ~
~Codo~waiversluitliro' ..
tha.~ eiciuiry ahd mm
Ate the:ap6ciatcimama:taIIities diatep~Ita~.ptapeity.d3HemMhvms~ecpcppertiesn7la•vlcinuy afiieti:are int6o.
Wgethae(rtcialcienumatanceaC=eatndl!pssusesbeyanil~ihe.coatrulp~ihepoper}yowner:(or'pa;viouep~apecty ~.
Damn)? _Y®•,g~No "..
PNpNGIAI C:,'(
T'..
~Da. `,d,
~F / ~P\
;_; r
~D~, ~Y~
~:~
%-~
~~
'....t.O4Nb FD-~g~
City of Anaheim
P®I.,ICE I)EPAI~TIVIEI~IT
Special Operations Division
To: Elaine Thienprasiddhi
Planning Department
From: Sergeant Mike Lozeau
Vice Detail
Date: June 6, 2007
12E: CUP 2007-05195
Arco Service Station
1700 W. La Palma Ave.
Anaheim, CA 92801
Attachment -Item No. 4
The Police Department has received an I.D.C. Route Sheet for CUP
2007-05195. The applicant is requesting to demolish an existing
service station and to construct a new service station with a
convenience market and self-serve car wash. They also want to permit
the sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption.
The location is within Reporting District 1521, which has a Crime Rate
of 234 percent above average. It is also within Census Tract Number
867.02 which has a population of 6,646. This population allows for 4 off
sale Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses and there are presently 2
licenses in the tract. It also allows for 7 on sale licenses and there are
presently 7 licenses in the tract.
The census tract boundaries are:
North La Palma
South 5 Freeway
East Euclid
West 5 Freeway
Off sale licenses in the immediate vicinity of the applicant:
651 N Euclid
1011 N Euclid.
On sale licenses in the vicinity of the applicant
1750 W La Palma
601 N Euclid (2 Licenses afthislocation)
669-671 N Euclid
821 N Euclid,
825 N Euctid
Anaheim Police Dept.
425 S. Harbor Blvd.
Anaheim, CA 92805
7'EL: 714.765.1401
FAX: 714.765.1665
Memorandum
Elaine Thienprasiddhi
1700 W. La Palma Ave..
821 N Euclid #B
The census tracts surrounding this location are as follows:
North - 866.01 population 9,872
On Sale allowed 11/active 2 Off Sale allowed 6/active 2
South - 871.02 population 5,862
On Sale allowed 7/active 3 Off Sale allowed 4/active 4
West - 871.02 population 5,862
On Sale allowed 7/active 3 Off Sale allowed 4/active 4
West - 868.02 population 5,359
On Sale allowed 6/active Off Sale allowed 4/active
East - 866.02 population 6,177
On Sale allowed 7/active 0 Off Sale allowed 4/active 1
East - 872.00 population 7,371
On Sale allowed 8/active 3 Off Sale allowed 5/active 1
Additional Census Tract information:
North West - 867.01 population 8,598
On Sale allowed 10/active 2 Off Sale allowed 5/active 4
North East - 866.01 population 9,872
On Sale allowed 11/active 2 Off Sale allowed 6/active 2
South West - 871.02 population 5,862
On Sale allowed 7/active 3 Off Sale allowed 4/active 4
South East - 871.05 population 4,507
On Saie allowed 5/active 3 Off Sale allowed 3lactive 0
The Reporting District north of the location is 1421; it has a crime rate of
181 percent above average. The'Reporting District east is 1522; it has
a crime rate of 134 percent above average. West is 1520; with a rate of
40 percent above average, and south of the location is 1621; with a
crime rate of 60 percent above average.
The Police Department has responded to this location 11 times in the
last year. The calls include 4 disturbing the peace, 1 trespass, 1 petty
theft, 2 lost /stolen, and 1 911 hang up, 1 medical aid, 1 violation of
court order. There were 4 reports taken.
Page 2
Memorandum
Elaine Thienprasiddhi
1700 W. La Palma Ave.
The Police Department opposes the applicant's request due to the high
crime rate in the area. If this application is approved we request the
following conditions be placed on their Conditional Use Permit:
1) There shall be no exterior advertising or sign of any kind or
type, including advertising directed to the exterior from
within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic
beverages. Interior displays of alcoholic beverages or signs
which are clearly visible to the exterior shall constitute a
violation of this condition.
2) No display of alcoholic beverages shall be located outside of a
building or within five (5) feet of any public entrance to the
building.
3) The area of alcoholic beverage displays shall not exceed 25% of
the total display area in a building.
4) Sale of alcoholic beverages shall be made to customers only
when the customer is in the building.
5) Mo person under twenty-one (21) years of age shall sell or be
permitted to sell any beer or wine unless under continuous
supervision of an adult 21 years of age or older.
6) That beer and malt beverages shall not be sold in packages
containing less than a six (6) pack, and that wine coolers
shall not be sold in packages containing less than a four (4)
pack.
7) The possession of alcoholic beverages in open containers and the
consumption of alcoholic beverages is prohibited on or around
these premises.
8) The parking lot of the premises shall be equipped with lighting of
sufficient power to illuminate and make easily discernible the
appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot.
Additionally, the position of such lighting shall not disturb the
normal privacy and use of any neighboring residences.
9) There shall be no amusement machines, video game devices, or
pool tables maintained upon the premises at any time.
10) There shall be no public telephones on the property that are
located outside the building and within the control of the applicant.
Page 3
Memorandum
Elaine Thienprasiddhi
1700 W. La Palma Ave.
11) The gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed 35
percent of all retail sales during any three (3) month period., The
applicant shall maintain records on a quarterly basis indicating the
separate amounts of sales of alcoholic beverages and other items.
These records shall be made available for inspection by any City
of Anaheim official when requested.
12) Any graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any
adjacent area under the control of the licensee shall be removed
or painted over within 24 hours of being applied.
13) The petitioner shall be responsible for maintaining free of litter the
area adjacent to the premises over which they have control, as
depicted.
14) Wine shall not be sold in bottles or containers smaller than
750 ml.
Please contact me at extension 1451 if you require further information in
regard to this matter.
F:thomelmminvin~2007-05195 CUP 1700 W. La Palma Ave.doc
Page 4
Item No. 5
L/
$p 9457.14
O
RCt 5g6p82 {l
¢5g.59-67 NOLOGY ~
~m
P~P~E\,GEOp3 r92 4PPP~i.M1PPV~N~E
RCL W~61-111:
\o Shepard gt- .
~ 24~~
$P 94-1
OA 3
SP 94-1 RCL 67-B6-39 SP 94-1
RCL b6-67-14 ~A 3
RCL 66-67-14 RCL 60-61-103
RCL fii-fit-69(1) GUP 3124
VAR 3764 $p 94-1
CUP 7546 ~o OAE
VAR 2006-04660 VAR 4070
SMALL IND. SMALL INO. ~ ~ m RCL fib-fit-14
FIRM FIRM m1°`O~m RCL 60-61-103
aom,°"a CUP 37fiB
5P9 j1 ~ U~U ELECTRONICS
FC O6b2.694(11 K[r STORE
RGL fi1P 3046
GU CPI
SEILVICE$
,-
19 X11 `y`
' S $ ~4
--- SPA ~> SP 941
1{ OA 5
~RP~NTER PVENVE RCL 6P-8-69(1) ~ ,.,T ~p 2000G05102k .' R C p~163
CUP 764fi > .Ey T-CUP 2001-04397. ~ VqR 4076
SMALL INO. -'- CUP 2000-04233)'.: VAR 3754
FIRM CUP 3124 `~</7 COMM.
VAR 4070 y ~ BU5.
VAR 3754 7
1 gp~P~A.EIYG
5P 4016
D~3 11 ~~ ~, c VP71
y1.9Y 11
~ 61.622 5l sw ~ ` . a.,::. g s.
VPR AM Nt RCL 91-92-03 '%~ ~~ -~
PM~ENSER CUP 1546 _ x/252'
G~p2639 vERgIDE FREEWAY ~SR.9~)
RI 50p11 -15 /
93-x. Mil ///I~1\\
~E~ 5~ • 10.a~ Z~p285 0
FR~N g4.1 'IGVlGUP 25251 p15MPNt~'Efw` pl
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE ALPHA (NORTHEAST AREA) REDEVELOPMENT AREA
Subject Property
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05209 Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Requested By: BRANDON RAINONE Q.S. No. 145
3364 East La Palma Avenue -Concourse Bowling tons
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
item No. 5
5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
5b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
5c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05209 (Motion for Continuance)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This 2.7-acre property is identified as 3364 East La Palma Avenue and is occupied by
Concourse Bowling. The property owner and applicant is the busihess owner, Brandon
Rainone with Outer Spring Volcano.
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests. approval of a conditional use permit to remodel an existing bowling
facility including an expansion for a management office and permit telecommunications
towers under authority of Code Section Nos. 18.120.0507 (Bowling Alleys) and
18.120.0511 (Telecommunications Antennas) with waivers of the following provisions:
(a) SECTION NO. 18.42.050.010. Minimum number of parking spaces
526 required; 240 proposed)
(bJ SECTION NO: 18.44.110.0103 Maximum letter height for a wall sign,
24 inches permitted; 48 inches
proposed)
(c) SECTION NO. 18.120.100.060.0803 Maximum floor area rattol (0.25
permitted; 0.32 proposed)
(d) SECTION NO. 18.120.100.060.0901 Required landsoaoino adjacent to a
freewav. DELETED
(e) SECTION NO. 18.120.100.1312 Maximum size of afreewav-oriented wall
sign: ~ square feet permitted; 1)000
square feet proposed)
BACKGROUND:
(3) This item was continued from .the May 30, and the June 25, 2007, Planning Commission
`meetings..
(4) This property is currently developed with a bowling facility and is located in the Northeast Area
Specific Plan, Commercial Area (SP94-1, DA 5):`The General Plan designates this property
and property to the east for General Commercial land uses and. properties to the north and
west for Low Intensity Office uses. The property is bounded by the SR-91 freeway to the south:
(5) Brandon Rainone, the property owner and business operator, has submitted the attached letter
dated July 12, 2007, requesting a continuance of this item to the September 5, 2007
Commission meeting in order to readvertise the request and submit revised plans.
RECOMMENDATION:
(6) Staff recommends that the Commission, by motion, continue this item to the September 5,
2007, Planning Commission meeting as requested by the applicant.
Case Planner: Elaine Thienprasiddhi
Srcup2007.05209eyt_72307.doc
Attachment -Item IVo. 5
July 12, 2007
Dear Planning Commission and Staff,
At this time we would like to request a continuance on our recent submittal to the
planning staff. We intend to modify our request and would appreciate a six week
extension to September 5, 2007.
It is our intention to provide the planning commission with a thorough project plan that
expresses how this addition is integral to The Concourse for reaching its full potential as
an entertainment center, while proving its value to the City of Anaheim.
If there is any uncertainty regarding this request, please feel free to contact me at your
convenience. We appreciate your consideration, and look forwazd to your response.
Kindest regards,
Brandon Rainone
Owner, The Concourse Bowling Center
~~ ~/R
-3
M 7416
RCL 70-71.55
RCL 65-66-17
VAR 2266
TOWNHOMES
_ 152 DU TOTAL
555'
SP 94-1
RGL 70-71-15 (1)
RCL 70.71-14
CUP 2167
VAR 4271
OFFICE BLDG.
D.A. 2
{ifa TllT1_K Nl
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05213
Tentative Tract Map No. 17175
Requested By: THE VINEYARDS APARTMENTS, LLC
5601 EastOrangethorpeAvenue
Subject Property
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 1B3
10311
° B
e
®Z
v
i
~m
~~
~.~
yam{
f
7 t
~
0
4
'
z "-'
='
175
76 04
76 03
'
159
1
~ ~
~ r
(
)
6213 rl m ~ r
21
732 ~ ~ ~ ~ RM-3
RCL 80-81-25
ARTMENTS , APARTMENTS
)U I ;; ~ 40 DU
t f4
'I
~
> y
Y't' ' t
' ~
~ e
~
f
x~l ; -~
Ry 4
~
~
~
Y
1
~`
~ rt
' T
i
: .
3 ~
!
i
~r~~ a ~~" ~ ,"~ w
' i
U' a
r" U
`'r ~ ``"",. `"
r>
'~
'
Z
,
n'
°~z~~J
,~ ~ ~
~
f
''~~ ~
e k
?_ W
J r
' 5~
Wg
"'nr H
C-G Q~ ~
~
,
n~ ~ ~ ~ ¢ RCL 79-BD-19 W 0
t ~ .~.,,,,~ ,,,,~ ~ CUP 3623
~~ ?~ ,~, ul CUP 2313 d A
„~, 0. VAR 3129 ~
~ SH OPPING CENTER
-- ~
A~VE ~'460'
~ ®®®~
-~
~
sP e4-1 cuP 2ao3-9afi2z sP 94.1 ~
NGRTREA9T CUP 3891 RCL 6490-46 (
INGUSTRIAL AREA CUP 3414 RCL B&6359
(
RCL 8390-d6 CUP 3240 RCL 6465-04
RCI. 87-BB-~ CUP 2905 RCL 6S6SZ5 j
RCL 68-87-Z9 VAR 3892 ~"
LI6
i MLI R
RCL 65'fiG-25(2) (CUP33141 S66-
RC
~
WP2003-0d693 RCLE
RCL BSfi6.17
(cuP 1565) CUP 3661 '
GUP Z005-05049 CINEMA GTY LUP 3253
T-CUP 2004-04869 TR
~
A 5 VAR 4198
VAR 4192
VAR 4156
SHGPPING CNTR. ^'
GA. 5 ' V
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05213
Tentative Tract Map No. 17175
Requested By: THE VINEYARDS APARTMENTS, LLC
5601 East Orangethorpe Avenue
Subject Property
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 183
10311
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23. 2007.
Item No. 6
6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion)
6b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion).
6c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.2007-05213 (Resolution)
6d. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17175 (Motioh)"
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This 13.3-acre property is identified as 5601 East Orangethorpe Avenue. The property is
owned by The Vineyard Apartments, LLC and the applicant is Lyon Realty Advisors:
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant7equests approval of he following applications:
(a) ;Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05213- to permit the conversion of ah existing 304-
unit apartment complex to an attached airspace fesidentiai`condomintum complex
with modification to standards under authority of Code Section Nos:: 18.06.030.090,
18.06.160 (PUD), and 18.38.100:020 (Conversion of Existing Multiple Family
Structures) with waiver of the following provision:
(a) SECTION NO. 18.06.090.050 Minimum setbacks between buildings.
30 feetrequiretl; 10 to 25 feet
proposed)
(b) Tentative Tract Map No. 17175 - to establish a 1-lot, 304-unit airspace attached
single-family residential condominium subdivlsioh.
BACKGROUND;
(3) This property is located within the Multiple-Family Residential zone (RM-4) is developed
with an apartment complex:: The General Plan designates this property andproperties to
the north for Medium Density Residential land uses. The General Plan desighates
properties to the west for Low-Medium Density residential land uses, the properties to the
east for Low-Medium Density residential and General Commercialland uses, and the
property to the south across Orangethorpe Avenue for Industrial land uses.'The property to
thenorth is'a parfofagolf course within the City of Yortia Linda. `'
(4) Avariance was approved in 1975 to waive minimum floor area and the required enclosure
of carports to construct this 304-unit apartment complex:.
(5) At the July 9, 2007, Planning Commission meeting, staff requested a continuance of this
item o the July 23, 2007, meeting to provide adequate time to comply with State noticing
requirements for condominium conversions: State law,requires that ail the tenants of a
proposed residential property cohversion be given a 10 day notice of the public hearing and
be provided with a copy of the staff report within three days of the public hearing: Staff
worked with the applicant to obtaih a tenant list and mailed the notice of public hearing and
the staff report to the tenants on July 12, 2007.
PROPOSAL:
(6) The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit and tentative tract map to convert a
304-unit apartment complex into a 304-unit residential condominium complex. New
construction is not proposed with this request. The site plan and tentative tact map
indicate the following existing site characteristics:
Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 6
(7} The site is currently developed with the following setbacks:
Develo ment Stahdards PPo'ect RAfl-4 Zone Standards
Site Area 13.3 net acres N/A
Number of Dwelltn Units 304 dweliin units 478 units maximum '
Avera a Land Area er Unit 1,905 s.f. . 1,200 s.f, minimum:
Lot Covera a 40.0% 55% maximum
Avg. ReclLeisure Area per
DU 361 s.f. per unit (116,000 s.f.
tdtal' ` 200 s.f. per unit (60,800 s.f.
total
Direction €Existing:"Setbacks
Landsca a/Buildin ' Required Setbacks
Landsca elBuildin
Oran ethor a Avenue 20 feet/20 feet 20 feeU20 feet
Interidr Setbacks Zero to 15 feet* 15 feet/5 feet
Setback between buildin s ' 70.25 feet° 30 feet! none
*Existing setback that can be modified through. conditional use permit
(8) Vehicular access is provided via two existing driveways on Orangethorpe Avenue leading:
Into an interior private drive ahd parking area. There is no distinction in parking
requirements between condominiums and apartments; therefore, the existing parking
condition can continue with no changer The site plan indicates 454 parking spaces are
available on-site.
(9) The floor plans indicate two-storyunits consisting of living and dining rooms and outdoor.
deck and balconyareas. Modifications tb the interior floor plans are not proposed. :
(10) .:The units are located within nineteen (19),two-story buildings with the following unit
configurationi
No, of [)offs.' Total Living Area* No. Of
f~Provid®d%Required m ' ~~"Bedrooms
square-feet (s:f.3'
64 540 s.f /550 s.f. Studio
144 705' and 740 s.f*/750 s.f, t Bedroom
2 floor tans
96 941 and 976 s.f./825 s.f. 2 Bedroom
2 floor tans '
"Modification to stahdards fs allowed in ordeFto achieve good project design, privacy,
livability, and compatibility with"surrounding uses.
{11) Elevation plans reflect two-story buildings consisting'of multiple'earth tone-colored stucco
walls, mission style clay file rooftops, aluminum windows, and white`lattlce on the
balcony/porch walls: Staff has recommended architectural and site enhancements to the:
property and buildings including embellishments to brsak up large sections of hlahk wall
area, new light posts tfiroughoutthe property, removal and replacemenfof he latticework.
on the tialcony and porch walls., and wall lights for common areas to match those wall lights
atthe entry doors: 'Staff has included a eonditioh bf approval requiring final elevation and
site plans reflecting the architectural enhancements and site improvemehtsao be submitted
to the Planning Services Division for review prior to approval of the final tract map.:
Page 2
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 6
(12) The tentative tract map indicates a minimum twenty(20) foofwide landscaped setback -
adjacent to Orangethorpe Avenue: Code requires one {1) tree forevery twenty (20) lineal
feet of street frontage which is 22 trees on Orangethorpe Avehue and 13 trees on Imperial
Terrace Lahe: The current Imperial Highway grade separatidhproject--, which includes the
widening'of Orahgethorpe Avenue, nasimpacted this property with the removal of trees'
within the setback area: Staff has included a conditidn of approval requiring thatfinal
landscapeplans including the requisite number of trees along each sheet frontage be
submitted to the Planning Services Division for review prior td approval of the final tract
map.
(13) The recreatioh areas throughout the propertycontain abolleyball eourt, three tennis courts,
and green belt areas:. The site also wntainsa pool area with associated
clubhouse/community`room for tenant use: Changesto these facilities are ndt proposed.
(14) California Government Code Section 66427a contains speci£c requirements for approval.
of a final map for a subdivision created from the conversion of residential real property into
a cohdominium project: California Government Code Section 66427.1 reads as follows:
"(a) Eachof the tenants of the proposed condominium project...has received, pursuant to
Section 66452.9, written notification of intention to convert at /east 60 days prior to the filing
of a tentative map pursuant to Section 66452. There shalfbe a further finding that each
such tenant,' and each person applying for the rental of a unit in such residential real
property, has, or will have, received all applicable notices and rights now or hereafter
required by this chapter or Chapter 3 (commencing wfth Section 66451). Ih addftion, a,'
finding shall be made that each tenant has received 10 days' written notification that an'
application for. a public report will be, or has been, submitted td .the Department of Real
Estate, and that such report will be availablebn request The written notices to tenants
required by this subdivision shall he deemed'satisfied tfsuch nbtices compty with the legal
requirements (or service by mail.
(b) Each of the tenants of the proposed condominium project... has been, or will be, given
written notification withih; l0 days'of approval: of a final map for the proposed conversion.
(cf Each of the tenants of the proposed condominium project... has been, or will be, given
180 days' written notice of intention to convert prior to termination of tenancy due fo the
conversion dr proposed conversion. The provisions of this subdivision shall not alteror
abridge the rights or obligations of the parties`in pertormance of their covenants; including,
but not limited to, the provision of services, payment of rehf or the obligations imposed by
Sections 1941; 194f.1, and 1941:2 of the: Civil Code.
(d) Each of the tenants of the proposed condominium project.:. has been, or will be, given
notice of an exclusive right to contract for the purchase of his or her respective unit upon
the same terms and cohditions that such unit will be fhitialty offered to the general public or
terms more favorable to the tenant' The rightshall run for a peridd of not less than 90 days
from the date' of issuance of the subdivision public report pursuant fo Section 11018.2 of
the Businessand Professions Code, unless the tenant gives prior written notice of his dr
her intention not to exercise the'right.
(ef This section shall not diminish, limit or expand, other than as provided herein, the
authority of any city, county, or cdy and county to approve or disapprove condominium.
projects."
The applicant hasindicated that written notification of intention to convert the apartments to
condominiums has been provided at least 60 days prior to the filing of this tentative map.
Page 3
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 6
(18) The applicant proposes to retain existing setbacks between buildings that are less then
code requirements: Code requires a minimum building setback of thirty (30) feet between
two story: primary walls Most of the buildings on the existing site containseparations that
vary considerably, buf at their closest point range from ten (10) to twenty-five (26) feet:.
Staff surveyed nearby and surrounding properties and identified twa adjacehf mutiple
family properties that contains similar building. separations (ranging between twelve and 23
feet) for various wall types. Since the project is a liveable community that inconsistent with
other condominium conversions, staff recommends approval oflhiswaiver; as requested.
The intent of the code is to provide a livable and open environment. between buildings and
the existing setbacks meet this intent.
(19) Modification to development standards, including minimum floor area and interior setbacks,
are allowed as outlined in Code Section 18.06.160. These deviations are allowed in order
to achieve good prdjecf design, privacy, livability, and compatibility with surrounding uses.
Before the Planning Commission approves these modifications, it shall make the following
findings:
(i) The uses within the project are compatible;
(ii) New buildings or structures related. to the project are compatible with the scale;
mass, bulk, and orientation of existing buildings,in the surrounding area, provided the
existing buildings conform with the provisions of this title;
(iii) Vehicular and pedestrian access are adequate;
(iv) The project is consistent with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City;
(v) The size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proponed use in a manner hoEdetrimental to he particular area;
(vi) 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;
(vii) The project complies with the General Plan and any applicable zoning or specific
plan; and
(viii) The granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will
not be tletrimental to the peace, heahh, safety and general welfare of the citizens of
the City of Anaheim.
(20) .Modifications are requested for unit size for the 64 studio units and the 144 one-bedroom
units. These units were constructed in compliance with applicable standards at the time
they were built: The setbacks abutting the interior property lines are alsoless than code
requirements: Code allows modification to both of these requirements under the Planned
Unit Development portion of the code. The existing project is well maintained. Since these
modificatidns would riot affect tfie current livability of the development, staff recommends
approval of the modifications.
(21) .Based upon review of the project with the requested modification of standards and waivers,
the site would comply with the intent of the Genere(Plan and underlying Zoning Code. The
intent of the General Plan is for Multiple Family designated properties to provide quality
multiple family living. environments with design amenities. Therefore, the development is
Page S
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 6
suitable for conversion from an existing multiple family apartment complex to a single-
family attached condominium development
(22) Goal 4.t of the Community Design Element of the General Plan reads as follows:'
"Multiple-family housing is attractively designed and scaled to complement the
neighborhood and provides visual ihterestthrough varied:architectural detailing."
Several policies are indicated in order to implement this goat .ln summary, the design
policies include the following:
e Reduce the visual impact of large-scale, multiple-family buildings by requiring.
articulated entry features;'such' as atttactive porches; and detailed fagade treatments;
which create visual interest'and give each unit more personalized design.
Discourage visually mondtonous(multlple-family resitlenoes by incorporating different
architectural styles, a variety of roof-lines, wallarticulation, balcohies; window
treatments, and varied'colors and building materials on ail elevations:
Require appropriate setbacks and height limits to provide privacy where multiple-
family housing is developed. adjacentto single family housing.
Reduce the vtsual impact of parking areas by utilizing interior courtyard garages,
parking structures, subterraneart lots, or tuck=under, alley-loaded designs.
Require minimum lot size criteria in the Zoning Code to encourage professional,
responsible, on=site property management.
Provide usable aemmon open space amenities, Common open space should be
oehtrally located and contain amenities such as seating, shade arrd play equipment
Private open space may include courtyards, balconies, patios, terraces ahd ehclosed
play areas.
Provide convenient pedestrian access from multiple-family development to nearby
commercial centers, scfiools, and transit stops.
Where possible,'undergrouhd or screen utilities and utilityequipmeht or locate and
size them tb be as incohspicuous as possible.
(23) Several of the design features indicated in tfie Design Elementare already incorporated
into the existing apartmentcomplex. Examples include reducing the visual Impact of
parking areas by utilizing interior' courtyard`garages; :providing usable common open space
amenities with'seating, shade and play equipment; and where possible; underground or
screen utilities andLtility equipment or locate and size them to be as inconspicuous as
possible. Staff has discussed with the applicant the need to provide enhancements to the.
property to further implementthe policiesatiove and achieve a'good project designed to
preserve and enhance the neighborhood in a manner that is compatible in scale, mass and
bulk with existing buildings in the area These enhancements will include detailed fagade
treatments (embellisfiments to spans of blank building walls); changes to ifie balcony and
porch screening design, and replacemenf of the original pole lamps throughout thebomplex
to'a more modern or decorativelamp design. Existingvtilityequipment (such as gas'
'meters and tiackflow devices) should be painted and screened with landscaping where
possible.' The applicant has indicated a'willingness to enhance the property in a manner
cdhsistentwith recently approvers condomihium conversions.
(24) Staff has included:conditions of approval relating to landscape installation and
maintenance: Detailedfinal elevation artd landscape plans are required for finalYeview and
approval by the Planning Services Divisionprior to final map approval to ensure that
upgrades to the complex are implemented:` Staff believes the proposed aonversion is
''compatible with existing and surrounding land uses (multiple family7esidences) and that
Page 6
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 6
modifications/upgrades proposed for the buildings would enhance the visual impact of the
property and livability far residents within and around the project.
FINDINGSF
(26) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from'strict enforcement of the
Zoning Code, a modification may be granted for the purpose of assuring that no property,
because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly
enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose of any.
variance dr code waiver is to prevent discrimination ahd none shall be approved which
would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other similaFproperties.
Therefore, before any variance orcode waiver is granted by the Planning Commission, it
shall be shown:
(a)' That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, which tlo hot applyto other identically zoned
properties in the vicinity; and
(b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed.
by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity,
(26) 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 proposed 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 18.66.040 (Approved' Authority);
(b) 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;
(c) That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use inadequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a mannerhot detrimental to the particular area
or to the health and safety;
(d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden
upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the
area; end
(e) 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.
(27) Before the Planning Commissiohapproves aconditional use permit to convert existing
multiple-family dwellings to a condominium or other common interest development, it shall
make the folldwing fihdngs:
(a) That the projecf complies with the General Plan; including the Land Use Element;
(b) That the existing structures and other improvements conform to the site
development standards for the underlying zone br any applicable specific plan.
(c) That the existing structures and other improvements are in compliance with the
Uniform Building Code and other applicable codes as adopted by the City of
Anaheim;.
Page 7
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 6
(d) That the vehicular and pedestrian access are adequate; _.
(e) That the size end shape of the siteproposed for the use are adequate to allow full
development of the proposal ih a manner not detrimental to the particulararea; -
(f) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden.
upon the streets and highways designed ahd improved to carry the traffic in the
area; and
(g) Thaf granting the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if arty, will
not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare bf the citizens of
the City of Anaheim.
(28) The State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code, Section 66473.5) makes it mandatory
to include in all motions approving, ar recommending approval of a tract map, a specific.
finding that the proposed Subdivision together with its design and improvement is
consistent with the City's General Plan.
Further, the law requires that the Commission make any of the following findingswhen
denying or recommending denial of a tract map:
1: Thafthe proposed map is not consistent with applicable Generatand Specific
Plans.
2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with
applicable Geheraf 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 td
cause substantial ernironmental damage or substantially and avoidably. injure fish
or wildlife br their habitat.`
6. That the design of the subdivision or the type df improvements is likely to cause
seriouspublic health problems.
7. That the design of the subdivision dr the type df improvements will cdnflict with
easements, acquired by the publidat large, for access through or use of property
within the proposed subdivision.
RECOMMENDATION:
(29) Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the followingections:
(a) 8y motion, ao rove a Negative Declaration for the project>
(b) By motion, ap rdve waiver (a).
(c) By resolution, aobrove Cohditional Use Permit No. 2007-05213.
(d) ey motion, approve Tentative Tract Map No. 17175.
Page 8
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"'
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05213 BE GRANTED
(5601 EAST ORANGETHORPE 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:
THOSE PORTIONS OF THE PRUDENCIO YORBA ALLOTMENT AND THE MARIA JESUS
YORBA DE SCULLY ALLOTMENT, AGCORDING TO THE DECREE OF PARTITION OF THE
RANCHO CANON DE SANTA ANA, RENDERED IN CASE NO. 1978 OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL
DISTRICT COURT OF CALIFORNIA, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH WAS RECORDED
FEBRUARY 8, 1874 IN BOOK 28, PAGE 158 OF DEEDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE
EASTERLY LINE OF TRACT 7416 AND THE CENTERLINE OF ORANGETHORPE AVENUE,
AS SHOWN ON A MAP OF SAID TRACT 7416, RECORDED IN BOOK 311, PAGES 37
THROUGH 42 INCLUSIVE OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;.
THENCE NORTH 1°13'30" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION AND SAID
EASTERLY LINE, 497.51 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID TRACT, SAID
CORNER ALSO BEING THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF TRACT NO. 8511, AS PER
MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 355, PAGES 37, 38 AND 39 OF SAID MISCELLANEOUS MAPS;
THENCE NORTH 20°26'29" EAST, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID
TRACT 8511, A DISTANCE OF 520.91 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SID
PRUDENCIO YORBA ALLOTMENT; THENCE SOUTH 89°58;33' EAST, ALONG SAID
NORTHERLY LINE, 554.77 FEET TO A POINT NORTH 89°58;33' W EST, 19.26 FEET FROM
STATION 1 OF SAID ALLOTMENT; THENCE SOUTH 26°0751" EAST 43.60 FEET TO THE
EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PRUDENCIO YORBA ALLOTMENT; THENCE SOUTH 0°04;52'
WEST ALONG SAID .EASTERLY LINE, 389.49 FEET TO STATION 3 OF THE TRACT OF
FIRST AND SECOND CLASS LAND ALLOTTED TO SAID MARIA JESUS YORBA DE
SCULLY, SAID POINT ALSO BEING AND ANGLE POINT INTHE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND
DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, .RECORDED JULY 28, 1954 IN
BOOK 2778, PAGE 632 AND FOLLOWING OF OFFICIAL RECORDS,. RECORDS OF SAID
ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID LAND, SOUTH 56°21;18"
WEST. 550.99 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID ORANGETHORPE AVENUE, SAID
CENTERLINE BEING A CURVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2000.00 FEET, A
RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE BEARS SOUTH 5°55'57" AND ARC DISTANCE OF 207.08
FEET; THENCE TANGENT NORTH 78° 18'33" WEST, ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, 361.76
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING..
EXCEPT THAT PORTION INCLUDED W ITHIN PLACENTIA YORBA ROAD, AS DESCRIBED
IN A DEED RECORDED JANUARY 6, 1916 IN BOOK 280, PAGE 151 OF DEEDS, RECORDS
OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on July 23, 2007, 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
Cr\PC2007- -1- PC2007-
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 the conversion of an existing 304-unit apartment
complex to an attached airspace residential condominium complex with modification to standards for
minimum floor area and interior setbacks is permitted in the RM-4 Zone as a Planned Unit Development
(PUD) subject to the approval of a conditional use permit under authority of Code Section Nos. "
18.06.030.090, 18.06.160 (PUD), .and 18.38..100.020 (Conversion of Existing Multiple Family Structures) with
waiver of the following provision:
(a) SECTION NO. 18.06.090,050 Minimum setbacks between buildings.
30 feet required; 1_0 and 25 feet proposed)
2. That the waiver pertaining to the minimum required setbacks between buildings is hereby
approved as the existing site contains building separations that vary considerably. An adjacent multiple
family residential development on Orangethorpe Avenue contains similar building separations for primary
walls and the strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by this other
property under identical. zoning classification in the vicinity.
3: That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and
development of the area because the apartment complex is existing, and no expansion or increase of units is
proposed. The proposed conversion would be compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and
modificatiohs and upgrades proposed to the buildings would enhance the visual impact of the property on
surrounding properties and the livability for residents within the project. In addition, this proposal as
conditioned is consistent with other recently approved condominium subdivisions.
4. That based upon review of the project with the Yequested modification of standards and
waiver, the site would comply with the intent of the General Plan and underlying Zoning Code, making the
develdpmenfsuitatilefnr conversion from an existing multiple family apartment complex to asingle-family
attached condominium development.
5: That the uses within the project are compatible and the scale and mass of the existing
buildings are compatible with the scale, mass, bulk and orientation of existing buildings in the surrounding
area
6. That vehicular and pedestrian access are adequate and the size and shape of the site is
adequate for the conversion.
7. That the existing structures and other improvements are in compliance with the Uniform
Building Code. and other applicable codes es adopted by the. City ofMaheim.
8. That the proposed conversion would not create any new units or additional square footage
and therefore would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area
in which it is proposed because the size and shape of the site for the project has been adequate for the full
development of the existing use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area
9. 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 because the project already
exists with 304 dwelling units. No increase in the number of units is proposed.
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.
11. That "' indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.
-2- PC2007-
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FtND'ING: 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 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 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 9, and as conditioned herein.
General Conditions:
2. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works
Department 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 one-gallon size clinging vines planted on maximum three-foot
centers or tall shrubbery.
3. That the property shall 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 from the time of discovery.
4. That adequate lighting of parking lots, driveway, circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses and
ground contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate
illumination to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the
hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and vehicles
onsite.
5. That any tree planted on-site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed,
damaged, diseased and/or dead.
6. That extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with
Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal
7. That this Conditional Use Permit is granted subject to the approval and recordation of Tentative Tract
Map No. 17175, now pending.
8. That any new backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street setback area in
a manner fully screened from .all public streets. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault
shall be brought up to current standards. Existing large water system equipment shall be fully
screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be shown on plans and approved by
Water Engineering and Cross Connection Control Inspector before submittal for building permits.
_3_ PC2007-
9. That if this site does not already have a separate irrigation meter, a separate irrigation meter shall be
installed .and shall comply with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code. Said information shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits.
10. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Services Standards ,.
Specifications. Any water service and/or fire line that does not meet current standards shalt be upgraded if
continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The
ownerldevelopershah be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line.
11. That the Home Owners Association (HOA) shall .have the responsibility to maintain the building
exteriors and use of the property for residential development. All common facilities such as recreational
areas, parking areas, community buildings and landscaping, as well as the general appearance of the
premises and buildings, shall be adequately and professionally maintained.
12. 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.
13. 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, 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
July 23, 2007. 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
ATTEST:
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-4- PC2007-
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 July 23, 2007, 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
.2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
_g_ PC2007-
City of Anaheim
~LAIVNIIVG DEI<'AI2T'ME1V'I'
Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting
of July 23, 2007.
6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
6b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT.
6c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05213
6d. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17175
Owner: .The Vineyards Apartments. LLC
4901 Birch Street
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Agent: Ron Cole.
4901 Birch Street
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Location: 5601 East Orangethorpe Avenue.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05213 -Request to permit the conversion of an
existing 304-unit apartment complex to an attached airspace residential
condominium planned unit development complex with .modification to standards
and waiver of setbacks between buildings;
Tentative Tract Mao No. 17175 - To establish a 1 lot, 304 unit airspace
attached residential condominium subdivision.
j Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
', CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to
establish a 1 lot, 304 unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision and
does hereby approve the Negative Declaration.
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, is consistent with the
Anaheim General Plan, and does therefore approve Tentative Tract Map No. 17175, to
permit the conversion of an existing 304-unit apartment complex to establish a 1 lot, 304
unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision subject to the following
conditions:
That the legal property owner must comply with tenant notification requirements of
Section 66427.1, 66451.3(b) and 66452.3 of the Subdivision Map Act.
2. That final detailed elevation plans and colors and materials shall be submitted to the
Planning Department for review and approval. Plans shall reflect detailed fagade
treatments including architectural embellishments on'blank walls, and a :new balcony
and porch design.
3. That 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).
www.anaheim.nel
2@0 South Anaheim @oulevartl
P.O. @ox 3222
Anaheim, California 92@03
TEl (714)765-5139
4. That The legal property owner shall execute a Subdivision Agreement, in a form
approved by the City Attorney, to complete the required putilic improvements at the
legal property owner's expense. Said agreement shall be submitted to the Public
Works Department, Subdivision Section approved by the City Attorney and City
Engineer and then recorded concurrently with the final map.
5. The westerly most driveway along Orangethorpe Avenue shall be removed and the
legal property owner shall construct curb and gutter in conformance with Public Works
Standard Detail No. 120. The legal property owner shall also construct sidewalk and
.public parkway landscape improvements in conformance to Public Works standard
detail no. 110-A. The property owner shall submit plans to the Department of Public
Works, Development Services Division for review and approval and then obtain a
Right of Way Construction Pennit. The improvements shall be constructed prior to
final map approval
6. That final landscape and hardscape plans shall be submitted to the Planning
Department far review and approval. The landscape plan shall incorporate layered
landscaping within the street setbacks along Orangethorpe Avenue and Imperial
Terrance Lane. A minimum of 24-inch box sized trees shall be planted in the front
setback areas along Orangethorpe Avenue and Imperial Terrance Lane in
accordance with Zoning Code standards. Said information shall be specifically
shown on the plans.
7. That prior to approval of the final map, 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.
8. 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
9. That timing for compliahce 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
mod cation complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code and (iii) the applicant has
demonstrated significant progress coward establishment of the use or approved
development.
TTM1717fi_Excerpt
Attachment -Item No. 6
SECTION 4
PETIT'IONER'S STATEb1ENT OF
NSTIPICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE- 1VAIVER
(NOT' REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQLrEST POR l1':U\'ER Oi' CODE SECTION:
(.4 separate statement is required far each Coda waiver)
PERT~VN9NG TO:
Sections I8.U3:0#U.030 and 18.1?.U60 of the Anaheim Alunicipgl Code require that before any variance or Code waiver may he
grnmed be the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following slmll be shown:
That there are special circumstances applicable to [he propzm~, including size, shape, tOpogrvphy, locn[ien or
surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and
_'. That, because of such special circumstances, snict application of rho zoning code deprives the properq~ oFprivileges
enjoyed by other properly under identical zoning classification in the vieinit}'.
In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Plamting Commission to
arrive at a decision, please answer each of the followiug questions regarding the property Cor which n variance is swght, fulh•
and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may anach additional pages.
1. Arc there special circuma;antes that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings? _Yes _ X No.
If }'our answer is "Yes;' describe the special circumsimtces:
?. Are the special circumstances that eppl r to the property different from other properties in die vicinity which are in the
same zono as your property? _Yes _ X. No
if your answer is "yes." describe how dte properly is different:
3. Do the special circums[nncu applicable to the property depm•e it of privileges currently enjoyed 6y neighboring
properties located within die same zono? X _Yes _No
ifyntpr nnc,v,.r if"'~,nc "rtn ril,r tl.. c orvel r ..,~ron__.
__ _ __ __ ______ _ _p..._....__.._ .
Anaheim' M ~n(cloal Code allows for the modification of some standards for PUDs, but not ail standards It does not allow for
the modiF'cattan of standards for the minimum sethack between buildings. Code requires 30 feet. The two adjacent multiple
famllu oreoerti hav ethack between buildings I ss than 30 feet. We would Ilke similar consideration
4. N~ ere ure speetal circumstances crested by causes beyond rho control pf the property owner (or previous property
owners)? . x _Yes _ No
EtPLAIN: The owner is requesting the variance request because the Tentative Map and Conditional Use Permit
application requires it as part of the overall appltoat on process
The sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Codc 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 •~'e ezpressh~ uthorized by zone regulations governing subjee:[ property. Use variances are not permitted.
Signature of Propem• Ormer or .4u[horized Agent vnic
CONDITIONAL 115E PERMITNARIANCE NO.
176'_Yd7ECEb1nEIt 1:, ^.U(la
Item No. 7
~ CL
I (PTMU) I (PTMU)
RCL 2004-0U129 RCL 2004-00129 z I (PTMU)
RCL99-00-15
' O. RCL99-00-15
RCL 99-00-
15 1- RCL 55-56-19
RCL 66-67-14 RCL 6fi-67-14 a RCL 54-55-42
RCL 54-55-42 RCL 54-55-42 ~ FIRMS
IND D<
i RCL 55-56-19 RCL 55-56-19 C¢j . ST
CUP 2165 VAR 3775
RCL 9?-W-15
acL w-st-14 CUP 1971 DAG 2005-00003 -' '
Ra ss-m-v
RCL Sb55-43 VAR 4304
VAR 3146 S
DAG 2005-00002
I (PTMU)
vanxm5
cuPa47
OAG 2005-00007 DAG 2005-00001
RCL99-00-15
n65TAURAU7 FSP 2005-00006 FSP 2004-00007 RCL 66-67-14
UNDER UNDER RCL 55-56-19
CONSTR. CONSTR. RCL 54-55-42
27
C
Platinum Tnanple Mixed Us e Ova rlav Zune I BANK
KATELLA AVENUE
Platinum Tnangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone I IPrMUI
RCL 2004-00125
RCL 99-W-15
- RCL 66-61-iC
.. _ ,. _ RCL ~-5]-93
cuP 1552
~
RCL 2005-00164 I PTMU
( )
RCL 2004-00129 CUP 1587
ADJ 2003-00236 r
~ I
) CtIP4475
VAR 2615
RCL 2005-00164
RCL99-DD-15
RCL 99-p0-15
DAG 67 Ot
' ~ tACL 7o-7ta41
ICUP Zoos-e5l ill
RCL 66 67 14 RCL 87-66-14 FSP 2007.00006 ° I ' (CUP 14321
RCL 56-57-s3 RCL 66-67-14 PSP 2006-00005 ' - I I NAR raze sl
CUP 575 RCL 56-57-93 (ROL 70-7134)
{CUP 2006-05117
) CUP 20 07-0 5227
CUP 2006-05116 (CUP 2006-05117)
(CUP te64 - t(PTMU)
(CUP 616)
UNDER
CUP 2002-04544
(CUP 1065 RLL 2061.a9t29
I R0. e5-aeas
CONSTR CUP 2946 (CUP 616) RCL SS-sr-s3
. CUP 2134 UNDER ,.,
- I
cuP4ms
(Ra7o-7ta41
CUP 1679 CONSTR (cuP zoos-os1 nl
. .. ,.. CUP 1842 a< . . ... .... . ... . ... . < ' ~. NAR Lazo 5) _
.. -... ..- -.... I(PtMU)
t RCL 2e0C-x0129
~ F RCL99-W-15
/
/
/
IIPTMU
r RCL 2004129 C
RCL99-00-15 RcL SS-s7-e3
RCL 87-66-14 CUP 447 5
(RCL 7o-71d4)
RCL 99-0p-15 (Res. of Int. b 6E)
RCL 56S/-93 1LUP 200fi-651 RI
I I
CUP 20 02-09 620
CUP 20 02-04 544
I (p7MU1 NAa lazo s)
I
~
P X RCL 2004-00129
(CUP 1065)
Z: ~ CU
46 (CUP 616)
S I ADJ 2003-00236 UNDER
DAG 67-01 C STR
I (
CL
P
Of
5
4) Z .
~ (
J
>
)
t
(
CUP 4006-05)117
J h
/1
~ (
) /
\
I \
/
ly
~~5~
CUP 2003-04716
~ '
/
\
m i /
V
f
I U N
ALL PR OPERTIES ARE IN THE PLATINUM T RIAN GLE.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05227 Subject Property
Fnal Site Plan No. 2007-00006 Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Requested By: LENNAR PLATINUM TRIANGLE, LLC Q.S. No. 108
1404 East Katella Avenue -Development Area C
10324
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 7
7a. CEQA SUBSEQUENT EIR NO. 332 AND ADDENDUM
(PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED).
7b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05227
7c. FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2007-00005 (Motion for Continuance)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) The property is identified as 1404 East Katella Avenue (A-Town Metro, Development Area C):
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of the following applications:
Conditional Use Permit fJo. 2007-05227 - to modify minimum setbacks td construct a
mixed-use project.
Final Site Plan No: 2007-00006 -review and approval of a final site plan fora 5-story,.
166-unit mixed-use development, including 15,275 square feet of commercial uses.
(3) This property is currently vacant and is located within the Industrial; Platinum Triangle
Mixed Use Overlay zone (I (PTMU)). The 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 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) The applicant has submitted the attached letter, dated July 13, 2007, requesting a
continuance to the August 20, 2007, Commission meeting..: This continuance request is
to allow time for the applicant tobomplete the Design Guidelines and Shared Parking
Analysis focthe A-Town Metro project: 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 August 20, 2007, Planning
Commission meeting:
Case Planner: Ted White
srCUP2007-05227iw
Attachment -Item No. 7
Tnly 13, 2007
Mr. Ted White
Senior Plainer
City of Anaheim Plamiing Department
200 South Anaheim Blvd., Suite 162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Re: Parcel C at A-Town Metia
Dear Ted:
This letter is to formally request a continuance of CUP numbers 2007-07227 and FSP
number 2007-00006 to a Planning Commission hearing date of August 20°i, 2007.
Thank you in advance for this consideration and now await your response.
Best regazds,
George Tellez
Project Manager
Cc: Donna Kelly, Gary Hildabrand, tlndrew Han, Tim Smallwood- MVE Partners.
GT/HH
25 Enterprise • Aliso Viejo, CA 9265fi • Phone: 949-349-8200 • Fax: 949-349-0893
L~6V ~AR.CORA
[p,:F
Final Site Plan No. 2007-00007
Tentative Tract Map No. 17102
Specimen Tree Removal No. 2007-00003
Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00204
Requested By: IRVINE LAND COMPANY
Southern terminus of Gypsum Canyon Road and bordered
on the north by the Riverside Freeway (SR-91)
Subject Properly
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1"= 200'
Q.S. No. 237, 238
243, 244
10320
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE SCENIC CORRIDOR (SC) OVERLAY ZONE.
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 8
8a FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT N0. 331
(PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED)
8b. DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENTAREA 5
(MIS2007-00204)
8c FINAC SITE PLAN NO. 2007-00007.
8d. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO: 17102
8e: SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. 2007-00003 - (Motion for Continuance)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This approximately 291-acre property is located east and southeast of the southern
terminus of Gypsum Canyon .Road, and bordered on the north by the Riverside Freeway
(SR-91): The property owner is the Irvine Land Company and the applicant is John
Sherwood representing The Irvine Community Development Company.
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of the following applications:
(a) Development Area Plan for Development Area 5 (MIS2006-00171) -Request foe.
review and approval of a Development Area Plan for Development Area 5 of the.
Mountain Park Specific Plan.
(b) Final Site Plan No. 2007-00007 -Request for review and approval of a final site
plan for Development Area 5 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan.
(c) Tentative Tract Mao No. 17102 -Request to establish 153 single-family detached
lots, 8 Large-Lots for a maximum of 617 single-family detached clutter units and 13
large-Lots for a maximum of 825 single-family attached units, a public water
reservoir; three private parks and associated streets and landscaping.
(d) Specimen Tree Removal Permit No: 2007-00003 -Request for review and
approval of a specimen tree removal permit to remove 53 trees as part of the
:.Mountain Park Master Specimen Tree Remdval :Permit
BACKGROUND:
(3) The project site islocated within the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4, Scenic Corridor
Overlay (SP90-4 (SC)): The site was an approximately 300-acre sand and gravel mining
operation which was closed in January 2004 and is currently under reclamation. It is
located south of the SR-91 Freeway, east of the Gypsum Canyon Road interchange.
(4) On August 23, 2005, the City Council approved Amendment No. 1 to the Mountain Park
Specific Plan No. 90-4 and certified Environmental Impact Report No. 331 to provide for the
development of a residential community wish up to 2,500 residential units, a fire station,
public trails, a trail staging area, a concession store/interpretive center, a school site, a
public community park and open space. The City Council subsequently adopted
ordinances to amend the Specific Plan Zone and establish revised zoning and development
standards as part of the Anaheim Municipal Code,
Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission.
July 23, 2007
Item No. 8
(5) The applicant John Sherwood has submittedthe attached letter dated July 11; 2007,
requesting a continuance of this item to the August 20, 2007, Cbmmissibh meeting due to
internal scheduling conflicts.
RECOMMENDATION:
(8) Staff recommends the Commission, by motion, continue this item to the AugusE20, 2007,'-'
Planning Commission meeting as requested by the applicant
Page 2
Page I of 1
Attachment -Item Plo. 8
Scott Koehm
From: John Sherwood [JSherwood@irvinecompany.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 9:37 AM
To: Scott Koehm
Cc: Bryan Austin; Dan Miller (Gov Relations)
Subject: Tentative Tract Map 17102
Scott - As you know, a public hearing is scheduled on July 23, 2007 for the Anaheim Planning Commission to
review Tentative Tract Map No. 17102. Due to internal scheduling issues, we would like to request a continuance
of the item to the August 20 Planning Commission meeting.
We appreciate your consideration of this request. Thank you.
Regards,
John
John Sherwood
Director, Community Development
Irvine Community Development Company
660 Newpcrt Center Drive I Newport Beach, Calrfornla { 92660-7011
Phone 949.720.2412 I Fax 949.720.2629
JSherwood@irvinecompany.com
~~~ ~t ~nr~rcaM~atav
,~,~«~
Notice to recipient: This a-mail is only meant for the intended recipient of the transmission, and may be
a confidential communication or a communication privileged by law. If you received this a-mail in error,
any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this a-mail is strictly prohibited. Please notify
us immediately of the error by return e-mail and please delete this message from your system. Thank
you in advance for your cooperation.
7/18/2007
Item No. 9
.a.~..oe.®.e.m„o..®e.®..®.am.oo.o®..m.."®..®e.®.._a,_..®..~...®.,®..®.. ®e.®.._..m."®.,®."®..®„®..®.o.
RtVEP.SlDE FREEWAY (SR-9?J
C-G
RCL 79-BO-16
RCL 73-74-36
(Res. of Irtt. to PC)
RCL 73-74-35
II CUP 3640
l!` CUP 2720
CUP 1574
EMERALD COURT
'i RETIREM ENT FACILITY
195 0U
MEDICAL CENTER DRIVE
C-G
57-58-05
On ~ VAR;696S -
I~ MEDICAL CENTER
c~
C-G(PC) m
RCL 79-80 16
RCL 79-74 36 ~ ~ .
(Res oRnt. bPC) a
RCL 73-74 35 "-« ~~
~ ~'
7 CUP 2002-04659
- T-CUP 2007-05227
CUP 4177 ..c. ~ a
ROMNEYA DRIVE
Conditional Use Pennit No. 4177
TRACKING NO. CUP2007-05221
Requested By: PRICE-JAMES COMPANY
1303-1371 North Euclid Street, Miller Toyota
Subject Property
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1"= 200'
Q.S. No. 44
1a32t
yv~-
CNE~ GH~
1
6 DU
GG I_
CUP 2000.04202
CUP 2675 =
CUP 1820 mU
CUP 1700 rc W
VAR 2922 5
~
STRIP MALL
F-
W
W
J
U
W
N
c-G
RCL 69-70-17
KAISER PERMANENTE
N
Conditional Use Permit No. 4177
TRACKING NO. CUP 2007-05221
Requested By: PRICE-JAMES COMPANY
1303-1371 North Euclid Street, Miller Toyota
Subject Property
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 44
10321
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 9
9a: CEQANEGATIVEDECLARATIONYPREVIOUSLY-APPROVEDI '(Motion)
9b: > WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion)
9c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4177 (Resolution)
{TRACKING NO. CUP2007-05221)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) The property is a total of 6.4-acres and is identified'as 1303 -1371 North Euclid Street
(Miller Toyota):: The property owner is the Price-James Company and the applicant is EMI,
the sign company.
REQUEST:
(2) : The applicant requests to amend plans and conditions of approval fora previously-
approved automotive sales dealership td permit afreeway-oriented electronic feaderboard
sign under authority of Code Section No. 18.60.190.030 (Amendment of Permit Approval),
18.44.050.010 (electronic readerboard signs), and 18.44.050.010.0103 (freeway-oriented.
signs) with waivers df the following provisions:
(a) SECTION NO. 18.44.100.010 Minimum lot size of an automotive
dealership to permit afreeway-oriented
siQn•
10 acres required; 6_4 acres existing)
(b) SECTION NO: 18.44.100.030.0301 Maximum area for the face of a lion.
125 s.f. permitted; 480 s.f proposed)
(c) SECTION NO. 18.44.100.060 Maximum permitted height of a freeway-
oFiehted sion'.
30 feet permitted; 75 feet proposed)
'originally advertised as "within 300 feet of asingle-family residence" but is no longer within
300-foot radius of single-family residence
BACKGROUND: -
(3) This property is developed with an automotive dealership,. Miller Toyota, and is located
within the General Commercial (C-G) zone and the General Plan designates this property
for General Commercial land uses. Properties to the east are designated for low Density
and Corridor Residential land uses (single-family and`multiple-family residential uses).
Properties to the south across Medical Center Drive are designated for Mixed-use land
uses (medical offices). Properties to the west are designated for Public institutional land
uses {Emerald Court Retirement Facility) and the Riverside Freeway (SR-91) is located
north of the property:
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:
(4) The following zoning action pertains to this property:
Case Planner. Kimberly Wong
Srcup2007-05221 k1w.doc Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 9
(a) On April 18, 2000, the City Couhcifapproved in part Conditional Use Permit No. 4177: `'
The Council approved waivers of the minimum number of required parking spaces and
the minimum distance between freestanding signs. A request fora 60' high freeway- ''
oriented sign was denied:. Resolution No. 2000-67 included the following condition
pertaining to permitted signage:
"24. That signage for subject facility shall be limited to that which is shown on the
exhibits submittetl by the petitioner and' apprdved by the Planning Commission;
provided, however; that. the' proposed 60-foot high freeway-oriented sign shall not be
permitted. Ahy additional signage shall be subject to review and approval by the
Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item."
The Council believed there was adequate visibility of the wall signs on the building, and
there were no freeway-oriented signs along the 91-Freeway; therefore, the request
would not be consistent to the goal of preserving the freeway corridor.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL:
(5) The applicant requests modification of Conditidn No. 24, to :permit the construction of a
freeway-o~iehted electronic readerboad sign.
(6) The site plan indicates the new electronic readerboard sign would be located within an
existing planter area at the northeast corner of the Miller Toyota parking lot adjacent to the
Riverside Freeway (SR-91): The site plan depicts the dealership's existing wall and
monument signs.
Page 2
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 9
~ f. s
~, ~ ~~
. -. x ~ r , , ~ - ~ d - f ~~~,~<
r, ,
.. .~ , . ..,. E
t
i
~h x ~tP
~.~.~`.v -.v '~ 1 teary. -~
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 9
(11) ' The subject automotive dealership site occupies 6:42 acres end therefore, does'not meet
the minimum lot size required'to have afreeway-oriented sign. The 10=acre minimum site
requirement is intended to ehcourage large, multiple dealership facilities orautomotive
malls to share freeway signs and to prevent visual"clutter The subject property is covered
by the SR-91 Corrjdor Beautification Program, in which the City is taking an active interest
in ensuring that the visual appearance of the freeway corridor is improved. Furthermore, all
other auto dealerships in the City thafhave freeway-oriented signs occupy atleast 10
acres.
(12) The Zoning Code requires the area of each face of the double-faced freestanding sign,
'' excluding the sign. base, shall not exceed 125 square feet. The proposed ign area is 480
l square feet. Staff cannot identify any hardship to justify this waiver as'similar waiver
requests in the vicinity have nbt been approved. Therefore,'staffdnes hot recommend
approval'of this waives
(13) The proposed height of the sign is significantly greater thanthe code allows. The
maximum heightpermitted for afreeway-oriented ign is 30 feet and the proposed sign is
75 feet tall. The applicant believes a substantial grade separation of approximately 30 feet
betweenthe freeway and the'proposed,'sign location is a hardship that limits the visibility for
vehicular traffic in'tioth eastahd westbound traveling lanes and states'that only 45 feet of
the signwill be visible from the freeway:: The applicant states that a sign shorter than the
proposed 75 feet will not be visible to freeway travelers. The: applicant has provided a line-
of-sight plan indicating that an existing'39-foot 4-inch high building is not visible to the
public traveling eastbound on`the Riverside Freeway and is minimally visible to the public
r traveling westbound on the freeway. Staff conducted several field surveys and found that
` the building is visible to the public traveling in both"directions on the freeway.
(14) The adjacent residential uses are on a similar grade as the auto dealership and would be
adversely impacted by the full height of the sign.
(15) The photometric plan indicates the adjacent residential uses to the west and east across
Euclid Street will incur a :02 foot-candles spill-over of illumination during the evening hours
from the proposed sign. As' a point of comparjson, a commercial parking lot in the evening
hours has an average 1.0 foot-candle: Although the anticipated illuminationwould be less.
than a comparable commercial parking lot, the changing message would increase the
visual impact of the. sign.
(16) There are no other similar signs along this stretch of the 91-Freeway and thisproperty
would not be deprived of a privilege enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity. The site is a
regularly-shaped property and staff cannot identify any physical conditions or hardship to
justify this wavier. Therefore, since the height of the sign exceeds the minimum required
...for visibility from the freeway,and there would be negative impacts to adjacent residential
properties, staff does not recommend approval of this waiver.
FINDINGS:
(17) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the
Zoning Code, a modification may be granted for the purpose of assuring that no property,
because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly
enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity end zone: The sole purpose of any
....Page 4
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 9
variancebr code waiver is to prevent discriminatioh. Variances orwaivers cannot be
approved if they wduld have the effect of granting a specialprivilegehot sharad by other
similar properties: Therefore, before anyvariance br code waiver is granted by the
Planning Commission', it afiall be showh:
(a) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size,
shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other identically.
zoned properties ih the vicinity; and
(b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
(18) Before the Planning Commission grants any conditional use permit, ifmust make a finding
of fact that the evidence presented sfiows thafall of the following conditions exist:
(a) That the use is one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning:
Code, or is'ah unlisted use as defined in Subsection'.030 (Unlisted Uses ''.
Permittetl) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); '`
(b) That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and
davelopmehfof the area in whicfi it is proposed to be'located;
(c) That the size`and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full
developmeht of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area
or to the ftealtfi and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
(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 the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposetl, if
any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of
Anaheim.
RECOMMENDATION:
(19) Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions as indicated in
"the attached resolutions including the findings and conditions contained herein:
(a) By motion, approve a CEQA Negative Declaration.
(b) By motion, denv waivers (a), (b), and (c).
(c) By resolution denv, Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05221.
Amendment of condition of approval for Citv Council Resolution No. 2000-67i
Page 5
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007.
Item No. 9
24: That signage for subject facility shall be limited to that which is shown on the exhibits submitted
by the petitioner and approved. by the Planning Commission,cincluding a 75-foot high electronic
readerboard freeway-oriented sign: Any additibnal signage shall be subject to review and
approval by the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations".item,
Additional conditions of aooroval:
Prior to issuance of a sign permit or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
L That final sign plans, and a colors and materials board, shall be submitted to the Planning
Services Division for review: ahd'approval: Any decision made by the Planning Services Division
regarding said plan may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a Reports and
Recommendation item::
2.` That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. That
landscape and/or hardscape screening of all pad-mounted equipment shall be required and shall
be shown bn plans submitted for building permits.
3. That the developer shall acquire all appropriate permits from the State or other relevant agencies
for all worKassdciated with the construction of the sign or modifications to landscaped areas
adjacent to SR-91 Freeway:. qll advertising oh the sign.. shall comply with' provisions set forth I
Sections 5200-5486 (Outdoor Advertising Act) of theBusiness and Professions Code.
4. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and
specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioneFand which plans are on file with
the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos: 1 through 10, as conditioned herein,
General Conditions:
5: That the sign shall be continually maintained in a "like new" condition.
6: That from 9 p.m. to 7 a:m. the electronic readerboard'shall maintain a single message to reduce
the night-time illuminatidn level for the adjacent residential uses:
7. That extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted ih accordance with
Section 18.60:170 of tfte Anaheim'Municipaf Code.
8. That timing for compliance with the oonditiohs 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.
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 anybther applicable City, State,
ahd Federal regulations: Approval does not include anyaction or findings as to compliance or'
approval of the request}egarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
Page 6
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"'
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05221 BE DENIED
(1303-1371 NORTH EUCLID STREET)
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:
PARCELS 2, 3 AND 4 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 80-234 AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN
BOOK 150, PAGES 2 AND 3 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED JUNE 23, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19990465854
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 2; THENCE
EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2 SOUTH 80°33'00"
EAST 100.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 09°2700" WEST -0.75 FEET TO A TINE
PARALLEL WITH AND 0.75 FEET SOUTHERLY OF SAID NORTHERLY LINE;
THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL 80°33'00" WEST 99.87 FEET TO THE WESTERLY
LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 00°13'40"
WEST 0.76 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on July 23, 2007, 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.fi0
"Procedures", 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 freeway-oriented electronic readerboard sign in conjunction with an existing
automotive sales dealership is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Anaheim
Municipal Code Section 18.44.050.010.0101 (Electronic Readerboard Signs) and 18.44.050.010.0103
(Freeway-oriented Signs) with waivers of the following provisions:.
SECTION NO. 18.44.100.010
Minimum lot size of an automotive
dealershio to permit a freewav-oriented
sign.
l10 acres required; 6_4 acres proposed)
SECTION NO. 18.44.100.030.0301
SECTION NO. 18.44.100.060
Maximum area for the face of a sion.
(7?5 s.f. permitted; 480 s.f. proposed)
Maximum permitted heioht of a freewav-
oriented sion.
30 feet pefmitted; 75 feet proposed)
CR\PC2007-0 -1- PC2007-
2. That the waiver pertaining to minimum lot size of an automotive dealership to permit a
freeway-oriented sign is hereby denied as the proposed sign would create additional visual clutter and
degrade the aesthetic value of the surrounding neighborhood. Furthermore, there are no similar signs aldng
the 91-Freeway, and the request would be inconsistent with the City's approach of preserving the corridor.
This property would not be deprived of a privilege enjoyed by others because there are no other dealerships
under 10 acres in size with afreeway-oriented sign..
3. That the waiver pertaining to maximum area for the face of a sign is hereby denied as the
proposed sign area is substantially greater than code requirements and there is no hardship to justify this
waiver as similar waiver requests have not been approved in the vicinity.
4. That the waiver pertaining to maximum permitted height of afreeway-oriented sign is hereby
denied because although there is a significant grade difference between the property and the freeway, the
adjacent residential uses are of similar grades. The full height of the sign would be visible to surrounding
residential land uses and the applicant has not fully demonstrated the need for the requested height. In
addition, the sign would create visual clutter and illumination of the sign would be detrimental to the adjacent
residences.
5. That the size and shape of the site is not adequate to allow for the freeway-oriented sign,
and that a waiver of minimum lot area is necessary to permit the freeway sign.
6. That the granting of the conditional use permit to allow the freeway-oriented sign, even
under the conditions imposed, if any, will be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens by allowing
additional freeway signage contrary to the zoning code and existing efforts to improve the City's arterial
highways and freeways by reducing the amount of large freestanding signs visible to the public.
7. 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 Negative Declaration previously
approved in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 4177 is adequate to serve as the required
environmental documentation in connection with this request.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby
deny subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, on the basis of the aforementioned findings.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the
processing of this discretionary case application within 16 days of the issuance of the final invoice.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
July 23, 2007. 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
-2- PC2007-
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 July 23, 2007, 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
.2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-3- PC2007-
PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF Attachment -Item No. 9
JUSTIFICATION.FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: 18.44.100ak10
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
PERTAINING TO: minimum lot size required topermit a freeway-oriented sign for an automotive dealership (10 acres
required; 5.8 acres prODOSedI
Sections 18.03:040.030 and 18.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any vaziance or Code waiver maybe
granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown:
1. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, which do not apply to other properly 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 properly under idenfical 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 properly for which a variance is sought, fully
and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages.
1. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography; locaflon or
surroundings? X Yes _No.
If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST DUE TO THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY BEING CONSIDERABLY LOWER THAN FREEWAY GRADE MAKING ff NOT SUFFICIENTLY VISIBLE
TO RECEIVE THE PRIVELEGES ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES. ALSO, THE PROPERTY HAS A
CONSIDERABLE SETBACK AND TI-ID NEARBY SOUND WALL DRAMATICALLY MINIMIZES ALL FREEWAY
EXPOSURE TO EASTBOUND TRAFFIC. WITH THE INSTALLATION OF THE FREEWAY PYLON SIGN WITH THE
LED DISPLAY THE DEALERSHIP WILL INCREASE VISIBILITY BOTH EASTBOUND AND WESTBOUND AND
WILL BE ABLE TO RAISE AWARENESS TO THE 250,000 CARS PASSING BY ON THE 91 FREEWAY EACH DAY.
2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different firm 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: ` THE
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
Signature of Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO.
37625~DECEMF3GR 12, 2000
PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF
NSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: 18.44.100.050-'
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
PERTAINING TO: maximum permitted heiehtfor afreeway-oriented si¢n
Sections 18.03.040.030 and 1:8.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any vaziance or Code waiver maybe
granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown:
1. That there are special circumsmnces applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classifcation 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 caning classification in the vicinity..
In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to
arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully
and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages.
1. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such assize, shape, topography, location or
surroundings? X Yes _No.
If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: THE
2. Are the special cicumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the
3/5/07
same zone as your property? X
_ Yes _ No
If vour answer is "ves; 'describe how the
is different:
B-29
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
The sole purpose of any vaziance ar 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 petmiued.
[f your answer if"yes; 'describe the s ial circumstances:
EXPLAIN:
The sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shalt 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 PERMITNARIANCE NO.
37625~DECENIDER 12, 2000
4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property
owners)? X Yes _ No
Attachment -Item No. 9
PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF
JUSTIFICAI'[ON FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER
(NOT REQUIRED FORPARICING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OFCODE SECTION: 18.44.(00.030.0301
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
PERTAINING T0: Maximum area for the face of a freestandine sien
Sections 18.03.040.030 and 18.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code waiver maybe
granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown:
1. Thnt there are special circtimstences 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 specie] circumstances, stdc[ application of [he zoning code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property under identical 'zoning classification in the vicinity.
[n order to determine if such special ciroutnstances 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 cotnple[ely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages..
1. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or
sunouttdings? X Yes _ No.
if your answer is "Yes;' describe the special circumstances: THE DEALERSHIP IS LOCATED 270' FROM THE STREET
CHART
2. Are the special cirounstances that apply to the property different frotn other properties in the vicinity which are in the
same zone as your property? X Yes _ No
If your answer if"yes," describe the special circumstances:
3. Do the special chrottmstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring
properties located within the same zone? X Yes _No
4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the properly owner (or previous property--
owners)? X Yes _ No
EXPLAIN: THE TOPOGRAPHY AND THE INDUSTRY STANDARD FOR FREEWAY ADVERTISING NECESSffATE
THE L.E.D. SIGN
The so ucpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be [o prevent discrimination and no variance or Code waiver shall be
appro ed which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone
which snot otherwise, cpressly authorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted.
Signature of Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date
CONDITIONAL USE PERMCCNARIANCE NO.
J7G2SDECEMBE[t 12, 2aa0
Item No. 1C
RS2
1 DU EACH FALMOUTH AVE
FALMOUTH AVE ~
9
RS-2
1 DU F.ACH
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTAP.EA
0
RCL 20
0-00032 W
(Res. of Int. to CL) W
RCL 98-99-11 ~
RCL 65-66-32
RCL 64-65-22 ~
R
54 65 30)
CL
(Res. of Int. to CL) ~
CUP 3954 ~
CUP 649 Y
VAR 766 5 --
VAR 793 O
~ - u
° n
ADJ 0139
SA-RANG COMM UNITY ~
CHURCH Lc m T ^;,
5'
RCL2000{OOR m q e
Qiu¢o11n,.b LL1
I
RCL669}11 -
VAfl 20d
VAR iO I
-- s1oP
7f°-- t99
i
SiOR
6Ac
\h'4Y
~f
t UEAH
RS-2
\~
Conditional'Use Permit No. 2007-05226
Requested By: N + p Desai-2000 III, LP
B ti G Singh-2000 III, LP
2006 000]2
d InL Iv LL)
sfi-s3-r,
p
-
~
53-54-31
VP 3063 ~ m
~G
°
VAR 3877
CCI~cI m x
2000J100]2 CUP200iAi90
IInI:b Lq m C
~~ W
CNP]GO]
L9989-11 upcN
D
Ja
0
LL (YLI U>
=
hELILALOFrILES ~ F ~ mV (
,1 N U
CG (BCC) `~ y rv ~ m
~ N
~W
RCL 9100-00032 m ~ Co ~ LL,= Z
RLL 90
99
i1 ~ >~ ^
-
- J U r 0
RCL 53-64.37 ~ ~
n~o1cAL oPFICEs
c~ acc1
CL 20~-00032
es. d IN. b cL)
RcL es-sv-11 n,EOicAL RCL 2060 0032
Rcuv ~,si 1 OFFICES Res. of Ini o CL) GL EN AVE
IULL) "RLLB9931f 1
,$LL63S4d1
P565 .+, LUP260]L52&
9HLP5
c-0 BCC1 .j
CUP206F052~!
p
R$-2
i{VP 20201526 RLLO&93i1 ~ ~
p
7-LUP Zmo-wza]
'
RLLS]54 ]t a. c~(ecc) 1DU EACH
~:CUP]921
~.'LUP]001
VOLANT O RCL 93-43-11
~ ~icUP]29f I
tl G RCL 61-62-54
v
~ , -CUP205 31 p RCL 53-54.31
OFFICE
<o "VAR ]00 ~,
C d 9UILOINGS RS-2
g
PL
8
-0a = ~ DU EACR
RNCE
c
N
1 (
j
9fATLN
26 6'
LA PALMA AVE
R
(R
U
LL
-
-
1112 North Brodkhurst Street and 2157-2165 West La Palma Avenue
RS2 / \
1 U EA H (/p~\
no At/C N
Subject Property
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 37
40330
Dale oFAerial Photo:
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05226
Requested By: N + p Desai-2000 III, LP
B & G Singh-2000 III, LP
1112 North Brookhurst Street and 2157-2165 West La Palma Avenue
Subject Property
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q:S. No. 37
10330
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 10
10a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion)
10b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion)
', 10c: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05226 (Resolution)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTIONi
(1 j The proposed project involves two properties totaling 1.5-acres and identified as 1112
North Brookhurst Street and 2157-2165 West La Palma Avenue.. The. property owners are
N & P Desai-2000 III, L.P, B & G Singh-2000 III, LAP, and the Anaheim Redevelopment
Agency:. The Anaheim Redevelopment Agency is currently in escrow to sell this property to
the other property owners. The applicant is the architect, John Dodson.
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit under authority of Code
Sectidrt No. 18.08.030.040.0402 (Commercial Retail Centers) to expand an existing.
commercial retailcenter frdm 5 tenant spaces to space for 11 tenants and to construct a
drive-through coffee shop . The applicant requests waivers of the following provisions:
(a) SECTION NO: 18.08:050.010 Maximum structural height
l0 feet permitted; 29 feet proposed)
(b) SECTION NO. 18.080.060.010.0101 Minimum landscape setback ad(acent to
a sinole-family residential zone:
(10 feet required; 0 feet proposed)
(c) SECTION NO.' 18.080.060.010.0102' Minimum building setback adiacent to a
single-family residential zone.:`.
20 feet required; 5 feet proposed)
(d) SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces
129 required; 91 proposed)
BACKGROUND:
(3) One of the properties is developed with a commercial retail center while the other property
is vacant: Both propertiesare located within the'General Commercial (C-G) zone. The
General Plan designates this property and properties to the horth and east for General
Commercial land uses. Properties to the west are designated for General Commercial and
Neighborhood Commercial land uses:: Properties to the northeast are designed for Low
Density Residentiatland uses: The on-ramp to the l-5 Freeway is td tfie south.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL:
(4) The applicant proposes to partially demolish and to expand the existing 10,825 square foot
commerciafcenter to the vacant property to the east. The project includes the demolition
bf 3,320 square feet of commercial space' and the construction of 7,660 square feet of
commercial space including a 1,800 square foot drive-through coffee shop. The completed
project will total 14,940 square feet.
Case Planner: Kimberly Wong
Srcup2007-05226k1w:doc Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 10
(5) The applicant proposes the following building and landscape setbacks:
Direction Code Required / Proposed Gode Required (Proposed
'Buildin Setback ' ` Landsca eSetback
North (adjacent to D feet ! 0 feet 0 feet I 0 feet
commercial
Northeast Corner 20 feet / 5 feet" 10 feet / 5 feet*
r (adjacent to
single-family ;
residential
South (adjacent to 15 feet / 15 feet ` 15 feet / 15 feet
La Palma Avenue
West (adjacent to 15 feet / 15 feet 15 feet / 15 feet 1
Brookhurst Street
WesC (adjacent to 0 feet 125 feet 0 feet! 5 feet
service station ''
East (adjacent to 0 feet f 5 feet 0 feet / 5 feet
commercial
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
Jury 23, 2007
Item No. 10
(7) The site plan proposes a total of 91 parking spaces and the Zoning Code requires'a
minimum of 129 parking spaces based upon the following ratios:
Use Square Footage -Parking; Spaces'
per Square Foot Total Parking
Spaces
Re wired
Subwa 1,900 16 30.4
Ta Ueria Monarcos' 1,155 8 9.2
Hatam Restaurant 2,025 8 16.2
Su er Jahan Market 2,200 5.5 12.1
Retail 5,860 5.5 32.2
Drive-throw h Coffee Shoe 1,800 16 28.8
Total. 129
(8) The proposed addition consists of seven (7) retail tenant spaces ranging in size from 617 to
868 square feet.,Specific interior improvements are not provided on the floor plan. The
1,800 square foot freestanding coffee shop is proposed td haves typical restaurant layout
with adrive-through service window facing La Palma Avenue.:
(9) The elevation drawings, colored renderings, and materials board indicate aone-story, 29-
foot highSpanish-style buildings The buildings would consist of clay the goofs and a plaster
:.finish of muted contrasting colors. In addition, a stone veneeFwainscot is proposed at the
`base of the buildings'and recessed the accents on the columns.
(10) The conceptual wall and monument signs comply with code,
(11) The landscape plan indicates a variety of canopy trees surrounding theproposed buildings..
The plan reflects a 15-foot wide landscape planter alohg La Palma Avenue with s 3-foot
high berm adjacehCto the drive-through lahe to further screen vehicle visibility.
(12) The submitted letter of operation indicates the building would be constntcted in one phase.
Since tenants have hot been determined; the hours ofbperation, employee information and
tenant miz are unknown'at this time.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(13) Staff prepared an Initial Study which concludes that there will be no significant
environmehtal impacts; therefore, staff recommends that a Negative Declaration be
aPProved'.`
EVALUATION:
(14) Commercial retail centers with two or more tenant spaces and restaurahts with a drive-
through are conditionally permitted within the General Commercial zone.'
(15) The applicant proposes a building that is taller than permitted. by the code. The Zoning
Code permits a maximum building height of 20 feet when the building is less than 20 feet
from a single-family residential zone boundary. Plans indicate a building :height of 29 feet
Page 3
Staff Report tq the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 10
located within five (5) feet of the adjacehfresidental property: Since the property"shares a
corner property line with asingle-family residentially zoned property; compliance witj~ this
development standard would require the building to be located 75 feet from the' northeast
corner of the property. In order to comply with code, approximately one-third of the rear of
the parceibduld not be used for buildings. Sirice the property only shares a comerwith the
single-family property, the proposed building wduld not directly abut ahyof the single-family
home's rear or side property fines: Therefore, staff recommends approval of this waives
Single-Family.
t 1~ ,- Zone Boundary
i :'
-,
`- , i .,_
F
( ~ ,
:75 Feet
t ~~ ~ ~ s
~ ,r'~ ~ ~
,~ I ~ ! ~ t_1 C
~ ' ~~ t t ['T__~ >T't ~ 'f ~ _~
t e
ty+{ s 'v" ~ T}xle ~ x + a ~ _ ~ ~
`~'~ yx_n ~ ' ~ m ~ ~ ~.~) S~j
~ ~r+.
y _y. .- . 9 -~' j ~ . - - ~' ..
7 is
i ~• ,r n I
4 }f ti
.,~r. ~, ~ ,~'' ~: ~
~' A „
!`i
75-foot long radius distance to single-family residential
(16) The Zoning Code requires a 10-foot landscape ahd 20 foot building setback adjacent to the
single-familyresidential' zone boundary.. The proposed plan does not include a landscape
setback and proposes a 5-foot building setback. As depicted in the aerial below, this
property is unique because ifabuts asingle-family zone of one point and commercial
properties along the ihterior propertyiines (hortH and east): Atypical parcel would abut
properties along the entire lehgth of a property line and the impact would result in a
significant amount of visibility to the adjacent lahd use: Compliance with these
requirements would render a largeportion of this site unusable. The building wail does not.
contain ahy windows that would affect the privacy of the single-family residence and the
existing residence is located 25 feet from the proposed building location: Therefore, staff
recommends aoprovatof this waiver: Staff has not received any opposition or inquiries
about this projeck
Page 4
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007
Item No. 10
(b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand
and competition far parking spaces: upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of
the proposed'use.
(c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposetl, if any, will not increase the demand for
parkjng spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate'vicnity of the
proposed use:':
(d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestioh
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 putilic streets in the immediate vicinity of the
proposed use:'
Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed, the granting of the waiver shalt be
deemed contingent`upon operation of the proposed use in conformance with the
assumptions contained in the Parking Demand Study that formed the basis for approval of
the waiver. Exceeding, violating, intensifying or otherwise deviating from any of the
assumptions as contained in he 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
Modification of Permits).
(20) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the
Zoning Code, amodification' may be granted fdr the purpose of assuring that no property, '
because of special circumstances applicable to it; shall be deprived of privileges commonly
enjoyed by other properties in the same'vicinity and zone: The sole purposeof any
varianceor code waiver is to prevent discrimination and no variance or waivershall be
approved which would have the effecfof granting a special :privilege not shared by other
similar properties: `Therefore, before any varianceor code waiver is granted by the
Planning Commission, ifshall be shown:
(a) 'That thereare special circumstances applicable to the property such as size,
shape, topography,' location or surrountlings, which"do not apply to other identically
zoned properties in the vicinity; and
(b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity:
(21) Before the Planning Commission grantsany conditional use permit, it must make a finding.
of fact that the evidehce presented shows thafall'of the following conditions exist:
(a) That the use is properly one far which a ddnditionalLse permifts authorized by the
Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as tlefihed in Subsectioh .030 (Unlisted Uses
Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority);
(b) 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;
Page 6
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
July 23, 2007.
Item No. TO
(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 of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.;
(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 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:
(22) Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions:
(a) By motion, approve a CEQA Negative Declaration:
(b) By motion, approve waivers (a), (b), (c), and (d).
(c) By resolution approve. Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05226:.
Page 7
[DR,~F~
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--***
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05226 BE GRANTED
(1112 NORTH BROOKHURST STREET AND 2157-2165 WEST LA PALMA AVENUE)
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Condikional
Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
described as:
BEING PORTIONS OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE
RANCHO LOS COYOTES, CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA, PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 10 OF
MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF
SAID COUNTY, ONE PORTION MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN TAT
CERTAIN GRANT DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED
MARCH. 11, 1996 AS_ INSTRUMENT NO. 19960118919 OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS AND ONE PORTION A BEING THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND
DESIGNATED AS PARCEL NO. 200742-1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, A COPY OF
WHICH RECORDED SEPTEMBER. 12, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO.
19970446574 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, LYING
NORTHERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 5 AS
SHOWN ON TRACT NO: 2093 RECORDED IN BOOK 76 PAGES 45
THROUGH 48, INCLUSIVE OF SAID MISCELLANEOUS MAPS; THENCE
SOUTH 89°35'53" EAST 658.30 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF
SAID SECTION; THENCE NORTH 00°24'07" EAST 53:00 FEET FROM THE
SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION; SAID POINT BEING THE POINT OF
BEGINNING, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE
TANGENT TO SAID PARALLEL LINE; CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING
A RADIUS OF 1480.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY 149.05 FEET ALONG
SAID CURVE CONCAVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5°46'12" TO A
POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE WITH A CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY.
AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1480.00 FEET; A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID
POINT BEARS SOUTH 06°10'19" WEST; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG LAST
SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5°46'12" AN ARC LENGTH
OF 149.05 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY WITH A LINE PARALLEL WITH
AND DISTANT NORTHERLY 68.00 FEET FORM THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF
SAID SECTION; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE NORTH 89°35'53"
WEST 273.67 FEET.
THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES USED IN THE ABOVE DESCRIPTIONS
ARE ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1927, ZONE 6.
MULTIPLY ALL DISTANCES USED IN THE ABOVE DESCRIPTIONS BY
1.00001210 TO OBTAIN GROUND'LEVEL DISTANCES.
APN: 072-415-50
THE LAND REFERRED TO IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE,
CITY OF ANAHEIM, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
Cr\PC2007-0 -1- PC2007-
THE WEST 317.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 283.00 FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 4
SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST IN THE RANCHO LOS COYOTES, IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON
A MAP ON .FILE IN BOOK 51, PAGE 10 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS,.
RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY.
EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH
53.00 FEET WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE WESTERLY 190.00 FEET OF
SAID SECTION, THENCE NORTH 0°19'44" WEST ALONG SAID EAST LINE
107.00 FEET TO A POINT 40.00 SOUTHERLY OF NORTHERLY LINE OF THE
SOUTHERLY LINE 200.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45°16'14" WEST 56:63
.FEET TO A POINT IN THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SOUTHERLY 200.00
FEET, SAID POINT BEING 40.00 FEET WESTERLY OF SAID EAST LINE OF
SAID WESTERLY 190.00; THENCE SOUTH 89°46'26" WEST ALONG LAST
MENTIONED NORTHERLY LINE 90.00 FEET TO A POINT IN THE EASTERLY
LINE OF THE WESTERLY 60.00 FEET OF SAID SECTION; THENCE SOUTH
0°19'41", EAST ALONG LAST MENTIONED EASTERLY LINE 122.00 FEET TO
A POINT 25.00 FEET NORTHERLY OF SAID NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH
53.00 FEET OF SAID SECTION; THENCE SOUTH 46°23'28" EAST 36.10 FEET
TO A POINT IN SAID NORTH LIEN OF SAID SOUTH 53.00 FEET OF SAID
SECTION SAID POINT BEING 26:00 EAST ALONG LAST MENTIONED
NORTH LINE 104.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA BY FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED
OCTOBER6, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19990711586, OFFICIAL RECORDS
OF ORANGE COUNTY.
APN: 072-415-45
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on July 23, 2007, 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 use, to expand an existing commercial retail center with adrive-through
coffee shop, is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code
Section 18.08.030.040.0402 (Commercial Retail Center and Restaurants -Drive-Through) with waivers of
the following provisions;
(a) SECTION NO. 18.08.050.010
Maximum structural height.
(D feet permitted; 29 feet proposed)
(b) SECTION NO. 18.080.060.010.0101
Minimum landscape setback,
(10 feet required; 0 feet proposed)
-2- PC2007-
(c) SECTION NO. 18.080.060.010.0102 Minimum building setback.
(20 feet required; 5 feet proposed)
(d) SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces.
129 required; 91 proposed)
2. That waiver (a) pertaining to structural height, waiver (b) for minimum landscape setback
and waiver (c) for building setback are hereby approved because the property's configuration is unique as
the property only shares a corner with asingle-family residential zone boundary rather than a property line
The location of the expansion of the commercial center is limited and compliance with these code
requirements would render aone-third of the site unusable.
3. That the waiver pertaining to parking, under the conditions imposed will not cause fewer off-
street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary because the
spaces provided exceeds the demand for the commercial center.
4. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and
competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposal because
adequate parking will be provided on the property.
5. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic
congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed uses because adequate
parking and circulation is provided.
6. That the proposed commercial retail center and drive-through restaurant, as conditioned
herein would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development. of the area in
which it is proposed to be located because the property is predominately surrounded by other commercial
uses.
7. 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..
8. That granting of this conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, will not be
detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim and will provide a land use that is
compatible with the surrounding area
9. That."' indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and thakno
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, IiE 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:
-3- PC2007-
1. That the number of tenant spaces for this commercial retail center shall be limited to twelve (12). Said
information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
2. That adequate lighting of parking lots., driveway, circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses and
grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate
illumination to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the
hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and vehicles on-
site. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Police Department, Community
Services Division approval.
3. That 4-foot high street address numbers shall be displayed flat on the roof of the building in a color that
contrasts with the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible from the streets or adjacent
properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
4. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage, collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the
Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval.
5. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works
Department 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 one-gallon size clinging vines planted on maximum three-foot centers
or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building
permits.
6. That an oh-site trash truck tum-around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476
and maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division.
Said turn-around area shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
7. That the project shall provide for accessible truck deliveries on-site. Said information shall be
specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
8. That a final coordinated sign program for the entire center, including specifications for the monument
sign and wall signs, shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval as to
placement, design, and materials. Said plans for the monument sign shall incorporate the stone
treatment used on the building. The signage shall be designed to complement the architecture of the
commercial retail center. Any decision by staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a
"Reports and Recommendations" item.
9. That all new backflow equipment shall be located above ground and outside of the street setback area
in a manner fully screened from all public streets. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault
shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water 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 and alleys. Said information shall be
specifically shown on plans and approved by the Water Engineering Department.
10. That all requests for new water services, fire hydrants, or fire lines, as well as any modifications,
relocations, or abandonment's of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through
Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department.
11. That since this project has a landscaping common area exceeding 2,500 square feet; a separate
irrigation meter shall be installed in compliance with Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
12. 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
-4- PC2007-
plans submitted for building permits. Plans shall also identify the specific screening treatments of each
device (i:e. landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.).
13. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense.
14. That plans shall be submitted to the Traffic and Transportation manager for his review and approval
showing conformance with Engineering Standard tJo. 115 (10-foot radius curb returns for all driveways
and sight distance visibility for the monument sign and wall location).
15. That any removal or relocation of any traffic signal equipment or any other related item to the traffic sign
shall be at the developer's expense if the project requires street widening or newlmodification of the
driveway.
16. That final elevation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review. Said plans
shall incorporate the use of stone material, detailed information pertaining to the materials and colors
proposed, the quality and design of proposed lighting and the quality and design of trellises and
canopies proposed. Any decision by staff maybe appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports
and Recommendations" item:
17. That parking lot lighting shall be decorative. Additionally, lighting fixtures shall be down-lighted and
directed away from nearby residential properties to protect the residential integrity of the area. Said
information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits:
18. That all plumtiing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building sha-be fully
screened by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials. Said information shall be
specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
19: That firtal landscape and fencing plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review
and approval. Said plans shall show a minimum of twelve (12), 24-inch box size trees along La Palma
Avenue, shrubs, and groundcover within landscape setbacks. The landscape material selected shall be
appropriate to the width of the planter area. Any decision made by the Planning Services Division
regarding said plan may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendation"
item. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
20. That the applicant shall abandon any City of Anaheim public utilities easements that conflicts with the
proposed building footprint.
21. That a Lot Line Adjustment shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Engineering Division,
Development Services to adjust the property line. The Lot Line Adjustment shall be approved by the
City Engineer and recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder.
22. That the applicant must coordinate with the City of Anaheim design section regarding the ultimate
location of the driveway approach. If the applicant fails to coordinate the location of the driveway
approach, at developer cost, the City constructed driveway approach shall be removed and replaced
with curb and gutter and a new driveway approach shall be constructed in the correct location. A right-
of-way construction permit shall be obtained for work to be done in the City right-of-way.
23. That the applicant shall submit to the Public Works pepartment, Development Services Division for
review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that:
-5- PC2007-
• 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.
• Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area
Management Plan.
• Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in DAMP.
• Describes the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Coritrol
BMPs.
• Describes the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control
BMPs.
• Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long-term operation and maintenance of the
Treatment Control BMPs.
24.
25. That the applicant shall obtain a demolition permit for demolition of ezisting structures:
Prior to final :building and zoning insaections the following conditions shall be complied with:
26. That prior to issuance of a certificate of occupahcy, the applicant shall:
• Demonstrate that all structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and
ihstalled in conformance with approved plans and specifications:
• 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 Projects WQMP are available
onsite.
• Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for al(structural
BMPs.
27. That an Emergency Listing Card, Form APD-281 shall be completed and submitted in a completed form
to the Anaheim Police Department
28. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications ,
submitted to the Ciry of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department
marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 8, and as conditioned herein.
General Conditions.:
29. That no video, electronic or other amusement devices shall be permitted on the premises.
30. That all public phones shall be located inside the building.
31. That no outdoor vending machines that are visible to the public right-of-way shall be permitted on the
property.
32. That all trash generated from this commercial retail center shall be properly contained in trash bins
located within approved trash enclosures. The number of bins shall be adequate and the trash pick-up
shall be as frequent as necessary to ensure the sanitary handling and timely removal of refuse from the
property. The Community Preservation Division of the Planning Department shall determine the need
-6- PC2007-
for additional bins or additional pick-up. All costs for increasing the number of bins or frequency of pick-
up shall be paid by the business owner.
33. That the property shall 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 from the time of discovery.
34. That any tree or other landscaping planted on-site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that
it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead.
35. 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.
36. That extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with
Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim" Municipal
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.
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
July 23, 2007. 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
-7- PC2007-
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 July 23, 2007, 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
.2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-g- PC2007-
Attachment -Item ido. 10
PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: 18A2.040& 18.08.050
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
PERTAINING TO; 1112 N. Dt•ookhurst Street
Sections 18.03.040.030 and 18.12.OG0 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requite that before any variance or Code waiver may be
grmrted by thcLoning Adminishator or Planning Commission, the Coflowing shall be shown:
I. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroutdings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; end
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 classif cation in the vicinity,
In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Adminisu•ator 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. Ifyou need additional space, you may attach additional pages.
1. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such es size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings? x Yes _ No•
If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circmnstances; See
attached sheet
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 propeity7 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"ycs,"describe the special ciroumstances: See Attached Sheet
4. Were the special ciroumstances created by causes beyond the contt•ol of the property owner (or previous property
owners)9 x Yes _ No
EXPLAIN: _
Attached sheet
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• gre»ting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone
which is/not (o~herwise expressly authorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted.
A~ .! NX/nP.t,' S ~ ~-5 /O?
Signature Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date
CONDITIONAL USBPERMIT/VARIANCE NO.
37625UJECEMEEn @, 2000
Justification for waiver of height limitations at 1112 North Brookhurst
1. This property of an unusual size from the surrounding properties because it was
originally part of a CalTrans project for the 5 freeway expansion. As a result of
the unusual configuration of the site it is difficult to develop this site if strict
height and setback restrictions aze enforced.
2. The shape of this property is different because it was intended to be part of the 5
freeway expansion and not developed as proposed. Additionally, this site is not
directly adjacent to the residential zone, only the northeast comer of this site is
adjacent to the south west comer of a residential zone.
3. This property is zoned for the commercial uses proposed, but do to its
configuration it is difficult to develop the property in a manner similar to adjacent
properties in the same zone, with out some waiver from the strict application of
height and set back restrictions do to adjacency to the residential zone.
4. The current owner and the previous owner; the Anaheim redevelopment agency
did not cause the hazdships on this site. The hazdships were caused by the way the
site was subdivided by CalTrans
Aicaohrsrer~f ®Iterr~ X600 '~Q
~~~s~~~ ~~~~~~f ~~~~6~u~ ~~aa~1~
11 ~ 2 ~. ~roo{<hltrs# ~~reet
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
¢~~9~
July 93, 2007
Table of Contents
Section Page
I. Introduction 1
2. Project Location 1
3. Site Description 1
A. Existing Site 1
B. Proposed Site 1
Figure 3.1 Existing Site 2
Figure 3.2 Site Plan 3
4. Parking Required per City Code 4
5. Site Parking Counts 4
6. Methodology of Study 5
7. Analysis 5
8. Conclusions 6
9. Recommendations 6
10. Findings 6
Appendix A Parking Counts 8
Appendix B Site Photos 13
Appendix C Similar Site Photos 14
Hanshaw Center
1. Introduction
The purpose of this parking study is to evaluate the parking demand for an expansion to the
Hanshaw Center, which is undergoing renovation and expansion. The applicant believes that
the parking demand is far less than the code, and parking counts at the existing site and a
similar site were taken to verify this. The Hanshaw Center wishes to expand its retail uses,
remove an existing free-standing Mexican restaurant and relocate this restaurant to its in-line
shops. The applicant also requests afree-standing coffee shop with adrive-thru lane. This
parking study will determine what types of tenants are appropriate for the parking supply
proposed.
2. Project Location
The Hanshaw Retail Center is located at 1112 N. Brookhurst St. in the City of Anaheim, at the
northeast corner of Brookhurst and La Palma, one block from the Interstate 5 freeway.
3. Site Description
A. Existing Site .
The existing site contains one L-shaped building containing 9,025 SF of retail and restaurant
uses and astand-alone 1,800 SF restaurant for a total of 10,825 SF. There is one access from
Brookhurst Street and two accesses from La Palma Avenue. On the corner, there is a gas
station that has its own accesses and parking, and is not considered to be a part of this site. An
aerial view of the site is shown in Figure 3.1. Photos of the existing site are provided in
Appendix B.
B. Proposed Site
The existing site has a vacant lot directly to the east, into which the proposed retail expansion
will take place. This lot has one access from La Palma Avenue. The site., after the expansion
will close the westerly La Palma access and use the easterly La Palma .access and the existing
Brookhurst access. Both of the site accesses will be restricted to right turns in and out due to
the proximity to the intersection of Brookhurst/La Palma. The Site Plan is provided in Figure 3.2.
The existing site proposes to demolish the 1,800 SF stand-alone Mexican restaurant and
relocate the business into an existing 1,155 SF vacant suite. A portion of the Super Johan
Market, 1,520 SF, will be demolished in order to extend the existing building into the vacant lot.
This renovation removes the portion of the building that formed the L-shape. The new
extension to the building will be 5,860 SF for retail uses. At approximately the same location as
the removed Mexican restaurant, afree-standing, 1,800 SF coffee shop with adrive-thru lane
will be added. There will be a net increase of 4,340 additional retail square feet at the :Hanshaw
Center, for a total of 14,940 SF for the entire site. The new tenants other than coffee shop have
not been determined at this time.
E~igure 3.'] Sxisting Site
North is to the right
La Palma
4. Parking Required per City Code
The existing Hanshaw Center is 35 spaces short of the parking requirement per the City Code:
The City requires 88 spaces and 53 spaces are provided. This information is tabulated in Table
4.1. below.
Table 4.1 Parking Requirement for Existing Site
Tenant
:Land Use
TSF Code
Parkin Rate Spaces
Re wired
Subway Fast Food 1.900 16lTSF 30.4
Hatam Restaurant Sit-down Restaurant 2.025 8ffSF 18.2
Super Jahan Market Retail 3.720 5.5/TSF 20.5
Taqueria Monarcos Sit-down Restaurant 1.800 8/TSF 14.4
Vacant Retail Retail 1.155 5.5/TSF 6.4
Total Spaces Required 10.6 88 i
Total Spaces Provided 53
Spaces short of code 35
The proposed expansion of the Hanshaw Center is 38 spaces short of the parking requirements
per the City's code. The City requires 129 parking spaces; 91 spaces are proposed. See Table
Table 4.2 for the breakdown of square footages for the proposed expansion.
Table 4.2 Parking Requirement for Expanded Site
Tenant
Land Use
TSF Code
Parkin Rate Spaces
Re wired
Subway Fast Food 1.900 16/TSF 30.4
Hatam Restaurant Sit-down Restaurant 2.025 S/TSF 16.2
Super Jahan Market Retail 2.200 5.5/TSF 12.1
Ta ueria Monarcos Sit-down Restaurant 1.155 8/TSF 9.24
Coffee sho Drive-Thru Fast Food 1.800 18/TSF 28:8
Retail uns ecified Retail 5.860 5.5/TSF 32.23
Total Pro osed SF 14.940
Total Spaces Required 129
Total Spaces Proposed 91
Spaces short of code 38
5. Site Parking Counts
Parking counts were taken by Southland Car Counters at the existing Hanshaw Center on
Saturday June 9, 2007 and Thursday June 12, 2007. Because the coffee shop with adrive-thru
is the only known use at the proposed expansion, counts were also taken at a retail center with
a Starbucks that has adrive-thru, to assess the parking demand of a similar site. The similar
site is located at 1131 W. Lincoln Avenue in the City of Anaheim. The similar site is shared by a
Subway and Anchor Animal Hospital.
6. Methodology of Study
The methodology of the study will be in two parts: determining the existing parking demand of
the current site at Brookhurst/La Palma, and evaluating the parking demand of a similar site
located at Lincoln/Carleton. The similar site's parking demand will be used to evaluate the
parking demand and drive-thru lane requirements of the proposed coffee shop. The'similar site
contains adrive-thru Starbucks and a Subway, similar to the coffee shop and Subway proposed
for the expansion of the Hanshaw Center, plus a small animal hospital.
7. Analysis
The existing Hanshaw Center has a parking demand of 31 spaces on Saturday at 12:45 PM.
Removing the vacant suite from the center's square footage results in 9.67 TSF. Applying the
parking demand of 31 spaces to the portion of the site that was occupied at the time of the
counts, 9.4 TSF, results in an overall parking demand of 3.3 spaces/TSF.
The similar site at Lincoln/Carleton contains a 2,000 SF Starbucks, a 1,000 SF Subway and an
850 SF animal hospital. A comparison of the code-required parking, the observed parking
demand, and the provided parking for this retail center is tabulated below.
Table 6.1 Parking Requirement for Similar Site at Lincoln/Carleton
Tenant
Land Use
TSF Code Parking
Rate Spaces
Re uired
Starbucks Fast Food 2.00 16/TSF 32
Subwa Fast Food 1.00 16~fSF 16
Animal Hos ital Animal Boardin /Groomin 0.85 4/TSF 4
Total S aces Re uired 3.85 42
Maximum Observed
Demand 14
Parking Provided 21
Applying the 14 occupied spaces to the 3.85 TSF of the similar site at Lincoln/Carleton, results
in an overall parking demand of 3.63 spaces/TSF. Because the animal hospital is new and has
recently opened, it is more conservative to remove that square footage' and calculate the
parking rate just for the Subway/Coffee shop uses. Applying the 14 occupied parking spaces to
the 3,000 square foot Subway/Coffee shop results in a parking demand ratio of 4.7 spaceslTSF.
The parking demand of the existing uses at the Hanshaw Center site on Brookhurst/La Palma
was determined above to be 3.3 spaces/TSF. The parking demand of the Subway/Coffee Shop
at the similar site at Lincoln/Carleton was 4.7 spaces/TSF. Both of these are below the parking
rate for retail, which is 5.5 spaces/TSF. The expanded Hanshaw Center will contain a total of
14.94 TSF. The retail parking rate of 5.5 spaces/TSF, when applied to the Hanshaw Center
with its mix of retail and restaurants, .results in a requirement of 82 parking spaces. This parking
rate is determined to be appropriate for all uses within the expanded Hanshaw Center.
Drive Thfu
Per Chapter 18.42 of the City's Zoning Code, the length of the drive-thru lane with a separate
ordering device is 160 feet. There must be a distance of 60' from the start of the drive-thru lane
Hanshaw Center
to the ordering device and 100' from the ordering device to the pick-up window. The Site Plan.
shows there is a distance of 60' from the start of the drive-thru to the ordering device and 106'
from the ordering device to the pick-up window, consequently, this requirement is met.
Based upon the counts taken at the similar Starbucks site at Lincoln/Carleton, the observed
demand in the drive thru lane was ten vehicles. Considering a length of 20 feet per vehicle, the
166' drive thru lane at the proposed stand-alone coffee shop will accommodate eight vehicles.
Any additional vehicles that wish to enter the drive thru will be accommodated within the site
along an angled drive .aisle that does not contain any parking spaces. This drive aisle is
situated within the Hanshaw Center site behind the gas station. Queuing along this angled drive
aisle will accommodate many more vehicles that wish to enter the drive thru lane, and these
vehicles will not block any parking spaces or cause back-up of vehicles onto either Brookhurst
Street or La Palma Avenue.
8. Conclusions
The Hanshaw Center will contain retail and restaurant uses which have an overall site parking
demand similar to the retail parking rate. The center will require 82 parking spaces. The site
plans shows that the center proposes to provide 91 parking spaces, which will be adequate for
the intended uses.
9. Recommendations
The design of the site has already considered and incorporated an additional drive aisle to
accommodate a large demand at the coffee shop drive thru. The area for additional queuing is
suffrciently away from both site accesses; queuing along this drive aisle will not block any
parking spaces.
The types of uses that are appropriate to the Hanshaw Center include general retail and
restaurants. The restaurants can be either fast-food or sit-down. A variety of uses should be
encouraged, so that all of the restaurants are not typical lunch time uses. Restaurants that have
a breakfast and dinner patronage should also be included. High turnover, heavy parking
demand retail uses such as a post office or bank should not be permitted.
70. Findings
Finding Number .0101 That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause
fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of such
spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and
reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use.
Hanshaw Center will be able to provide adequate parking onsite for its uses.
Finding Number .0102 That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not
increase fhe demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the
immediate vicinity of the proposed use.
Hanshaw Center will provide adequate parking onsite for its uses. Curbside parking
along Brookhurst Street and La Palma Avenue is not allowed.
Hanshaw Cenler
Finding Number .0103 That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not
increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the
immediate vicinity of the proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as parking for
such use under an agreement in compliance with subsection 18.42.050.030 (Non-Residential
Uses- Exception).
Hanshaw Center will provide adequate parking onsite. Overflow parking will not occur
upon adjacent private property.
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.
Hanshaw Center will provide sufficient parking onsite for its uses.
Finding Number .0105 That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not
impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the
immediate vicinity of the proposed use.
Hanshaw Center will provide sufficient parking onsite for its uses.
Hanshaw Cenler
Appendix A -Parking Counts
1112 N. Brookhurst St.
Saturda June 9,2007
TIME Shopsl0eli Mexican Restaurant TOTAL
Reg. 0 Reg. $
S aces 28 2 22 1 53
7:00 AM 1 0 1 0 2
7:15 qM 1 0 2 0 3
7:30 AM 3 0 1 0 4
7:45 AM 2 0 3 0 5
6:00 AM 3 0 4 0 7
8:15 AM 3 0 5 0 8
8:30 AM 3 0 3 0 6
8:45 AM 4 0 5 0 9
9:00 AM 3 0 6 0 9
9:15 AM 3 0 6 0 9
9:30 AM 5 0 7 0 12
9:45 AM 5 0 7 0 12
10:00 AM 4 0 6 O 10
10:15 AM 6 0 7 0 13
10:30 AM 7 0 8 0 15
10:45 AM 7 D 8 0 15
11:00 AM 9 0 9 0 18
11:15 AM 15 0 9 0 24
11:30 AM 13 0 B 0 21
11:45 AM 15 1 7 0 23
12:00 PM 19 0 8 0 27
12:15 PM 13 0 9 0 22
12:30 PM 17 0 11 0 28
12:45 PM 18 0 13 0 31
1:00 PM 14 0 10 0 24
1:15 PM 17 0 10 0 27
1:30 PM 17 0 9 -0 26
1:45 PM 13 0 8 0 21
2:00 PM 15 0 8 0 23
2:15 PM 18 0 7 0 25
2:30 PM 17 0 7 D 24
2:45 PM 15 0 7 0 22
3:00 PM 15 0 8 0 23
3:15 PM 17 0 8 0 25
3:30 PM 11 0 9- D 20
3:45 PM 12 0 9 0 21
4:00 PM 15 p 8 0 23
4:15 PM 15 0 8 0 23
4:30 PM 15 0 7 0 22
4:45 PM 12 0 6 0 18
5:00 PM 12 0 6 0 18
5:15 PM 11 0 7 0 18
5:30 PM 12 0 B 0 20
5;45 PM 12 0 6 0 18
6:00 PM 12 0 7 0 19
6:15 PM 13 0 8 0 21
6:30 PM 12 0 6 0 1B
6:45 PM 8 0 5 0 13
7:00 PM 7 0 1 0 8
Hanshaw Center
Appendix AContinued -Parking Counts _
1112 N. Brookhurst St.
Tuesday June 12. 2007
Sho slDell Mexican Res taurant
TIME Reg. ~ .Reg. ~
~ TOTAL
S aces 28 2 22 1 53
7:00 AM 0 0 0 __ 0 0
7:15 AM 1 0 D 0 1
7:30 AM 2 0 0 0 2
7:45 AM 3 0 1 0 4
8:00 AM 5 0 1 0 6
6:15 AM 3 0 1 0 4
6:30 AM 4 0 2 0 6
6:45 AM 5 0 3 D 8
9:00 AM $ 0 2 0 8
9:15 AM 7 0 4 0 11
9:30 AM 10 0 2 0 12
9:45 AM 5 0 3 0 8
10:00 AM 4 0 5 0 9
10:15 AM 6 0 6 0 12
10:30 AM 7 1 3 0 11
10:45 AM 8 0 6 0 14
11:00 AM 10 9 5 0 15
11:15 AM 13 0 4 0 17
11:30 AM 12 0 7 0 19
11:45 AM 15 D 5 0 20
12:00 PM 15 0 6 0 21
12:15.PM 17 0 6 0 23
12:30 PM i6 0 8 0 24
12:45 PM 18 0 4 0 22
1:00 PM 17 p 5 0 22
1:15PM 15 0 6 0 21
1:30 PM 11 D 3 0 14
1:45 PM 12 0 fi 0 18
2:00 PM 13 0 4 0 17
2:15 PM 15 0 2 0 17
2:30 PM 15 0 5 0 20
2:45 PM 15 0 6 0 21
3:00 PM 13 0 6 0 19
3:15 PM 12 0 3 0 15
3:30 PM 14 0 6 0 20
3:45 PM 15 ~ 0 7 0 22
4:00 PM 15 0 8 0 23
4:15 PM 13 0 6 0 19
4:30 PM 11 0 9 0 20
4:45'PM 10 0 8 0 18
5:00 PM 11 0 6 0 17
5:15 PM 10 0 5 0 15
5:30 PM 12 0 7 0 19
5:45 PM 11 0 8 0 19
6:00 PM 10 0 6 0 16
6:15 PM 9 0 9 0 18
8:30 PM 11 0 6 0 17
6:45 PM 9 0 6 0 15
7:00 PM 8 0 5 0 13
Hanshaw Cenler
Appendix AContinued - Si nilar SiteParking Counts
1131 W. Lincoln Ave.
Saturday June 9, 2007
TIME LOTH
-._- TOTAL
Reg $
L
S aces 20 ___ _1 21
7:00 AM 5 0 5
7:15 AM 6 0 6
7:30 AM 8 0 8
7:45 AM 5 0 5
6:00 AM 7 0 7
8:15 AM 6 0 6
8:30 AM 6 0 6
8:45 AM 6 0 6
9:00 AM 6 D 6
9:15 AM 7 0 7
9:30 AM 4 0 4
9:45 AM 6 0 6
10:00 AM 8 0 8
10:15 AM 9 0 9
10:30 AM B 0 8
10:45 AM 11 0 11
11:00 AM 10 0 10
11:15 AM 10 0 10
11:30 AM 12 0 12
11:45 AM 12 0 12
12:OOPM 12 0 12
12:15 PM 12 0 12
12:30 PM 10 0 10
12:45 PM 10 0 10
1:00 PM 12 0 12
1:15 PM 9 0 9
1:30 PM 8 0 8
1:45 PM 7 0 7
2:00 PM 7 0 7
2:15 PM 5 0 5
2:30 PM 4 0 4
2:45 PM 4 0 4
3:00 PM 5 0 5
3:15 PM 5 0 5
3:30 PM 6 0- 6
3:45 PM 5 0 5
4:00 PM 6 0 6
4:15 PM 6 0 6
4:30 PM 8 0 8
4:45 PM 5 0 5
5:00 PM 5 0 5
5:15 PM 4 0 4
5:30 PM 4 0 4
5:45 PM 5 0 5
6:00 PM 4 0 4
6:15 PM 5 0 5
6:30 PM 5 0 5
6:45 PM 4 0 4
7:00 PM 4 0 4
Hanshaw Center
Appendix AContinued -Similar Site Parking Counts
1131 W. Lincoln Ave.
Tuesday June 12. 2007
TIME T
Rey - - ~ OTAL
S aces 20 1 21
7:00 AM 6 0 6
7:15 AM 10 0 10
7:30 AM 8 0 8
7:45 AM 12 0 12
8:00 AM 11 0 11
8:15 AM 9 0 9
9:30 AM 9 0 9
8:45 AM 9 0 8
9:00 AM 8 0 8
9:15 AM 9 0 8
9:30 AM 9 0 9
9:45 AM 11 0 11
10:00 AM 11 0 11
10:15 AM 10 0 10.
10:30 AM 9 0 9
10:45 AM 10 0 10
11:00 AM 10 0 10
11:15 AM 9 0 9
11:30 AM 7 0 7
11:45 AM 11 0 11
12:00 PM 14 0 14
12:15 PM 13 0 13
72:30 PM 12 0 12
12:45 PM 11 1 12
1:00 PM 11 0 11
1:15 PM 9 0 9
1:30 PM 9 0 9
1:45 PM 11 0 11
2:00 PM 11 0 11
2:15 PM 10 0 10
2:30 PM 9 0 9
2:45 PM 10 0 10
3:00 PM 12 0 12
3:15 PM 11 0 11
3:30 PM 10 0 10
3:45 PM 10 0 10
4:00 PM 12 0 12
4:15 PM 11 0 11
4:30 PM 11 0 11
4:45 PM 6 0 6
5:00 PM 6 0 6
5:15 PM 7 0 7
5:30 PM 4 0 4
5:45 PM 4 0 4
6:00 PM 4 0 4
6:15 PM 4 0 4
6:30 PM 4 0 4
6:45 PM 3 0 3
7:00 PM 5 0 5
Appendix AContinued -Cars in the Starbucks Drive-Thru
1131 W. Lincoln Ave.
Saturday June 9, 2007
TIME ~ IN
7:00 AM 2 ~~~-
7:15 AM 4
7:30 AM 6
7:45 AM 2
8:00 AM 5
8:15 AM 4
8:30 AM 8
8;45 AM 3
9:00 AM 7
9:15 AM 4
9:30 AM 5
9:45 AM 7
10:00 AM 6
10:15 AM 10
10:30 AM 4
10:45 AM 6
11:00 AM 6
11:15 AM 5
11:30 AM 7
11:45 AM 2
12:00 PM 3
12:15 PM 6
12:30 PM 4
12:45 PM 2
1:00 PM 4
1:15 PM 5
1:30 PM 3
1:45 PM 4
2:00 PM 6
2:15 PM 3
2:30 PM 2
2:45 PM 3
3:00 PM 4
3:15 PM 3
3:30 PM 7
3:45 PM 7
4:00 PM 3
4:15 PM 1
4:30 PM 3
4:45 PM 4
5:00 PM 3
5:15 PM 5
5:30 PM 4
5:45 PM 5
6:00 iPM 3
6:15 PM 4
6:30 PM 4
6:45 PM 3
7:00 PM 5
Loo
sife
sed
Hanshaw Center
Appendix ~
fife B~hofos
.~ppenCil}£ C
Sisra'slar Site Lincoln/Carleton S~sbway/Starbucks/Anirnai 8~ospital
Parkin
arleton
Item No. 11
J
3pJ
JPR~~
~-CH gSRE~~
NoR
VPR 1°-~'
WtW~ \~
/ n~
Q `
f
T
N1
I ~
J ~
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05225 Subject Properly
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Requested By: CARI.OS HERNANDEZ Q.S. No. 71
760 North Anaheim Boulevard
10322
9 (~ 4pU N.nv
RS-3 ~ 5 p~ N v ~ m~
73 C ~ me
~4pU?DU m
oRN E Du
Mt~DS v~ R
R5.3 t8 A
pGl9p'9~- m
GT ~ 3pU N p
PZb~.6M15'fN P C G
'b w
VPR1~
w>n/ p 1 OV Ep,CH
p~pP ~05~ Q16 N R
1~V~.. \~
R
c ~ l
C
ZDu
~ m
~ ~
~1
~m
wm ''~ / ~~r t59 ipp f ~ 40u~ ~pU l~ ~ gpU~pl
l~v^RNE S'(RF E9 ~ cv R~~ ~ro`Vp0. 3 ~ZZ 1O DU yCZ apu3 R53 pG c 1DU 30~ `DU
VP R5. C
o:
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05225
Requested By: CARLOS HERNANDEZ
Subject Property
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 71
760 North Anaheim Boulevard
'10322
ITEM NO. 11
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
I
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
', Tel: (714) 765.5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
vnvw.anaheimnet
City of Anaheim
PLANNING: DEPARTMENT
DATE: JULY 23, 2007
FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL U5E PERMIT N0.2007-05225 - REQUEST TO
ESTABLISH AN AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR FACILITY:.
LOCATION: This 0.34-acre property is identified as 760 North Anaheim Boulevard.
The applicant and property owner is Cazlos Hernandez.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission take the following
actions:
(a) Adopt the attached resolution approving a CEQA Categorical Exemption, Class 1
(Existing Facilities) and Conditional Use Permit No: 2007=05225.
REOUEST: The applicant requests approval to establish an automotive dealership.
BACKGROUNDi This property is developed with a vacant commercial building and is
located within the C-G (General Commercial) zone. The General Plan designates this
property and the properties to the north; south; and west for Low Medium Density
Residential land uses; the properties to the east are designated for Low Density
Residential land uses.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-04386, a request to permit an automotive repair and
sales facility was approved by the City Council on October 2, 2001 for a period of three
years: The applicant of the time did not request a reinstatement of this permit; therefore,
the conditional use permit expired on October 2, 2004:
PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to establish an automotive repair facility within
an existing commercial building: The site plan shows the 2,083 square foot commercial
building with two service bays, storage rooms, sales area, and restrooms: No expansion
to the building is proposed. The letter of operation states that the hours of operation
would be from 8 a.m: to 6 p:m. Monday through Saturday with up o three employees..
The proposed auto repair services would include tune-ups, alignment, brakes; engine
repair, and tire balancing, rotation, and replacement.
ANALYSIS: Automotive repair facilities are conditionally permitted within the C-G
zone. An automotive repair business has been operating at this location since 1979: A
6-foot high block wall with clinging vines was constructed adjacent to the alley in 2001
in order to screen the auto repair activities from the residential properties across the
alley. The project has been evaluated against applicable development standazds and is in
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05225
July 23, 2007
',. Page 2 of 2 _
compliance: Staff believes that an automotive: repair business would be appropriate for
the property with the recommended conditions of`approval which limit the hours of
operation and prohibit outdoor storage and repair activities in the Barking lot areas.
Therefore, staff recommends ap rp oval of this request. -
Respectfully submitt/e~d, ~ Concurred by,
~~~
Pnnclpal Planner , Planning Services Division Manager.
Attachments:
L Letter of Operation
PROJECT SUMflAARY
CUP2007-05225
Develo ment Standard Pro osed Pro'ect C-G zone standards
Site Area 0.34 N/A
Parkin 20 s aces 7 s aces
Landscaping (existing) Adiacent to: Feet
Anaheim 'Blvd.
North St.
Alle 0"
5*
5' 15
10
10
Buildings setbacks Adjacent to: Feet
(existing) Anaheim Blvd.
North St.
Alle 15
10
10* 15
10
20
Signs No signs plans submitted Will comply with Code
re uirements
"Existing non-conformity that is permitted to remain since no construction is
proposed.
~®R~Fr~
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"'
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05225 BE GRANTED
(760 NORTH ANAHEIM BOULEVARD)
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:
REAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
.LOTS 1 AND 2 IN BLOCK A OF TRACT NO. 158, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN
BOOK 12, PAGE 8, MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE WESTERLY 5.25 FEET THEREOF AS CONVEYED TO
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, FOR WIDENING NORTH LOS ANGELES STREET, BY DEED
RECORDED DECEMBER 2, 1937, IN BOOK 919, PAGE 207, OFFICIAL.RECORDS.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on July 23, 2007, 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 this request to permit an automotive repair facility in an existing commercialbuilding is
properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section No.
18.08:030.040.0402 (Automotive -Repair & Modification).
2. 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 site can accommodate the use proposed and there
are other similar land uses in the vicinity.
3. That the traffic generated from the auto repair will not impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area
4. 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: The Planning staff has
determihed that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15301,
Class 1 (Existing Facilities), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the
requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation.
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:
Cr\PC2007= -1- PC2007-
Prior to issuance of a building permit or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, the following conditions shall be complied with:
1. That final sign plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. Any
decision by the Planning Division may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a Reports and
Recommendations item.
That within ninety (90) days, the fol owing conditions shall be complied with:
2. 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 No. 1, and as conditioned herein.
3. That rooftop address numbers for the police helicopter shall be painted on the roof with a minimum
size of 4 feet in height and 2 feet in width. The lines of the numbers are to be a minimum of 6 inches
thick and the numbers should be spaces 12 - 18 inches apart, painted in a contrasting color to the roof
material
4. That an Emergency Listing Card, Form APD-281 shall be filed with the Police Department, available at
the Police Department front counter
General Conditions:
5. That the property shall 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 from the time of discovery.
6. That the hours of operation shall be limited from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. seven days a week...
7. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses:
8. That vehicle repair activities and storage of inoperable cars and parts shall not be permitted outside of
the building.
9. That gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may
adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to
the Engineering Standard Plan No: 475 and shall be subject to he review and approval of the City
Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to the issuance. of a building permit.
10. That timing for compliance with conditions of app~bval 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.
11. That extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with
Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal
12. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal
regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the
request regarding any other applicable ordinance, .regulation or requirement.
-2- PC2007-
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
July 23, 2007. 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
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, dp hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission
held on July 23, 2007, 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
.2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-3- PC2007-
Attachment -Item ido. 11
Letter ®f ®perati®n
A. The use of this building would be auto maintenance & repair. The inside of
this building is 2083 sq. ft.
B. Pazking for this size building, as required in 18.06.0222, is more than required
by code.
C. Days of operation would be limited to Monday thru Sat, with hours being Sam
to 5 pm for working and possibly Spm to 6pm for customers to pick up their
cars. This will help keep the area quiet for people in the apts. to the East.
D. The number of employees would be 2 or 3 working 1 shift Sam to Spm.
E. This business usage fits the building and the azea. In the office azea their will
be a person attending calls and helping customers. In the bay azea there is a
lifter and a machine used to align vehicles. Two cars can be worked on at the
same time, two mechanics will work in the bay area. The Auto Repair shop
wil] do all General Repair such as: Tune-Ups, Alignment, Brakes, Motor
Repair, changing of new and used tires.
The surrounding azea is as follows: Across the street is a caz lot with auto
repair on the rear of the property. To the South is a mufIIer and brake business
with the bays facing this property. On the North side across North St. is a
liquor store, then a car lot, followed by an auto parts store with a machine shop
in the reaz next to the alley. The apts. across the alley have the garage facing
this property. Further, the doors and windows face away from the alley, and
aze not visible from this property.
CUP (d0. 2QG7 - G ; ;' ~ ~
Item No. 1:
RCL 6°~65.9b pFtw--
RGL6p 65-p9
9<5
' ~tGUP'tvn~~.{-3-,Q-~~6~
cUPG
7~
' t
G
N
5
~
~ 'l 55 t'
SGH
`
0
W
R l
DD
t
°~A0.
SO " 5
U
-y~
aZ 20
6
a
a
6
CJP '
1
-
N
CP
c .JP V
C~'M33 m VP 5
CCUl1P
L ~ VD
L. RLL EP-fi5, 10
5
~ pcS,L~~~S(1A3
I~
5-
y
5 ~YG R
p~~ U
?
I
5549
65-~-5
aLL
aLL 65-~ VPa UaaH3
~ ~
B5
RG
KL 5
aG1-Zp04 ~Tg5
Y
p ~ Vim. RCL 52.53-tt RCL
'5~ a~~
-,3-,3 c0 ~°°c aE SUP PIY
51d
2 ~ ~
a
' P
1.LC51
2!00003~",6°''i5~Y'~
~2
UP"
' J
~ .-
r
Q ~m
I ' ~~ CNP 2005Z°5°31
RCL 550680 CU
CU
4
UP
.:5°t
tT'' 'U pJP 25N RCL 45-66-fit 97
G
~~
c~P ~e~ 2 ~
Nnm RCL 52-53-11 ~~
VAR 2993 (
)
ILUP tots) CU
3aa5t L5125145 RLL 60-fit-96
a PCN C:
~ _~mtn
1- ¢>
SUPPLY
- INTERN TON N- SM,
F
SHap RCL 53-51-10
fib' VP
paP1i--T, ClIP266<
s pECSN
a d ~
~~D
v COMPANY" INC
ac
csnoc s ~
ran
® N
/m
L
RS2 ~ iu~ C.c
s 1 DU EAGI $o
~
~ F- VAR 2x13
1 W oio D m
~ c~im cc
P a
u
~ ,
y o
~ u!
e
e C-G
RCL 53-54-13
RS2 CUP 3959
1 DUEACH CUP 2605
CUP 1544
I VAR 315
u 2 w ADJ 9903
0 PCN 95-01
0
rc N SHOPPING CENTER
TILL AVE o e
e
2
W
O
a
m
a CL 5 57-30
~ CUP 602
U
HILL PL
4DU
CL 5 57-3
Du cHr
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05228
Hpk,E
Requested By: ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT
1234 South Anaheim Boulevard -Anaheim Chevrolet
10323
4 DU
R
R
R
RCL~~-5y.,.
N
O ~
m n
~ n
0
~A
NA
9
Z O
mA
-fi6~ ~~ i
~ gp63
~R 621µC1200 C ~e31aY~ i
a5nt toS~\ /
Subject Properly
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1 " = 200'
Q.S. No. 86
BALL ROAD
0:
Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05228
Requested By: ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT
1234 South Anaheim Boulevard -Anaheim Chevrolet
Subject Property
Date: July 23, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 86
10323
ITEM NO. 12
PLANNING COMMISSION AGEPTI9A REPORT
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
City of Anaheim
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE: JULY 23, 2007
FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.2007-05228'-REQUEST TO
ESTABLISH AN AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP'
'LOCATION: This l.2-acreproperty is identified as 1234 South Anaheim Boulevard.
The applicant and propertyowner is the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission take the following
actions:
(a) Adopt the attached resolution approving a CEQA Categorical Exemption, Class i
and Conditional Use Permit No.2007-05228.
REQUEST: The applicantrequests approval to'establish an automotive dealership with
waiver of the provision requiring a minimum landscaped setbackof 15 feet. The
applicant'proposes a 2 to 5 foot landscaped setback.
BACKGROUND: This property is developed with a vacant commercial building and is
located within the Industrial (I) zone. The General Plan designates this property and all
surrounding properties for General Commercial land uses.
PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to establish an automotive dealership within an
existing commercial building with no new construction. The site plan shows the 5,568
square foot commercial building is set back 44 feet from Anaheim Boulevazd;
significantly greater than the 15 feet required by Code. Code requires a landscaped
setback of 15 feet and the applicantproposes a 2 to 5-foot wide planter along Anaheim
Boulevard: This planter width would be consistent with the existing planter widths for:
the adjacent auto dealer properties to the north and south. Four vehicle display pads are
proposed in front of the building: The display pads will encroach 11 feet into the
required landscaped setback along Anaheim Boulevazd. The attached project summary
chart provides details of the proposal.
The proposed dealership would include auto sales only;. no auto repair services aze
proposed. According to the Redevelopment Agency; this auto dealership is proposed as ;
an interim use only. The Agency proposes to assemble parcels along Anaheim
Boulevard to allow for a future big box retail development:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.2007-05228
i duly 23, 2002
'. Page 2 of 2'.
ANALYSIS: Automotive sales facilities are permitted in the Industrial zone subject to
', the approval of a conditional use permit: There are other automotive dealerships in the
vicinity and this proposal would be compatible with surrounding land uses:'
Issue: Waiver of minimum landscaped setback
' The applicant proposes a 2 to 5 foot landscape setback along Anaheim Boulevard,
significantly less than the I5 feet required by the Code. The applicant requests this
waiver in order to accommodate a vehicle display area between the building and the
front planter. The attached statement of justification states that the encroachment into
the setback is necessary to provide adequate visibility, to the showroom and vehicles.
The statement of justification also refers to existing automobile dealerships along
Anaheim Boulevard that have vehicle display areas within the street setback area.
Staff believes that the requested waiver of minimum landscape setback along Anaheim
Boulevard is justified in this case because the proposed landscape enhancement meets
the intent of the code by providing a layered landscapeazea to enhance the appearance of
the project from the street. In addition; dealerships in the immediate vicinity already'
have landscaped setbacks consistent with the 2 to 5 foot width proposed by the applicant
as well as vehicle display areas in their landscape setbacks. Staff believes that the
modification to the street setback would not negatively impact adjacent uses'and denial
bf this'waiver would deprive this property of a privilege enjoyed by others in the
vicinity: Staff recommends approval of the waiver; as conditioned:
..Respectfully submitted, Concurred by,
~~
Principal Planner Planning Services Division Manager
Attachments'
I . Redevelopment Agency Memorandum
2. Justification of Waiver Form
PROJECT SUMMARY
CUP2007-05228
Develo went Standard Pro osed Pro'ect C-G zone standards
Site Area 1.2 N/A
Parking 73 s aces 16 s aces
Landscaping Setbacks Adiacentto:
Anaheim Blvd.
Interior Feet
2 to 5
0
15
0
Building Setbacks Adjacent to: Feet
Anaheim Blvd.
Interior 44
0 15
0
Signs No signs plans submitted Will comply with Code
requirements
(oR~,F~
RESOLUTION NO PC2007--***
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05228 BE GRANTED
(1234 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOULEVARD)
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 1:
THE EASTERLY 30 FEET OF LOT 1 OF TRACT NO. 3351, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM,
COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A
MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 1 t0, PAGES 5 TO 7 INCLUSIVE OF MISCELLANEOUS
MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
PARCEL 2:
LOTS 2 AND 3 OF TRACT NO. 3351, IN THE CITYOF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF
ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, S SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 110,
PAGES 5 TO 7 INCLUSIVE OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
EXCEPT THE MOST SOUTHERLY 50 FEET OF SAID LOT.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on July 23, 2007, 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 this request to permit an automotive dealership in an existing commercial building is
properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section No.
18.08.030.040.0402 (Automotive Car Sales & Rental) with waiver of the following provision:
SECTION NO. 18.08 060 010 Minimum landscape setbacks abutting an
arterial highway (15 feet required; 2 to 5 feet
proposed):
2. That the waiver pertaining to minimum landscape setback is hereby approved because there
are other automobile dealerships in the immediate vicinity which also enjoy reduced setbacks for the display
of vehicles. The encroachment of the display area into the street setback is appropriate for this location to
allow for the display of vehicles for sale. There are other buildings in the vicinity with setbacks that are less
than code requirements. Denial of this waiver would deprive this property of a privilege enjoyed by other
properties with the same zoning in the vicinity.
3. 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 site can accommodate the combined uses proposed
and there are other similar land uses in the vicinity.
4. That the traffic generated by the proposed auto sales facility will not impose an undue
burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area.
Cr1PC2007- -1- PC2007-
_____
5. 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: The Planning staff has
determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15301,
Class 1 (Existing Facilities), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the
requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation.
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 within 90 days from the date of approval of this project, the developer shall remove the existing
wrought iron fence along the Anaheim Boulevard frontage.
2. That final plans for the four vehicle display pads shall be submitted td the Plannjng Services Division
for review and approval. Any decision by the Planning'Division may be appealed to the Planning
Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item;
3. That final sign plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. Any
decision by the Planning Division maybe appealed to the Planning Commission as a Reports and
Recommendations item.
Prior to final building and zoning inspections the following conditions shall be complied with:
4. 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 No. 1 and 2, and as conditioned herein.
5. That rooftop address numbers for the police helicopter shall be painted do the roof with a minimum
size of 4 feet in height and 2 feet in width: The likes of the numbers are to be a minimum of 6 inches
thick and the numbers should be spaces 12 -18 inches apart, painted in a contrasting color to the roof
material
6. That an Emergency Listing Card, Form APD-281 shall be filed with the Police Department, available at
the Police Department front counter.
General Conditions:
7. That automobile repajrshali .not be permitted oh the premises.
8. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses.
9. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion through the provision of
regulariandscaping maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffitiwithin twenty-four
(24) hours from the time of discovery.
-2- PC2007-
10. That gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may
adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to
the Engineering Standard Plan No. 475 and shall be subject to he review and approval of the City °'
Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to the issuance of a building permit.
11. 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.
12. That extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with
Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal.
13. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request pnly 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
July 23, 2007. 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
-3- PC2007-
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 July 23, 2007, 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
2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-4- PC2007-
'n- .....1[i
:0~. ~~ ~.U~.
1lal ~~~i
IiJ ~Ji..~ ~.''
=- ; ,
,;
,iii;.:. ...rie~i ;.
Attachment -Item tdo. 12
City of Anaheim
C®MLJI~ITY REVEL®PME1~T
To. Cit Anaheim PlanningComtnissiou
From• ~Stipkovich, Executive Director
c: Brad L. Hobson
Gregory Hastings
Sergio M. Ramirez
Date: July 17, 2007
RE: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OF THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1234 S. ANAHEIM BOULEVARD
(ANAHEIM CHEVROLET).
The purpose of this memorandum is to request a Conditional Use Permit for auto
sales and outside velilcle storage far the property at 1234 S. Anaheim Boulevard.
The property is owned by the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") and
leased to Anaheim Chevrolet.
Anaheim Chevrolet was previously located at the southwest corner of Lincoln
Avenue and Euclid Street, however the business relocated to the subject location as
anew `"Target" store will be built at the old location location. The Agency is
negotiating with Anaheim Chevrolet to build a new flagship dealership facility and
showroom at Lincoln and Interstate 5 Freeway. While Anaheim Chevrolet secures
financing required to build the project they have temporarily relocated to the
Agency owned site at Anaheim Boulevazd and Ball Road.
The Agency has entered into a temporary two year lease with Anaheim Chevrolet
for the Agency owned site. The 4.95 acre site is comprised of three parcels. Two
of the parcels ltave entitlements for auto sales, however the parcel at 1234 S.
Anaheim Boulevazd does not. A CUP for auto sales and outside storage is
required since Anaheim Chevrolet will occupy the entire site.
If you have any questions, please call Sergio M. Ramirez at (714) 765-4318
Thank you.
F.~DOCSDEVSVCSNSMDSVaNitll AAVUl~eimfl~ervk, Temp NP Aum Sa1c,.DCC
Attachment -Item No. 12
PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: te.to.osa.o2o:o2ot.ot a ts.to.oso.ozo.ozot.oz
(A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
PERTAINING TO: Front landscaped setback requirements
Sections 18.03.040.030 and 18.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code
waiver may be granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown:
That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location
or surroundings, which do not apply to other property under Identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and
2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of
privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning
Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which
a variance is sought, fully and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional
pages.
Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography,
location or surroundings? X Yes _ No.
If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: The property is flanked by auto sales uses
that only have four feet of landscaping. The subject property currently has only four feet of landscaping.
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: The adjacent and nearby properties have less
landscaping than code currently requires. Adherence to code on subject property would require a deeper
landscape setback resulting in an unbalanced street scene from the existing legal-non-conforming
properties.
3. Do the special circumstances applicable io 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: The subject property (1234 S. Anaheim Blvd.) is
situated between two properties occupied by auto dealerships. Both dealerships have 4' landscaped
setbacks or less. Specifically the subject property will be operated and integrated by the same auto
dealership (Anaheim Chevrolet) to the south.
4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous
property owners)? ~ Yes _ No
EXPLAIN The existing 4' landscaped setback were installed prior to the acquisition of the property by the
Redevelopment Agency.
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 fn the
same vicinity and zone which is not otherwise expressly authorized by zone regulations governing subject property.
Use variances are notpe~rafkted.
~~ 7• r7• a7
Signature of roperty neror Autho t ed gent Date
DECEMBER 12, 2000
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO.
F:~-OC6~OEVSVC6~GENEPALUCG~lI6PPetitionets 61e~errentGOC