The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 2007/10/29~ a6ed ~LOl6Zl0 L) aoP'(LO6Z0 4 )lsepua6e{~eoua~o\sooPG H ;au•w~ayeue uoissiwwoo uiuue~ ssa~ppe view-a 6uimopo; aya 6uisn uorssiwwo~ 6uiuue~d ay; ~o; a6essaw a anew ~(ew no,~ ;uawu~nofpy swa;~ 6ul~eaH oJgnd ~epuale~;uasuo~ s;uawwo~ o lgnd aauel6a)ly;p a6pald 'W'd OE~Z 6uueaH ollgnd of auanuoaaa 6uueaH allgnd of ssaoaa • e;a~oas ay; o; ~~;lwgns pue aouenpe ui pieo~a~ea sea;a~ woo asea~ epua a aye uo wa~~ ue u~p~e a~ ~uawa~e}s a anew o~ yslna no !I saso ~n u~ aa~ p~ooa~ ~o~ epua6e LOOZ '6Z ~aqo}op aye uo swa;I ~o} nnalna~{ ueld tieulwlla~d (uolsslwwo~ 6uluueld ~(q pa;sanba~ sy) sanssl pue s;uawdolanap /(;I~ snouen uo uolsslwwo~ o~ a~epdn }}egg 'W'd 0£~ d nnalnab veld daeulw)a~d ~aP~O of Iles zanbselan fed 'aawo~l ~(~ued gassae~ uayda~g 'uew~se~ lleJ 'lennie6y ~a~ad a~auolsslwwo~ hle~eyl ydaso~ :aaodwal-ad uew~ley~ e}~n8 ~Ila~i :uew~,ley~ elwo;gel 'wlayeuy 'p~enalno8 wlayeuy y}noS OOZ IIeH ~(;!~ '~agwey~ I!ouno~ LOOZ 6Z -~~q®~~® ~p~® ISSI 1 ~ I Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 2:30 P.M. Public Comments: This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the Anaheim Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public hearing items. Consent Calendar: The items on the Consent Calendar will be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless members of the Planning Commission, staff or the public request the item to be discussed and/or removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. Reports and Recommendations 1 A. (a) (b) Location: 500 West Disney Way Continued from the August 20, September 17, and the October 15, 2007, Planning Commission meetings. Request review and approval of a final site plan to construct a 400-unit time share within the Anaheim GardenWalk project. 1B. (a) CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED) (b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05241 (Tracking No. CUP2007-05205) Agent: DMJM Design 999 Town And Country Road Orange, CA 92868 Location: 1325 North Anaheim Boulevard Request to review final elevations for apreviously-approved office building. H:\d ocs\cl eri ca I\agend as\(102907 ).d oc Project Planner. (dherrickQanaheim.vet) Project Planner: (kwong2Qanaheim.vet) (10/29/07) Page 2 Agent: Chris Samueltan Morris Architects 2046 Armacost Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90025 Mi u es 1C. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of October 1, 2007. Continued from the October 15, 2007 Planning Commission Meeting (Motion) 1D. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of October 15, 2007. Public Hearing Items: 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (READVERTISED) 2b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-00456 2c. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2007-00200 2d. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 2e. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05204 2f. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17047 Agent: La Vue LLC 30622 La Vue Street Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Location: 2800-2816 West Lincoln Avenue.121 and 131 South Dale Avenue and 125-137 South Dale Avenue: Portion A: Property is approximately 1.35-acres, and is located at the southwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Dale Avenue (2800 - 2816 West Lincoln Avenue) Portion B: Property is approximately 0.82-acre, having a frontage of 150 feet on the west side of Dale Avenue and is located 310 feet south of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue (121 and 131 South Dale Avenue). Portion C: Property is approximately 0.82-acre, having a frontage of 150 feet on the west side of Dale Avenue and is located 460 feet south of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue (125-137 South Dale Avenue). General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456 -Applicant-initiated request to amend the land use element map of the General Plan redesignating Portion B from the Corridor Residential designation to the Low-Medium Density Residential land use designation. City-initiated request (Planning Department) to amend the land use element map of the General Plan redesignating Portion A and Portion C from the Corridor Residential designation to the Low-Medium Density Residential land use designation. Reclassification No. 2007-00200 -Request reclassification of Portion B from the RM-4 (Multiple-Family Residential) zone to the RM-3 (Multiple- Family Residential) zone or less intense zone. Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05204 -Request to construct a 14-unit attached single-family condominium planned unit development with modification of development standards and waiver of minimum setback between buildings on Portion B. Tentative Tract Map No. 17047 - To establish a 1-lot, 14-unit airspace H:\docs\clerical\agendas\(102907).doc (10/29/07) Page 3 attached residential condominium subdivision on Portion 6. Project Planner: Continued from the August 20, and the September 5, 2007, Planning (ernien@ananeim.neq Commission meetings. General Plan Amendment Resolution No. Reclassification Resolution No. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Tentative Tract Map Resolution No. H:\does\clerical\agendas\(102907):doc (10129/07) Page 4 3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION* 3b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 3c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IdO. 2007-05258 3d. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2004-177 Owner: Elisa Stipkovich Anaheim, Redevelopment agency 201 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 Gina Oklejas P.O. Box 2597fi Anaheim. Ca 92825 Agent: Elisa Stipkovich Anaheim, Redevelopment agency 201 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 Location: 1501 West Lincoln Avenue: Property is an irregularly- shaped site consists of multiple properties with a combination area of approximately 3.29 acres, and is located at the northeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Loara Street, having frontages of 472 feet on the north side of Lincoln Avenue and 210 feet on the east side of Loara Street. Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05258 - To establish an automotive sales dealership with automotive repair and to replace an existing legal nonconforming freestanding (monopole) telecommunications facility with a telecommunications facility with waivers of (a) minimum landscape and structural setback adjacent to an arterial highway, (b) minimum landscaped and structural setback abutting a local street and freeway and (c) required improvement of public right-of-way. Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-177 - To combine eight parcels and existing right-of-way to create one parcel. 'Advertised as Previously-Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration Conditional 'Use Permit Resolution No. Tentative Parcel Map Resolution No. _ H:\docs\clerical\agendas\(102907 ).doc Project Planner. (skoehm@anaheim.nef) (10/29/07) Page 5 4a. 4b. Owner: Cheng Lee 13571 Harbor Boulevard Garden Grove, CA 92843 Agent: Eduardo Morales 408 South Brookhurst Street Anaheim, CA 92804 Location: 408 South Brookhurst Street: Property is a rectangularly- shaped, 0.3-acre property with a frontage of 83 feet on the east side of Brookhurst Street, and is located 516 feet south of the centerline of Broadway. Requests reinstatement of this permit and modifications to conditions of approval to delete a time limitation and modify the hours of operation to retain a restaurant with beer and wine sales. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Sa. 5b. 5c. Sd. Agent: Andrew Han Lennar 25 Enterprise Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Location: 2050 South State College Boulevard and 2015 - 2125 East Orangewood Avenue: Property is approximately 15.6 acres, located at the northeast corner of State College Boulevard and Orangewood Avenue. This request is to permit the A-Town Stadium development, an 878-unit, residential project consisting of six development areas, two public parks and new public connector streets. This project requires approval of the following actions. Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05093 - To permit two residential tower structures up to 350 feet in height. Development Agreement No. 2006.00002 - To adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Platinum Triangle Partners, LLC to provide for the development of the A-Town Stadium Master Site Plan. H:\dots\clerical\agendas\(102907).doc Project Planner: (kwong2 oQanaheim.net) (10129/07) Pagefi Owner: Platinum Triangle Partners, LLC 25 Enterprise Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Tentative Tract Map No. 16860 - To establish a 10-lot (6 numbered and 4 lettered), residential subdivision. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Development Agreement Resolution No. Tentative Tract Map Resolution No. 6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED) 6b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3950 (TRACKING NO. CUP2007-05252) Owner: David L. Rudat P.O. Box 841 Orange, CA 92856 Agent: Jesse Gilholm Synergy 867 East Front Street Ventura, CA 93001 Location: 1110 East Oranaefair Lane: Property is approximately 0.25-acre, having a frontage of 60 feet on the south side of Orangefair Lane and is located 196 feet west of the centerline of Raymond Avenue. Applicant requests to retain a previously approved telecommunications facility and remove a time limitation. 'Advertised as "Mitigated Negative Declaration" Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Project Planner: (twhite@anaheim. nett Profecf P/anneC (skoehm@anaheim. net) Adjourn To Wednesday, November 14, 2007 at 1:00 P.M. for Preliminary P an Review. H:\dots\clerical\agendas\(102907).doc (10/29/07) Page 7 CERTIFICATION OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: 2:00 p.m. Octpber 25, 2007 (TIME) (DATE) LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND p NCIL DISPLAY KIOSK SIGNED: If you challenge any one of these City of Anaheim decisions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in a written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. RIGHTS OF APPEAL 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\(102907).doc (10129/07) Page 8 SCHEDULE 2007 November 14 (Wed) November 26 II December 10 II December 24 (Cancelled) II H:\does\clerical\agendas\(1029o7):doc (~ oi2sro7) Page 9 - - ~.. Item No. 1F 3 nel OENNY6 CUP ]61 ~--~ ~~ 9 0.ESTAUMM NP]t6 ~~-] RLL6-08)6111@7 VM 12)] CIIP <t) N'IAHEIM INN RCL fi6S)al ( fi31 VAR 30]0 2 CUP ]E6 VAR 115 PAMApA NAINW)E V Mi 2fl95 ftLL 88fi)-01166) A R CUP ]66 SP 92.1 ICLEfiL1E1(21) NP 1001 IPfIDSCAPEO G"OEMEM NP2$16 ]ISNEY WAY <,,, 'P 92.1 m p g1 RN UO91 8 L v 11ss - van ~ }5 016NEYLWO a W LUP 969 J 7 m SP 92.1 (] 1 FCL 66fi)S1I16U CM 691 m plsNEnwp = SP 9z-1 nci 6 6A iai o° ~ . s_e 9_ .~_ , 1612 s P4mm 0^I~ W I N fG0 SP B2-1 PLL 66GTEt lz) 6n°0~1 1 RCL 6465112 SP 82.1 p cEXRx PLLSG61dT RLL6GS)dt Z)I 1 [UP156 ftLL 64951 2 CUPSTA RLL EG6)L] cUP]2 LUP T95 ,.. ,g+6].t. VAR 216)6 PAPW NL LOT WPS/1 RLL b46b0 VAR ZpH6 LlIP 32 RL1666]E11IDf OI6NETLVIp VAR 20)96 CVP2]t0 PARI(ING pISNEYLANp VAR]p09 PPAPING VM)]0 61l INO. FIPM Q SP 92d ~ LANO6CAPE0 SP 92-1 1 ~ RLL fi68T-6t 1100) ti EASEMENT RLL 6687-61(1007 RCL 069 61 1 Z InxEnxc WFCPXU EpISOrv CO. e~OEx.Exi LUP 1009 3NIq ELISUN LO. EASEMENT -1500' PCLm61a1 ml ~ EP 0?-0 Ptt ts >d1 Pas4a6 6 131 AP]tl VAR101 ns "' urtES SP B2-Z RCL 6667.61115) VAR 2218 ~ 9z-z qw p6z1 RLt 688)61(1001 SUPERB 1t 861 ~ MOTEL 54 316 P6x¢e~ IAVAHEMPE90 VMA6T -NGVpAYI~ INN 66UItE6~... PR6i£all 1 I`REIpILL APIATAHO1'{1 EXPPE6 p11G86E5TV VE Inl AHEIM RESORT AWHEW u F6P FSP 6P8]-1 rpwH6E o nw 6P 62.1 PLL fi69N NP 261 Lunn U ANAHEIu u e ~ s ezz 64TELL()E U PLL 6L B~b'T6~11161 - PLL58fi)31 RQ 5661x' xCL ~>~®1 EN6°IlffE6 1AVENUE KATELLA AVENUE 'R 9'03.1 R2088T911531 PR 66fi3d1 N6) LUP 3386 ~B0'2 PLL 35I ~ 6PBt.0 ~-_6^ °~ ° & ~g " r VAR34p6 6P eza VM 9]O6 qLL 888)d1110) ~Anzi e6 ~ I ^a6p E' AA9'!19 LUP 1110 fiP 9z-1 PL1 668id1I01I LW °6p1 I VALNR VARHBB EIR]1] E61]n q L ~ L9 em ~ ~ : 6p 62-I WP18W P 6P9z /` CUP 1t VM B& URYfi MpIOR LODPi B~10tEL w i un 2n ~q Q VAP ]906 p161EVINlp EMPLOVFf PMNING / / \ \ PARPII port ¢ / \ mez-2 6P 92-2 . I/ / _ \ \L ®-61-011I1 66) RE6TAURAM SP B2-1 - ~ all RN 086)dt 61 R L 8 ~ I tl p N RL 26316 LUP 359 SP 92-2 LUP 3161 RLLfi66 e6e 110) LUe 1BUA fORTOFlNO INN66UITE6 Final Site Plan No. 2007-00009 Requested By: CHRIS SAMUELIAN 500 West Disney Way 4 '~~~ Subject Properly Date: October 29, 2007 Scale: Grephic Q.S. No. 87 1035'1 E4'~'T't~Cbili~l~"g' IV®. 1 E~~TT!~CI~IQ/Y~I~I'I' RTQ. Z i/aevu ®f S®aa~h ~9awati~t~ ad®rag E~ate4Ba Aveaaaee A'g"TACFYIO~IV"~' ~ i9ie~ f~®rn Kagei6a Avenue City of Anaheim 1~L,AlVIV[NG I3EPAIt'd'IVIENT Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting"of October 29. 2007. 1A.(a) (b) Location: 500 West Disnev Way \vmvcdnalteimnCr Request review and approval of a final site plan to construct a 400-unit time share within the Anaheim Gardenwalk project. ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to construct a 400-unit time share within the Anaheim Gardenwalk project and does hereby determine that the previously-approved Mitigated Negative Declaration and Second Addendum to the Pointe Anaheim Initial Study are adequate environmental documentation for this request. Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and :MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the request to construct a 400-unit time share within the Anaheim Gardenwalk project and has determined that the Final Site Plan is in conformance with the Specific Plan and Conditional Use Permit No. 4078 requirements. FSP20p7-OOp09_Ezcerpl 200 South Anaheim Boulevard P.0. Bax 3222 Anaheim, Calicornia 92803 TEL (774)65.5139 Agent: Chris Samuelian Morris Architects 2046 Armacost Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90025 Item No. 1B RIVERSIDE FREEWAY 0 u~i D z Q 0 J - ANAHEIM CITY LIMITS@~ ~ bevy - O <sN~ O < O ~ ~ N O ~ ~~N H Q U r ~ ~ 4T5 ~ ~ T ~~„ RCL 66-67-14 PARKING LOT N ~ ~` RCL 62.83-30 *~ - CUP 2002-p4566 ~~G jat u ~ ...... r_ „ ^'~ z ' ~+ RRCL~2007-00~~I2I3309 ~_ ,:~ ~ ~ 5~~ CUP ~~74)52fi5 },~~ =' T GUP 2007 0.5241 I ~~~u WICANT VAR 1946-24 4 i ly `` ~,~,''~ '" ^~ ~ ~ '. t;~ KINSBURSKY INC ,r,- 0.y ~~ ~.^~~`.k t..4 s ~ a,~ y'r`~r" -K ~&~~` ~ , I ~~~<~ ~ ~ ~~ .~(~,,~"~~ `~ COMMERCIAL STREET 3 ..~ A vwe'~",ktt ~.. J RCL 76-77-18 ~ ~ ~ ''' ~ ~ ~" "; RCL 58-57-13 ~ ?`~.~„+ ~^'~ '" ' CARL KARCHER COMMISSARY , '~°• ~~ ~";~ I m `~ ~ `~ ' ' 8 DISTRIBUTION CENTER k CARL KARCHER COMMISSARY "3 & DISTRIBUTION CENTER I ~~l U 5 ws ~ 9 ~ Y _. ~. ;~ ,..:,~. > N~ ALLIED BUILDING ~ saw ~~ .` `~~'=~.-°`.r~ PRODUCTS CUP 1438 ~ Q GG ~ RCL 86.67-06 I ~ RCL 51-52-2 I RCL ~4~ RCL 51-52.2 RCL 51-52-2 m I RCL 51-52.2 CUP 3516 CUP 1438 ~ CUP 3663 CARL KARCHER C-(a CERAMIC TILE OFFICES W CUP 2639 INDUSTRIAL FIRMS Q DISTRIBUTORS /1 Z (//~\\\ Q ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE COMMERI IALlINDUSTRIAL (NORTH CENTRAL AREA) REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05241 TRACKING NO. CUP 2007-05265 Requested By: DMJM DESIGN Subject Property Date: October 29, 2007 Scale: 1 " = 200' Q.S. No. 70 1325 North Anaheim Boulevard 10405 City of Anaheim ~LA[VI~IIIVG DEPAR'TN[EIV'g' Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of October 29, 2007. 1B.(a) CEQA AAITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007.05241 (TRACKING NO. CUP2007-05265) Agent: DMJM Design 999 Town and Country Road Orange, CA 92868 Location: 1325 North Anaheim Boulevard www,anaheimnei Request review final elevations for apreviously-approved office building. ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to construct an office building and does hereby determine that the previously-approved Mitigated Negative Declaration is adequate environmental documentation for this request. Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the request to construct an office building and does hereby aoprove the elevation plans based on Commission's concurrence with staff that the final plans are architecturally enhanced to provide a quality office building that is consistent with the Community Design Element of the General Plan. CUP20p7-05241_Excerpl 200 South Anaheim Boulevard P.O. Bax 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 TEL (7141765-5139 Item No. 2 RM-4 RCL fit-63-60 CUP 348 LINDALE VILLA APARTMENTS 88 DU ~ RM-0 RCL 87-88-35 VAR 374 CG RCL 56-57-15 CUP 2528 CUP 554 SMALL SHOPS W Z W Q C-G RCL 84~65-0e W RCL5657-15 ..1 CUP 2695 Q CUP 978 ~ SERVICE STATION SENIOR APARTMENTS 118 DU RM-4 70 RCL 65-66-117 RCL 71-31 RCL 56-57-41 (Res of Inl to RM-1200) VAR 1796 RCL 59-60-62 NORMANDY CUP 1577 gpgRTMENTS VAR 2232 70 DU C~G RCL 59-60-62 C-G - CUP 495 RCL 56-57-41 VAR 1147 S CUP 2220 SMALL SHOPS VAR 3702 An aheim Commercial Colritlors Retlevelopmenf Project .®.® LINCOLN AVENUE Imo-241'-®I $ ', k VARi2~i21 CL RGL 1B -7fi ~ 6~ ~ ~~RESTAl1RANT~ RCL RCL 83-81-100 -~' X160: c CLIP ~J45& ~~ 6 ~'~. O 71_7?-bg U [:g-m.63 ffi00-04030 2 ~< t ~ ~ C P2B04 CUP 2]65 CUP4111 v"a ~m~ ~> ¢ sy~ +r ,]. ~-,~r{„~'~„ ` ~ NM CUP340 E6TAURAN. ANAHEIM NAT AL H acne C A RCL ®~ ~ + N NN VAR 1813 m ~y O f PA2 ~004r6 -~ +{ p ~UP 38331 s0aexc0 V ~ ~- '~-~ UCOHIS ~ENOY ~ ° '~ ~ ua z m6 o 5 ~P~ RCL RM-4 70 71 16 0 , c B - 4 n A E ~ ~t.gH O - - S ..,, .? ~M VAR 2207 . p . , VILLA DEL SOL °-'--~' RMi ~"'-r TTM 1784] + fC APARTMENTS RCL Z6m-BBZm - ~ O7 DU O N ~~ CUP 200]-m204 ~ ~ ~ VAR 3458 } ° cPAZfim mass ~ T(MHP) a 1 o u EacH ~ ~ RCL 82-83-28 B'6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ' CUP 2008.05068 --?" ' r"- w J RN.3 6 -sn CUP 2033 v RcL mw Ba1z3 ~+ . _ CUP 35 1A c RCUP 2004 04883 + o ~ CUPP0040485fi cPAZ6m m458 MOBILEHOME PARK o TOWNHOMES a ,:; iq out ; 241 Mobile Home Park Overlay Zone NEBfOPLE eia RM-4 acr. z-1e °"R 3~a you T(MHP) RCL 81 RCL 8089-0@ _ _ CUP T CL (MHPI RCL m-fit-lm CUP 2633 T(MHP) CUP14fi CUP 2646 AOJ 0158 eyp®78/- a r~ W m J r T VACANT RS2 1 DUFJ4 T SCHWEIT2ER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TOLA AVE RS2 RCL 61-86-']] 1ouEACH VARYB7fi Portion A: General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456 Portion B: General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456 Reclassification No. 2007-00200 Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05204 Tentative Tract Map No. 17047 Portion C: General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456 Requested By. LA VUE LLC CITY OF ANAHEIM (Initiated General Plan Amendment for Portions A & C) Portion A: 2800 - 2816 West Lincoln Avenue Portion 8: 121 - 131 South Dale Avenue Portion C: 125 - 137 South Dale Avenue TOLA AlV~E a RS2 g 1DU EA H ~ pf '~ 9~bJectPraperty Date: Odober 29, 2007 Scale: 1"= 200' Q.S. No. 13 19352 Portion A General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456 Portion B: General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456 Reclassification No. 2007-00200 Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05204 Tentative Trad Map No. 17047 Portion C: General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456 Requested By: LA VUE LLC Subject Property CITY OF ANAHEIM Date: Odober29, 2007 (Initiated General Plan Amendment Scale: 1"= 200' for Portions A ~ C) O.S. No. t 3 Portion A: 2800 - 2816 West Lincoln Avenue Portion B: 121 - 131 South Dale Avenue Portion C: 125 - 137 Scufh Dale Avenue 10352 Date of Aeoal Photo: 2006 ~~HEIM C9 /P C~ ~D P 2 j D . F DUNDED ~g5 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 76&5139 Fax:(714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.ne[ ITEM N®. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: OCTOBER 29, 2007 FROM: PLANNING SERVICES MANAGER SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT' NO.2007-00456, RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2007-00200, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05204, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17047 LOCATION:'': Portion A: 2800 - 2816 West Lincoln Avenue. Portion B: 121 and 131 South Dale Avenue Portion Ci 125-137 South Dale Avenue APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant and propertyowner is Max Ebrahimzadeh with La Vue LLC. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval on Portion B identified above, to construct a 14-unit attached single-family condominium project with modification to permit a landscape setback of one foot: and building setback' of 13 feet along the rear property line where five feet'and 20 feet are required; respectively. The applicant also proposes 31 feet' between buildings where 40 feet is required:: ThisprojecYrequires aGeneral Plan Amendmentand Reclassification to allow the density proposed and establish the'' appropriate zone foithe property:: A tentative tractmap is'also requested to create the subdivision. Staff requests' approval of a General Plan Amendment for Portions A and C to amend the Land Use Element Map of the General Plan to redesignate these two surrounding> 'properties from the Corridor Residential to the Low-Medium Density Residential:. designation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission take the following actions:. (a) By motion, approve a Negative Declaration: {b) By resolution; approve General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456. (c) By resolution; approve Reclassification No: 2007-00200. (d) By motion, approve a waiver. of minimum setback: between buildings. (e) By resolution; approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05204. (f) By resolution; approve Tentative Tract Map No. 17047. l GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-00456 October 29, 2007. Page 2 of 5 BACKGROUND: At the applicant's request, this hearing was continued from the September 5, 2007, Planning Commission meeting. Portion A is currently developed with a strip commercial center and adrive-through restaurant and is zoned General Commercial (C-G). Portion B is currently developed with two single-familyresidences and is zoned Multiple-family Residential (RM-4). Portion C is developed with a recently constructed 14-unit condominium development. and is zoned Multiple-family Residential (RM-3). The General Plan designates all' of these properties for Corridor Residential land uses. Properties to the west and south are designated for Medium Density Residential land uses,. to the north across. Lincoln Avenue for Comdor' Residential Land Uses and the east across Dale Avenue for Corridor Residential and Low- Medium Density Residential land uses. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to construct an attached condominium development consisting of 14 units within three buildings on Portion B. The buildings`wouldbe situated in a "IJ" formation with a centrally-located private driveway. The unit entries would be located opposite the garages, facing the perimeter of the property. Two of the buildings are oriented with their sides facing Dale Avenue. The end units in these buildings are oriented toward the. street so that the entryway and porch faces the street. Please refer to the project summary chart attached to the staff report for projecf details. The applicant proposes an amendment to the General Plan from the Comdor Residential to the Low-Medium Density Residential: designation and a zone change from the RM-4 to the RM-3 zone. in order to implement the project... This is requested because the proposed density exceeds thaf allowed by he current General Plan designation and the current zoning is intended for multiple-family apartment developments. Staff has initiated an amendment to the General Plan from the Corridor Residential to the Low-Medium Density Residential designation f_or the Portion A which is located to the north and Portion C which is to theisouth. ' A conditional use permit for a Residential Planned Unit Development is requested, as well as modification of standards for he landscape and building'setbacks along the rear property line. One foofof landscaping and a 13 foot building setback is proposed, while five feet of landscaping and 20 feet building setback is required: A modification of the code requirements for setback between buildings is requested since the applicant proposes approximately 31 feet between buildings and 40 feet is required between two three story buildings. ANALYSIS: Issue: General Plan Amendment. The applicant .requests an amendment to the Land Use Element Map of the General Plan to redesignate Portion B from the Comdor Residential land use designation to the Low-Medium Density Residential land use designation. Staff proposes a City-initiated amendment for Portions A and C, also from the Corridor Residential land use. designation to the Low-Medium Density Residential land use designation to create one consistent General Plan for the entire corner. The attached Exhibit A shows the existing and proposed General Plan designations for the project site. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-00450 October 29, 2007 The existing Comdor Residential designation is intended to provide forquality residential development on minimum one-acre project sites for single-family attached townhouse style housing typically fronting on'arterial highways: This designation is intended to provide for housing. opportunities along the City's arterial corridors and is implemented by the RM-1 "zone: The permitted density range for Corridor Residential is from zero up to 13.0 dwelling untsper gross acre. The proposed Low-Medium Density Residential land use designation is intended to provide for the development ofsmall-lot single-family homes, condominiums, townhomes; and apartments. This designations typically implemented by the Single Family Residential (RS-4) and Multiple Family Residential (RM-1, RM-2; and RM-3) zones.' The Low-Medium Density Residential> land use designationwould permiYa theoretical maximum of up to 15 units of a density of 18 ' dwelling' units per gross acre for this: property: Upon the initial submittal of the applicant's requested proposal, staff was opposed to the requested change in General Plan designation because it would be considered "spof zoning" due to the inconsistency between the proposed designationof Portion B and the adjacent properties (Portions A and C)i Uponfurther analysis, staffbelieves that the Low-Medium Density Residential designation is appropriate for this corner for a number of reasons. First; Portion C was approved prior to the Comprehensive General Plan Update and is currently developed to the density allowed under the proposed' designation: The development proposed on Portion B would be compatible with the newly constructed townhomes on Portion G While the townhome development on Portion C is comprised of a different layout than the current proposal, the site also includes i4 units ona`pazcel of the same ize. Portion A ispartially developed with a recently constructed drive-through restaurant; however, the remainder of the site, which is an L- shapedparcel, is`improved with an older strip retail center. This site is identified in the Housing Element as a Housing Opportunity site and staff believes that a designation with a higherdensity will provide greater incentive to develop the property for residential use: !The existing commercial. uses on thissite will not be affected by the General Plan Amendment,'since they aze consistent with the Commercial zoning which will remain inplace. The property owner for Portion C was contacted via telephone regarding the City-initiated General Plan amendment for his property and hisonly concern was proper notification of the new and future homeowners in the new condominium development: While the City does not have updated ownership information for the 14 units; public hearing notices were sent to the' occupanf ofeach condominium unit; Additionally,' the staff report was sent to the developer of the site so that he could provide copies to buyers: The property owners of Portion C have. been sent a letter detailing the nature and implications of this request by the City. At the time of printing; staff had received a phone call from one of the two property owners who did not have any concerns with the proposed General Plan amendment. Issue: Zone change. The .applicant requests that the property be rezoned from the RM-4 zone to the RM-3 zone, The requested rezoning would be compatible with the proposed General Plan designation ofLow-Medium Density Residential. The RM-3 zone inconsistent with the zoning of the adjacent condominiums to the south and would be the proper implementation zone for the type of development proposed. 1 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-0045G October 29, 2007 Page 4 of 5 Issue: Conditional Use Permit.. A conditional use permit is required for any Residential Planned Unit Deve]opment. The project is compatible with the surrounding multiple-family residential uses, including the condominium development to the south (Portion C) and the apartmentcomplex to the west. The project complieswith all requirements of the RM-3 Zone with the exception of the required landscape and building setbacks along the rear property line and the required setback between buildings on the same site.. Issue: Modification to Standards for landscape and building setbacks. Modification to standards is allowed in order to achieve good project design, privacy, livability, and compatibility with surrounding uses: The7equired landscape and building setback is a development standard that may be modified by conditional use permit; Code requires a five foot landscape setback and 20 foot building setback. The applicant proposes. a reaz landscape setback. ' of one foot and a building setback of 13 feet and 3 inches: The proposed building setback is adequate because this setback is adjacent to a row of carports for the neighboring apartment complex; therefore, privacy is not a concern. The one foot planter will be able to' accommodate clinging vines to soften the block walland prevent graffiti: opportunities: Staff further recommends that the. space between. the building and property line aze betterserved as entry porches in order to provide additional private recreation area for this development Issue: Setback between buildings. Code requires a minimum sepazaton of 40 feet between three story buildings. The applicant proposes a separation ofapproximately 31 feet. Staff believes thaYunique circumstances existpertaining to the parcel width df 150 feet: Due to the width of the lot, once the required depth of the garages are accounted for, minimal azea is left for the drive aisle, living area within the unit and setbacks adjacent to property lines: Providing the Code required setbacks between the buildings would create a greater impact to the livability of theproject, especially since the unit entriesare oriented toward the sides of the property; rather than the interior drive aisle where the deviation is requested. The 31 foot separation allows for adequate internal circulation within the central driveway andprovides greater separation between the structures within this project. and the adj acent properties: The deviation: also providesmore opportunities for useful open space and andscaping alongthe fronts of units. Issue: Elevations. Staff has concerns with bertain aspects of the elevations. The overall architectural style and ype ofenhaneed materials are appropriate for the area: Staff's concerns pertain to the placement of enhanced materialsandprojeetions on one of the buildings facing Dale which appear to emphasize the height of the building: Staff is also concerned with the monotone colorscheme used throughout the project:: A condition of approval has been added that would require that the elevations be reviewed by the City's architectural consultant in order to address these speeifidconcerns: 7 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-00456. October 29, 2007 Page 5 of 5 C®NCI~iJSI®IV: Staff recommends approval of this prof ect because it furthers the goals of the General Plan by providing residences on a housing opportunity site. The project creates a livable community and complies with code except where there are physical constraints caused by the shape of the parcel. Respectfully submitted, Conc ed by, ,~ . ~1 ~,~ P 1 _ ~~~ Acting Principal Planner Pl ~ mg Services Manager. Attachments: f 1. Project Summary ~~~ / 2. Exhibit A -Existing and Proposed C~'kneral Plan 3. Draft Resolutions 4. Justification of Waiver Forms A'I'TACIi10~IENT N®. 1 PR®JECT SUIVIMAf2~' Development'Standaril,' ;. ~' = "P'ropo'sed P.roject? - ~: =RM-3 Slandarils Site Area 0.84 acre N/A General Plan Densi 17 du/acre 18 du/acre Lot Covera e 32.8% 45% Avg. Rec/Leisure Area per 536 s.f. 350 s.f. DU Parkin 39 s aces 39 s aces Landscaping Front (Dale Avenue) 20 feet 20 feet Side 5 feet 5 feet Rear 1 foot 5 feet Building Setback Front (Dale Avenue) 20 feet 20 feet Side 20 feet 20 feet Rear 13 feet, 3 inches 20 feet Buildin Hei ht 33 feet, 8 inches 40 feet Number of bedrooms/baths 2 bedroom/2,5 bath = 4 units N/A 3 bedroom/2.5 bath = 10 units 2 bdrm = 1,697 s.f. 2 bdrm = 825 s.f. Size of units 3 bdrm = 1,379 s.£, 1,725 s.f. 3bdrm = 1,000 s.f. ' p d yyo ~ O 6. ~r F i ® Q O ® O ~ ~ 0 m N e ~ r ~~++ N pyp 1.I~ ® U ~ ~ U' J U Z~ ~I` i8 a~ h ' ~I (n (/] z L 2 ~ r Z ¢ o WU / ~' i~bV$ pi _. ~ ® ~ Z ~ og ~ z m ~~ E E~ ~ s qq ~ za ~ ZU V Wd Z~ R ~ Z~ ® ~ Z c c 0 4Z 8 R~9 ~ pQ x ~ ~ Oa W2 zr ~ ~ WS mr ~' m0 CR U m0 c ~ w °• ~p ~ ~ a K od .. o ¢O n ¢O '~ ~ ' ld ~ o w ~ ~ ~ m. 9o w ~-°o «E ~ d3 ' U 9 t V'O A J R ¢ 0 U ' ~ N Z ~ ~~ ~ J ~, U Z W J Q g 0 3f1N3nb 3 1d4 ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~, L ~, ~ '£ ! ~ 2 m C .~ ~ C s O t~ '~~' G O ,~ m'3 - C O a3 ~ g a my ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~, t c= ~~ `° ~ ° ' o c v t :~ ~ N a~ 3 :: ~ J 1O E c ~ 9 9 .y d ~ R' ~nRa>FT~ RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-00456 PERTAINING TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT WHEREAS, ON May 25, 2004, the City Council, by its Resolution No. 2004-95, adopted a comprehensive update to the General Plan for the City of Anaheim; and WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified petition for amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan, designated as General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456, to re-designate the subject property situated in the City. of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described below from the Corridor Residential land use designation to the Low- Medium Density land use designation; and PORTION A PARCEL 1: ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, AS SHOW ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 11 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:': COMMENCING AT A POINT IN THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 13, SOUTH 89 DEG. 41' 15", WEST 291.16 FEET FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEG. 12' 20", EAST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED ON PAGE 2 OF THAT CERTAIN DEGREE, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH WAS RECORDED OCTOBER 15, 1963, IN BOOK 6762, PAGE 63 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID LAND IS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 74, PAGE 5, RECORD OF SURVEYS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, 66.00 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OETHE NORTH 66 FEET OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN; THENCE CONTINiJING SOUTH 0 DEG. 12' 20", EAST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE 236.55 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEG. 41' 15", EAST PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER 89.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 DEG.. 12' 20" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN SAID , DEGREE 236.55 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 66 FEET OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER THENCE SOUTH 89 DEG. 41' 15", WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE 89.50 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 1: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, I THE RANCHO LOS COYOTES, AS SAID SECTION IS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 11, OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THE EAST 4 ACRES OF THE NORTH 10 ACRES OF THE EAST 13 OF THE EAST 30 ACRES OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 13. -1- PC2007- EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE SOUTH 296 FEET THEREOF.. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE WEST 89.50 FEET. ALSO EXCEPTION THEREFROM THE NORTH 66 FEET THEREOF. PORTION B PARCEL l: THE NORTH 148.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 296.00 FEET OF°THE EAST 4 ACRES OF THE NORTH 10 ACRES OF THE EAST 13 ACRES OF THE NORTH 18 ACRES OF THE EAST 30 ACRES OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTH 53.5 FEET THEROF, PARCEL 2: THE NORTH 53.5 FEET OF THE SOUTH 296 FEET OF THE EAST 4 ACRES OF THE NORTH 10 ACRES OF THE EAST 13 ACRES OF THE NORTH 18 ACRES OF THE EAST 30 ACRES OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST,. S.B.B. &M. PORTION C; THE SOUTH 148 FEET OF. THE EAST 4 ACRES OF THE NORTH 10 ACRES OF THE EAST 13 ACRES OF THE NORTH 18 ACRES OF THE EAST 30 ACRES OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN.. WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 18.68 of the Anaheim Municipal Code; provisions of the General Plan maybe amended'whenever the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare require such amendment when adopted by a resolution ofthe City Council in the'manner prescribed by ]aw; and WHEREAS; the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on August 20, 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 heaz 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 September 5, 2007 and October 29, 2007, Planning Commission meeting; and -2- PC2007- WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456 proposed to amend "Figure LU-4" of the Land Use Element of the Genera] Plan to re-designate the subject property, as shown in the attached map marked as Exhibit "A," from the Corridor Residential land use designation to the Low-Medium Density land use designation; 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 applicant proposes the redesignation of Portion B, and City staff proposes redesignation of Portions A and C from the Corridor Residential land use designation to the Low- Medium Density Residential land use designation. 2. That the General Plan designates properties to the east of the subject property for Low- Medium Residential land uses which aze currently developed with multiple-family residential land uses. In addition, the proposed designation for Portion C would be consistent with the existing density developed on the site. Therefore, Exhibit A should be adopted to redesignate the subject property for. Low-Medium Density Residential land uses. 3. That the proposed land use designation of subject property is necessary and/or desirable for the orderly and proper development of the community. 4. That the proposed land use designation of subject property does properly relate to the General Plan designations established in close proximity to subject property and to the zones and their permitted uses generally established throughout the community. 5. That *** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning Con~rnission has reviewed the proposal; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declazation reflects She 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 pursuant to the above findings, the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council of the City of Anaheim adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456 pertaining to the Land Use Element, Exhibit A, to redesignate the property from the Corridor Residential land use designation to the Low-Medium Density Residential land use designation. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionazy 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. -3- PC2007- THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 29, 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 maybe replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of anappeal. - CHAII2MAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Grace Medina, Senior Secretazy of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on October 29, 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- ~nxa~~~ RESOLUTION NO. PC2007-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NO.2007-00200 BE GRANTED (121 -131 SOUTH DALE AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified petition for Reclassification for real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as follows:. PARCEL L• THE NORTH 148.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 296.00 FEET OF THE EAST 4 ACRES OF THE NORTH 10 ACRES OF THE EAST 13 ACRES OF THE NORTH 18 ACRES OF THE EAST 30 ACRES OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTH 53.5 FEET THEROF. PARCEL 2: THE NORTH 53.5 FEET OF THE SOUTH 296 FEET OF THE EAST 4 ACRES OF THE NORTH 10 ACRES OF THE EAST 13 ACRES OF THE NORTH 18 ACRES OF THE EAST 30 ACRES OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, S.B.B. &M. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on August 20, 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 reclassification and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and that said public hearing was continued to the September 5, 2007 and October 29, 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 applicant proposes reclassification of subject property from the RM-4 (Multiple-Family Residential) zone to the RM-3 (Multiple-Family Residential) zone. 2. That the proposed RM-3 zone would be consistent with the proposed Low-Medium Density Residential land use designation of the General Plan. 3. That the proposed reclassification of subject property is necessary and/or desirable for the orderly and proper development of the community. -1- PC2007- 4. That the proposed reclassification of subject property does properly relate to the zones and their permitted uses locally established in close proximity to subject property and to the zones and their permitted uses generally established throughout the community. 5. That *** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and does hereby approve the Negative Declazation 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 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 RM-4 (Multiple-Family Residential) Zone and to incorporate said described property into the RM-3 (Multiple-Family Residential) Zone upon the following conditions which aze hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of subject property in order to preserve the health and safety of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: 1. That prior to introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, a preliminary title report. shall be furnished to the Planning Services Division showing the legal vesting of title, a legal description and containing a map of the property. That prior to placement of an ordinance rezoning subject property on an agenda for City Council consideration, Condition No. 1; above-mentioned, shall be completed. The City Council may approve or disapprove a zoning ordinance at its discretion. If the ordinance is disapproved, the procedure set forth in Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.60.140 shall apply.. The provisions or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of the Planning Commission unless said conditions are complied with within one (1) year from the date of this resolution, or such further time as the Planning Commission may grant. . 3. That completion of these reclassification proceedings is contingent upon approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456, Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05204 and Tentative Tract Map No. 17047. 4. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution shall not constitute a rezoning of, or a commitment by the City to rezone, the subject property; any such rezoning shall require an ordinance of the City Council, which shall be a legislative act, which maybe approved ordenied by the City Council at its sole discretion. -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 October 29, 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, Grace Medina, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on October 29, 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- [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2007-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05204 BE APPROVED (121 -131 SOUTH 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 follows: PARCEL 1 THE NORTH 148.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 296.00 FEET OF THE EAST 4 ACRES OF THE NORTH 10 ACRES OF THE EAST 13 ACRES OF THE NORTH 18 ACRES OF THE EAST 30 ACRES OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, SAN BERNARDiNO BASE AND MERIDIAN. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTH 53.5 FEET THEROF. PARCEL 2: THE NORTH 53.5 FEET OF THE SOUTH 296 FEET OF THE EAST 4 ACRES OF THE NORTH 10 ACRES OF THE EAST 13 ACRES OF THE NORTH 18 ACRES OF THE EAST 30 ACRES OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, S.B.B. &M. WHEREAS, the Plarming Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on August 20, 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 "Procedures", to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed reclassification and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and that said public hearing was continued to the September 5, 2007 and October 29, 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 applicant proposes a conditional use permit to construct a 14-unit detached single-family residential planned unit subdivision with modification of development standards and waiver of the following provision: CODE SECTION N0.18:06.090.050 Minimum setback between buildinRS. 40 feet required; 31 feet proposed). -1- PC2007- 2. That the requested waiver is hereby approved, because unique circumstances exist pertaining to the parcel width of 150 feet. Due to the width of the lot, once the required depth of the garages are accounted for, minimal area is left for the drive aisle, living area within the unit and, setbacks adjacent to property lines. The narrow nature of the lot would limit the usability of the setbacks along the north and south property lines if this waiver was not granted. 3. That the proposed request to construct a 14-unit attached single-family residential planned unit condominium complex with modification to standards is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section Nos. 18.06.030.040.0402 (Dwellings -Single-Family Attached) and 18.06.160. 4. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the proposed project is compatible with surrounding land uses and complies with all provisions of the code except as requested herein. 5: That the new buildings are compatible with the scale, mass, bulk, and orientation of existing buildings in the surrounding area. The project is consistent with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City. 6. That vehicular and pedestrian access is adequate. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. 7: That granting of 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. 8. That *** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; .and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition:: CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the. public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit on the basis of the aforementioned findings. Prior to issuance of a buildin¢ 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 fanal landscape and fencing plans in compliance with Zoning Code requirements for the subject property shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. Said -2- PC2007- plans shall show minimum 24-inch box .size trees or a minimum brown trunk height of 8 to 10 feet, shrubs, groundcover, and clinging vines to be planted in layers on all walls visible from the public right-of--way and within landscaped setbacks. The landscape material selected shall be appropriate to the width of the planter area. Decorative pavement shall be shown at the vehicular entry to the site. Any decision made by the Planning Department regarding said plan maybe appealed to the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. All trees shall be properly and professionally maintained by the property owner to ensure,mature, healthy growth. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 2. That final detailed elevation plans including colors and materials shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. The elevations shall be peer reviewed by the City's architectural consultant in order to address specific concerns to (1) reduce the amount of stucco used on the east elevations, facing Dale Avenue, (2) modify the material enhancements and projections to de-emphasize the height of the buildings and (3) vary the monotone color scheme. Any decision by staff regarding said plans maybe appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. 3. That prior to the issuance of the building permit, the Lincoln Avenue sewer upgrade project shall be awarded to a contractor. 4. That all air-conditioning facilities and other ground-mounted equipment shall be properly shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent residential properties. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits: 5. That roll-up garage doors shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. Said doors shall be installed and maintained as shown on submitted plans. 6. That all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be fully screened by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 7. That an automatic fire sprinkler system shall be designed, installed and maintained as required by the Fire Department. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 8. 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.) and shall be subject to the review and approval of the appropriate City departments. 9. 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 on plans submitted for building permits. -3- PC2007- 10. That gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic in the adjacent public street. That if gates are proposed, such installation shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan No: 475 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 1 I. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation'Manager for review and approval of wall and fence locations to determine conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115. 12. That the owner shall be responsible for the relocation/removai of any equipment in the right-of- way in the event that street widening or the proposed driveway entry conflict with existing equipment. 13. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street setback azea in a manner fully screened from all public streets. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault shall be brought up to current standazds. 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 areas in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be shown on plans and approved by Water Engineering and Cross Connection Control Inspector before submittal for building permits. 14. That since this project has a common landscaping area exceeding 2,500 squaze feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed and shall comply with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 15. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Services Standards Specification. Any water service and/or fire line that does not meet current standazds shall be upgraded if continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The applicant shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or abandon any water service or fire line. 16. That prior to application for water meters, fire line or submitting the water improvement plans for approval, the developer/owner shall submit to the Public Utilities Water Engineering Division an estimate of the maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide the estimated water demands: Any off=site water system: improvements required to serve the project shall occur in accordance with Rule No. 1 SA.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules .and Regulations. 17. That prior to issuance of the first building permit, excluding model homes, the final map shall be submitted to and approvedby 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). -4- PC2007- 18. That the owner shall submit a letter to the Planning Services Division requesting termination of Variance No. 3459 (waiver of maximum structural height and required block wall to construct a 24-unit apartment complex) since this permits are no longer necessary, Prior to issuance of a eradine permit, the following conditions shall be complied with: 19. That the applicant shall submit to the Public Works /Development Services, for review and approval, a Water Quality Management Plan, as described in Drainage Area Management Plan for Orange County. Said WQMP shall: ® Address Site DesignBest Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious azeas, creating reduced or "zero dischazge" azeas, and conserving natural areas. ® Incorporate applicable Routine Source Contro] BMPs. ® Incorporate Treatment Control BMPs. ® Describe the long-term operation and maintenance, identifies the responsible parties, and funding mechanisms for the Treatment Control BMPs. 20. That the applicant shall demonstrate that coverage has been obtained under California's General Permit for Stormwater Dischazges Associated with Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board .and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Dischazge 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. 21. That since the site is located within a liquefaction zone on a Seismic Hazazd Map issued by the State of California Divisions of Mines and Geology (DMG), the developer must submit a geotechnical report that meets the requirements fora "Screening Investigation for Liquefaction Potential" as identified in DMG special publication 117. "Guidelines for Evaluating and' Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California". Please note that if the findings of the screening investigation cannot demonstrate the absence of liquefaction hazards, then the comprehensive quantitative evaluation must be conducted to develop mitigation recommendations to effectively reduce the hazard to an acceptable level. 22. That the applicant shall submit a Drainage Study prepazed by a registered professional Civil Engineer in the State of California. -The Study shall be based upon and reference the latest edition of the Orange County Hydrology Manual and the applicable City of Anaheim Master Plan of Drainage fox the project area. All drainage sub-azea boundaries per the Master Plan for Drainage shall be maintained. The Study shall include: an analysis of 10-, 25- and 100-yeaz storm frequencies; an analysis of all drainage impacts to the existing storm drain system based upon the ultimate project build-out condition; and address whether off-site and/ or on-site drainage improvements (such. as detention/ retention basins or surface runoff reduction) will be required to prevent downstream properties from becoming flooded. -5- PC2007- Prior to final building and zoning inspections the following conditions shall be complied with: 23. Remove the existing driveway approaches on Dale Avenue and replace with curb, gutter, parkway landscaping and sidewalk. Qbtain a Right of Way Construction Permit from the Public Works/Development Services. Improvements must be complete prior to fmal building and zoning inspections. 24. Prior to issuance of 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 WQMP • Demonstrate that an adequate number 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. 25. 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 mazked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 5, and as conditioned herein. General Conditions:' 26. That all requests for new water services or fire lines; as well as any modifications; relocations, or abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. 27. That this Conditional Use Permit is granted subject to the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456, Reclassification No. 2007-00200, and approval and recordation of Tentative Tract Map No. 17047, now pending. 28. 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. 29. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, acid removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24) hours from time of discovery, 30. That the CC&Rs for the development shall include provisions that requires that the two-car garages be utilized for the parking of vehicles. 31. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed requesTonly 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 regazding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. -6- PC2007- 32. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval maybe 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. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 29, 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 maybe replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Grace Medina, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on October 29, 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 -7- PC2007- 7 [IDRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2007-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR TENTATNE TRACT MAP NO. 17047 BE GRANTED (121 AND 131 SOUTH DALE AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Tentative Tract Map No. 17047 for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: PARCEL 1: THE NORTH 14$:00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 296.00 FEET OF THE EAST 4 ACRES OF THE NORTH 10 ACRES OF THE EAST 13 ACRES OF THE NORTH 18 ACRES OF THE EAST 30 ACRES OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTH 53.5 FEET THEROF. PARCEL 2:' THE NORTH 53.5 FEET OF THE SOUTH 296 FEET OF THE EAST 4 ACRES OF THE NORTH 10 ACRES OF THE EAST 13 ACRES OF THE NORTH 18 ACRES OF THE EAST 30 ACRES OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, S.B.B. &M. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on August 20, 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 heaf and consider evidence for and against said proposed reclassification and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and that said public hearing was continued to the September 5, 2007 and October 29, 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 deteimine the following facts: 1. That the proposed tentative map, including its design and improvements, is consistent with the proposed Anaheim General Plan. 2. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed development and the density proposed. 3. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will observe all existing easements for the use of, or access through the property. -1- PC2007- 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: 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 enviromnent. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby grant .subject Petition for Tentative Tract Map No. 17047, 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: Prior to approval of the final map or within a period of two (2) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, the followine conditions shall be complied with: 1. 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)... 2. The legal property owner shall execute a Subdivision Agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, to complete the required public improvements at the legal property owner's expense. Said agreement shall be submitted to the Public Works /Development Services approved by the City Attorney and City Engineer and then recorded concurrently with the final parcel map. 3. That the access drive, sanitary sewer and storm drain within the development shallbe privately maintained. Improvement plans for the sanitary sewer, and private drainage system shall be submitted to the Public Works/Development Services concurrently with the final map. 4. That a maintenance covenant, shall be submitted to the Public Works/Development Services and approved by the City Attorney's office. The covenant shall include provisions for maintenance of private facilities, including landscape and building maintenance, compliance with approved Water Quality Management Plan, and a maintenance exhibit. The covenant shallbe recorded concurrently with the final map. 5. That the legal property owner shall execute an agreement concerning Community Drive Approaches, in a form approved by the City Attorney. Said agreement shallbe .submitted to the Public Works/Development Services, approved by the City Attorney and then recorded concurrently with the final map. -2- PC2007- 6. That the developer shall submit street improvement plans to the Public Works /Development Services to improve Dale Avenue (4-lane secondary arterial) in conformance with Public Works Standard Detail 160-A and the City of Anaheim General Plan. 7. That the abandonment of any existing City of Anaheim public utilities easements conflicting with building footprints is required. The applicant shall submit an abandonment application, copy of recorded easement, Grant Deed or Title Report, and sketch of area to be abandoned for review and processing. 8. That all condominium units shall be assigned street addresses by the Building Division. Street names For any new public or private street (if requested by the developer or required by the City) shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Division. 9. That private sanitary sewer and storm drains for this development shall be privately maintained. 10. That recordation of a Save Harmless in-lieu of Encroachment Agreement is required for any private storm drains connecting to a City storm drain: 11. That approval of this tract map is granted subject to the .approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2007-00456, Reclassification No. 2007-00200 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05204. 12. 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 Deparhnent mazked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 5, and as conditioned herein. General Conditions: 13. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion through the provision of regulaz landscaping maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24) hours from the time of discovery. 14. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval maybe 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. 15. That extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval maybe granted in accordance with Section 18:60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal. 16. 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. -3- 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 chazges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 29, 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 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Grace Medina, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on October 29, 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 2002 SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2007- a _ a a ~ ~ 4 _ - _ a __. . Attachment -Item No. 2 SECTION 4 PETITIONER'S STA"fEN1ENT OF 7USTIFICATION FOR VARIANCEICODE WAVER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARHING WAVER) REQUEST FOR WAVER OF CODE SECTION: r S • QlA ' oRO • 4 S~ PERTAINING TO: 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: That [here are special circumstances applicable to the properly, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other propery under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjo}'ed 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 [hc 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 circums~ces that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings? _ Yes - No. If your answer is "Yes;' describe the special circumstances; 2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in [he vicinity which are in the same zone as your property? _ Yes /_ No If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different: 3, Do the special circumstances applicable to tl~ property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone?-/Yes _No 4. O ~- Ci'j ~71~i ~I~ M TW a 1 ° I t1">rb~ The sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be [o prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege no[ shared by other property in the same vicinity and zoae whic~ s not V~~se express ae orized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances aze not permitted. h'' C~~ ip _ ~3 - a ~ rgna[ure of Property Owner o orize~ Date CONDITIONAL USE PERMTTNARIANCE NO. 37625\DECEMBER 1:, 2000 • u ~ a ~® w 6 Were the specjal circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property owners)? _/ Yes _ No ~vlLSy,RE 9L RCL 63 646 ~ti RCL 53-54-27 G~ ~ nFFIr.F a ~ ° 4~ A'VAHF ® , g1RCHMON7 DRIVE RS-1 p,00D _~_ C-G ~ G ;L 73-74-6 RCL S&59-61 LAW T-CUP 2006-05112 OFF ES CUP 2603-09663 cuP 3434 OFFICE SALT A ANA ~RF~wgY ~~ 5/ \ T-CUP T CUP ~ CUP: 3 o N °'!c L ~r 5 o CE ~° I. ~ ~ j RCL 60-61- VAR 1097 SMALL COMMI I FIRMS 472' LINCOLN AVENUE n~ ~,° ~bN ¢> CH RCL 64-6553 VAR 2520 5 I ~ RCL 66.67-14 RCL 56-57-66 VAR 1968 5 F- W N b SMALLII Q O J I ~ RCL 78-79-36 VAR 2932 VACANT ~L. CUP 3338 OFFICE BLDG. rvo. a ~i~SN~R ~ F q ~FRUF STRIA4 FIRMS 9N~9y~ RCL 56-57-66 ~q (CUP 556) EMBASSY ST vri cv n vv Iwn SRS>AB I v.-. ev c~ ve I qCL SF57A6 qf.L 66fiT.flfi Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05258 Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-177 Requested By: ELIZA STIPKOVICH ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Subject Property Date: October 29, 2007 Scale: 1" = 200' Q.S. No. 53 '10393 "K qVE~ I 1 ~' 6MALL INS. ~p ~~` FIR///M6 ~/ u) o Rdi/~o~ ~.. 1 Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05258 Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-177 Requested By: ELIZA STIPKOVICH ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1501 West Lincoln Avenue Subject Property Date: October 29, 2007 Scale: 1" = 200' Q.S. No. 53 10393 200 S. Anaheim Blvd Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net ITEM N®. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: OCTOBER 29, 2007 FROM: PLANNING SERVICES MANAGER SUBJECT:' CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05258 ' ' TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.2004-I77' LOCATION: 1501 West Lincoln Avenue APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNERS The applicant is the Anaheim'Redevelopment Agency and the property owners are the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency and Gina Oklejas representing Sherwood Automotive Group.~ REQUEST: The applicant requests apptoval of a conditional use permit to establish as automobile sales dealership with automotive repair and to replace an existing monopole with a telecommunications facility withlandscape and building setbacks that are less than code requires adjacent to the freeway, Loara Street and Lincoln Avenue. A tentative parcel map is requested to combine. eight parcels and the abandonedportionof Manchestef Court into one parcel: RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission take the following. actions; (a) By motion, approve a Negative Declaration.. (b) By resolution, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05258. (c) By resolution, approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-177 BACKGROUND: This 3.3-acre property is currently vacantwith a monopole telecommunications facility, and is zoned Commercial General'(C-G). The General Plan designates this property and surrounding properties'for General Commercial land uses. The Interstate 5 Freeway is adjacent to the north side of this property.: This project was previously approved in 2004 but was never developed due to financing concerns. The entitlements have since expired and the applicant is seeking approval of this project again: Of the 3.3-acre property, 3 acres are owned by the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency and the remainder is owned by the Oklejas family (Sherwood Automotive Group). The entire site contains eight parcels and right-of-way from the recently abandoned Manchester Court which has been conveyed to the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency: Tentative Tract Map No: 2004-177 was previously approved to consolidate these parcels into one parcel No changes are proposed to this map, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05258 October 29, 2007 Page 2 of 3 PROPOSAL: The automobile dealership will consist of a 3-story building with automotive sales and repair. The first floor and mezzanine contain the primary customer service areas including sales offices; parts sales, car wash for dealership use only and auto repair bays. The second and third floors are designated for employee parking and automobile storage and display. The dealership intends to have a total of 45 employees.' Hours of operation are between 7 a.m: and 9 p:m. daily: The project wilt comply with Code required parking as the site plan shows a totalof 535 parking spaces and Code requires a minimum of 385 spaces, Please'refer to the attached project summary chart for project details. The site currently contains a telecommunications monopole:. The applicant is proposing to remove'andYeplace the monopole with a stealth telecommunications facility on the roof ofthe automobile dealership. ;This telecommunications facility, including equipmenfand antennas, will be completely screened by the building parapet.. Code permits the construction of telecommunications facilities which are integrated within a building subject to approval of a Telecommunications Antenna Permit: Aprojectbondition willrequire the applicant to submit finalplans forthe telecommunications equipment'for review by staff to'ensu~e that the facility blends with thebuilding and that the telecommunications permiYis obtained. ANALYSIS: Code permits automobile sales dealerships with'automotive repair in the General Commercial zone subject to approval of a conditional use permit. In addition, the applicant has requested setbacks that are less than codeYequires. The proposed tentative parcel map would create one consolidated parcel to develop the auto dealership. +Following is staff's analysis and recommendations on the requested setback deviations and building elevations. Issue: Landscape and Buildin¢ Setbacks. The applicant requests to construct the building closer to the property lines and with less landscaping than what is permitted by Code. The amount of deviation`varies depending on the location as described below: Lincoln Avenue: The required building and7andscape setback along Lincoln Avenue is IS feet,:and the .applicant. isproposing a setback of 10-15 feet. The applicant has indicated tharthe railroad right-of--way crosses the property atYhe southwest comer, constraining development, opportunities on the site. Loara Street: The required building and landscape setback along Loara Street is 10 feet and the. applicant is proposing 5 feet. Because of the planned future abandonment of Loara Street, the. applicant believes the required 10 foot setback would be an unnecessary burden to the project. Interstate 5 Freeway: The. required landscape setback adjacent to the freeway is 10 feet and the applicant is proposing 3 feet. The applicant states that the proposed 3 foot landscaped setback is of a higher grade than the freeway right-of--way and not visible from the freeway. In addition, the freeway right-of--way provides an adequate buffer with existing landscaping. l CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.2007-05256 October 29, 2007 Page 3 of 3 Code requires a justification for all deviations from code requirements. Staff believes that: special circumstances' apply to this property because of the encroachment of the railroad right-of- way, the future abandonment of Loaza Street, the elevation of the property and the large amount of existing freeway landscaping: These unique characteristics do not apply to identically zoned properties in the vicinity; therefore, staff supports these deviations: Issue: Elevations: This project is located in a prominent location adjacent to a freeway and major.arterial highway: Although the requested project has been previously evaluated and approved for this same group of properties, staff has included specific conditions of approval requiring final review by the Planning Commission in order to ensure that the architecture of the project is still appropriate. The detailed elevations, landscaping and signs would be evaluated. by the City's consulting architect once the plans are prepazed. Conclusio®: Staff believes that the design of the proposed project and operafion of the proposed use would be compatible with the surrounding commercial and industrial uses and the adjacent I- 5 Freeway. The site is adequate to accommodate the proposed automotive sales dealership, and there is justification to approve the proposed deviation from required setbacks: Staff recommends approval of this request. Respectfully submitt/e///d, Con erred by, ~~~ ~C-~a Acting Principal Planner /Planning Services Manager. Attachments• ``= l .= 1, Project Summary 2: Statements of Justification A'I"'I'ACI~MEIV'I' N®. 1 PRO.SPCT S Y CY1P2007-05258 IPevelo""gent Standard ~ :Pro osed Pro'ect'. ~~ ~ ~-G~zone standards ~ _ Site Area 33 acres N/A Building and Landscape Adiacent to: Feet Setbacks Interstate 5 Lincoln Avenue Loaza Street 43 10-15 5 10 15 10 Pazking 535 spaces 385 s aces Building Height 53 feet, 5 inches 75 feet [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2007-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 2007-05258 BE GRANTED (1501 WEST LINCOLN 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: An irregularly-shaped approximately 3.3-acre area situated in the County of Orange, State of California, as shown in Attachment No. 1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full; WHEREAS, this property is developed with a monopole telecommunications Facility and is zoned General Commercial (C-G); and that the Anaheim General Plan designates the property for General Commercial land uses; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center. in the City of Anaheim on October 29, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public heating 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 forwhich a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.08.030.040.0402 (Automotive-Car Sales & Rental) with waiver of the following: (a) SECTION NO: 18.08.060.010 Minimum structural and landscape setback abutting an arterial highway. (15 feet required; 10-15 feet proposed) (b) SECTION NO: 18.08.060.010 Minimum structural and landscape setback abutting a local street and freeway (10 feet required for a local street; 5 feet proposed and 10 feet required for a freeway; 3 feet proposed) (c) SECTION NO. 18.40.060:030 Required improvement of public right-of--way (Withdrawn) -1- PC2007- 2. That the above-mentioned waiver (a) perkaining to setbacks abutting Lincoln Avenue is hereby approved as the railroad right-of--way crosses over the southwest comer of the property constraining the development potential of the property. 3. That the above-mentioned waiver (b) is hereby approved because Loara Street is identified for future abandonment. Since there will no longer be a street at this location, the requirement fora 10 foot setback would be an unnecessary burden to the project. This property is unique because it abuts a street that will be abandoned. 4. That the above-mentioned waiver (c) pertaining to required landscaping adjacent to a freeway is hereby approved. This property is unique because the grade of the property is higher than the freeway and the deviation would be imperceptible because of the grade difference. 5. That the proposed automobile sales dealership with automotive repair would not adversely affect the adjoining ]and uses and the growth and development of the azea in which it is proposed to be located because it is compatible with the surrounding uses.: 6. That the size and shape of the site is adequate to allow full-development of the automobile sales dealership in a manner not detrimental to the particulaz azea or to the health and safety. 7. That the traffic generated by the automobile sales dealership will not, under the conditions imposed, impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area.. 8. That granting this conditional use permit will not, under the conditions imposed, be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 9. That *** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to establish an automobile sales dealership with automotive repair; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declazation 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 properly in order to preserve the health and safety of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: -2- PC2007- Prior to issuance of a building permit or within a period of one (2) years from the date of this. resolution, whichever occurs first, the following conditions shall be complied with: 1. That the applicant shall submit final building elevation plans for review by the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. 2. That prior to the issuance of building permits, plans shall show any proposed gates and shall demonstrate that gates shall not be installed across any driveway in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public streets and that installation of any gates shall conform to the current version of Engineering Standard Detail 475: The location of any proposed gates shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. 3. That prior to final building and zoning inspection, fire lanes shall be posted with "No Parking Any Time." Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.That an application for street abandonment for Loaza Street shall be approved by the Public Works, Development Services Division. 4. That the Developer shall post a bond for all traffic related street improvements. All improvements shall be completed prior to final building and zoning inspection.' 5. The Developer shall obtain a permit for the abandonment of Loara Street from the Public Works, Development Services Division. 6. That street improvement plans shall be submitted for all traffic related improvements adjacent to the project site to Public Works/ Development Services for review and approval. These plans will show both sides of all streets and alleys adjacent to the property, including all driveways and utility installations, signing and striping.. 7. That rooftop address numbers shall be shown on roof plans according to Police Department specifications. 8. That the Developer shall coordinate with the PUC to remove .and relocate any railroad crossing signal equipment or any other related item to the7ailroad crossings at Loara Street and at Lincoln Avenue at the Developer's expense if the project requires street widening: Prior to final building and zoning inspections the followine conditions shall be complied with: 9. That the Developer shall remove and relocate any traffic signal equipment or any other related item to the traffic signal at Loara Street/ Lincoln Avenue at the Developer's expense ifthe project requires street widening: Should any items related to the traffic signal need to be relocated, prior to the issuance of the first building permit, traffic signal plans shall be submitted for all traffic related improvements adjacent to the project site to Public Works/ Traffic Engineering for review and approval 10. That the Developer shall remove and relocate any railroad crossing signal equipment or any other related item to the railroad crossings at Loaza Street and at Lincoln Avenue at the Developer's expense if the project requires street widening. -3- PC2007- 11. That the applicant shall submit a letter to the Planning Services staff from a licensed landscape architect certifying that the landscaping has been planted in accordance with the requirements of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 12. That street improvement plans shall be installedand completed prior to the first final building and zoning inspection. 13. 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 7, and as conditioned herein. General Conditions: 14. That approval of this conditional use permit is granted subject to the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 2004-177, now pending. 15. That the applicant complete aBurglary/Robbery Alarm Permit application, APD 516, and return it to the Police Department prior to initial alarm activation. 16. That the applicant file an Emergency Listing Card, Foim APD-281 with the Police Department. 17. That "No Trespassing 602(k) P.C." signs be posted at the entrances of the pazking azeas. Signs must be installed per Anaheim Police Deparkment specifications. 18. Thaf all entrances to pazking areas shall be posted with appropriate signs per 22658(a) C.V.C., to assist in removal of vehicles at the property owner's/manager's request. 19. 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. 20. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval maybe 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. 21. That extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval maybe granted in accordance with Section 18..60..170 of the Anaheim Municipal. 22. 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. -4- 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 I S days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 29, 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. CI-IAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CTTY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Grace Medina, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on October 29, 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 -5- PC2007- Attachment -Item No. 3 SECTION 4 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF NSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE W AVER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WANER) REQUEST FOR WANER OF CODE SECTION: I ~.~~ '~ 6D'c'~ y // pp (A separate statement is required for each Code waiver) PERTAINIlVG TO: ~~~^ ~ ~µNw '7 ~l c(Srrk®C a~P, uce~-i~' 10 l ,1. ~.~(in F~ t,nke.- Sections 1 &:03:040.030 and 18.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require [hat before any variance or Code waiver maybe granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the fallowing shall be shown: That there ere special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classiftcafion 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 mtder 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 amve at a decision, please answer each of the following quesfions regarding the propertyfor which a variance is sought, Fully and as completely as possible. if you need additional space, you may attach additional pages. Are there special cimumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topogrnphy, location or surroundings? ~ Yes _ No. If your answer is "Yes," describe the s' ~t r .. 2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the same zone as your property'? ~ Yes _ No // if your answer is "yes,"' describe how the property is different: Q~-~ ra:~r,~.I l' n_.-J i~DF r 'r6 3. Do tkrespecial circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges cutrenkly enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone? ~C Yes _No If your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances: 4. Were the special circumsmnces created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property owners)? Yes _No n f EXPLAIN: /l.~u Gy~-~3~ f+,let rx'+~rve.,X rzlti~-r,1- Gr ~U['ae~~~~1 Tate sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and ao 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 otherw~i axgi: ly authorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted. ~~L Signature of operty wn or Auth rued gent Da e CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE N0. 37fi251DECEMHER 12, 2000 1 SECTION 4 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF 7USTIFICATION FOR VARIANCEICODE WAIVER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER) REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: IB. 00. 0(00. OIC] (A sepazate statement is required for each Code waiver) PERTAINING TO: t_neJt~~,oE ~-ripgctc nn.r~, ~Ewa•( Sections 18.03.D40.030 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 fallowing 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 ?. 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 fallowing questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully and as completely as possible, If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages. 1. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or sunoundings7 ~ Yes _ No. If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: 2. Ara the special c'ucumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the same zone as your property? ~ Yes _ No If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different: 3. Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone? _Yes gNo if your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances: 4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the cpntrol of the property owner (or previous property owners)? Yes _No EXPLAIN: The sole purpos f y variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be approved o d have the effect of granting a special privilege not shazed by other groperty in the same vicinity and zone which i oth 's press) authorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted. I LL G Signa r f perry r u rized Agent Date CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO. 376251DECEMHER 12, 2000 SECTION 4 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF NSTIFfCATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER) REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: (A separate statement is required for each Code waiver) PERTAINING TO: L~Ar1nSC's+rt°~,.1'~ Sr~Ar^~ ,4LUr~1F-. t..-I~li:(Z7~- ~"(72F_E7~ Sections 18.03:D40.030 and 18. ]?.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code waiver may he 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, locafion or surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classificaion 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 orPlanning 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. answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: 2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the viciniy which are in the same zone as your property? LC Yes _ No If your answer is `Tyes," describe how the property is different: Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges cun•ently enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone? _Yes ~No If your answer if "yes," describe the special-circumstances: 4, The sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone which is not o rse ex essly autho ' by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted. _ j!i L d'7 .Signature f Property Owner or Auth sized gent D e CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO. 3762itDECEMEER 12, 20an Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property owners)? _Yes _ No [DRAFT) RESOLUTION NO. PC2007-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR TENTATNE PARCEL MAP NO. 2004-177 BE GRANTED (1501 WEST LINCOLN AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Tentative Parcel Map for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: An irregularly-shaped approximately 3.3-acre area situated in the County of Orange, State of California, as shown in Attachment No. 1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference a5 if set forth in full; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on October 29, 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 heaz and consider evidence for and against said proposed tentative parcel 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: L That the proposed tentative map is consistent with the General Plan and the General Commercial Zone (C-G). 2. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed type and intensity of ' development and therefore would not cause public health problems or environmental damage. 3. That *** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that *** 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 declazation 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 envirorunent. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Tentative Parcel Map, 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- PC2007- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve subject Petition for Tentative Parcel Map on the basis of the aforementioned findings 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:. Prior to approval of the final map or within a period of two (21 year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, the following conditions shall be complied with: 1. 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). 2. That the developetshall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim an easement sixty (60) feet in width from the construction centerline of Lincoln Avenue for street widening purposes. 3. 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 aze on file with. the Planning Deparhnent mazked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 3, and as conditioned herein. General Conditions: 4. That timing for compliance with conditons of approval maybe 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. 5. That extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval maybe granted in accordance with Section 18:60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal 6. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. 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 -2- PC2007- occurs first. Failure to pay all charges .shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 29, 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 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Grace Medina, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on October 29, 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- Hem No. 4 m 0 0 4 0 0 N D P ; AREA NO. t CCa (BCC) C ~ RCL 88-B9-11 111 -00149 RC ' RCL fi4-f3dq C RCL 20 05-0 01 44 RCL 59-m-103 C 0 VAR433 PC~BB9-01 ~,C` STATION ~D j ' - GG (BCC) o P ~ RCL B9-W-it m RCL ~-m-103 RCL 2-m-Om45 !E h CUP2004-04005 RCL xOm-Pm45 ~'y F I AREA NO. 2 O F CE JE Ci hoCAL BUSINE50) AC U RCL ~-m-103 ° 1 VAR433 a . L.B 6C6 RLLB&B&il C-G teCG) VAR 11573 RcL6e.4B-lm °vl°°°r COP 2739 CUP 1444 RCL 80-89-11 ~ ,°,,„° a ~°. CL 63.64-110 (fi) m r ~ ~ ~ CUP 1076 K~;~ yF TBCCC) RCL 69-m-29 ~~~ IR RCL 60-~-1/ VAR 1422 ~ RCL 63-64.110 6LImCl (Rfi6. dIi1C IP CL) RLLBB9&it TLUP 3Ul0.W61] GG (BCC) RCLbe80.1m TLUP 3m1-045] RCL 88-m-11 F RCL 583 CUPx00669xTI TLUP 1mT-Oix2] VM 4m RCL fi3-fi4-110 (fi04. d LIL b CL) W CUP2006MBX 6E~CPPPALACE W GG IBCC ~' ) ~ RCL 98-%-11 i a° RCL 63b4-118 (i) rn ~ cc 1Bcc ?- RCL 1M-w-~i E o CUP 2487 ~ (- TLUP 2001-6145] D U U m CUP 670 ~ U7 n CUP20m-04277 TLUV zom-P4s12 ; E N~ m ~ B VA VAfl 4348 P` a C:G (BCC ~ oPRACroR E u E,~ RC 11 CUP 2489 99 99 = .C BCG E L - - ~ ~ ~ ~ E E2 RCL 63-fi4-118 (2) CUP 2431 aci m-~s j f B C 94 E m CUP 3844 CUP ~ a ~a M R lY eLE `mZ m d ci ~ c c m 1 0~ R a3 -11 m ~ G GG (BCC ) RCL 63-61-110(5) G Q RCL 93-99-11 CUP 3513 cuP3Pa4 RCL 56-57-2 m y SMALL 5ROF5 CUP 2081-04479 3 ? VAR 433 Conditional Use Permit No. 1731 TRACKING NO. CUP2007-05253 Requested By: CHENG LEE 408 South Brookhurst Street- La Langosta Mexican Restaurant 1 BROADWAY ~ ~ F m W Q N UqW S '`; RS-2 1 DU E4CH ~ 2 = NQ ~~ W7 K ~ o VALLE f- } W F DL Subject Property Date: October 29, 2007 Scale: 1 " = 200' Q.S. No. 40 bass F1M AVE ~~ ~ ~' ~~,__-- - AedalPhoto: Conditional Use Permit No. 1731 TRACKING NO. CUP2007-05253 Requested By: CHENG LEE 408 South Brool<hurst Street - La Langosta Mexican Restaurant Subject Property Date: October 29, 2007 Scale: 1" = 200' Q.S. No. 40 10395 1 ITEM N0.4 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPO><2T City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: OCTOBER 29,2007 FROM: PLANNING SERVICES MANAGER SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1731 (TRACKING NO. CUP2007-05253) LOCATION: 408 South Brookhurst Street. APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Eduardo Morales and the property owner is Cheng Lee. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval to reinstate a conditional use permit to retain: apreviously-approved restaurant with beer and wine sales for on-site consumption and to remove the expiration which is currently to expire on November 2007. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, approve apreviously-approved CEQA Negative Declaration. (b) By resolution, approve amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 1731 to delete the time limitation. BACKGROUND: This property is developed with La Langosta Roja Restaurant. It is located within the General Commercial (BCC) (C-G, Brookhurst Commercial Comdor Overlay) zone and the General Plan designates this property and all adjacent properties for Comdor Residential land uses: Conditional Use Permit No. 1731; a request to permit the sales of beer and wine for on- premises consumption in a restaurant, was approved by the Planning Commission on July. 18, 1977, with no time limitation. On May 29, 1996, at the request of the Code. Enforcement Division, a request to initiate revocation or modification proceedings was approved by the Commission due to complaints received by neighbors and'the high concentration of businesses selling alcoholic beverages and criminal activities in the vicinity: The permif was subsequently modified and new conditions including a time' limitation were added because of problems with restaurant and nightclub businesses in the vicinity, not because of problems with the business: The Planning Commission has subsequently granted reinstatements because the business has been operating in zoos. Anaheim ei~d. ` compliance with the conditions of approval. The permit expires on November 18, 2007:. Suite #16& Anaheim, CA 92805 TeI: (714) 7fi5-5139 : Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.nel CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1731 October 29, 2007 Page 2 of 2 PROPOSAL: The applicant has submitted a request to reinstate this conditional use permit. A deletion of the time limit is requested because the operation of the restaurant is in conformance " with the original approval and all conditions of approval pertaining to the permit have been complied with. The applicant also proposes to openthe restaurant for breakfast beginning at 7 a.m: The condition of approval limifing the hours ofoperation only limits the closing time; therefore, the request to extend the hours of operation for breakfast service does not require an amendment to the conditions of approval. i; ANALYSYS: There are no outstanding complaints pertaining to this property and the last. complaint filed with the Community Preservation Division was in 2005: pertaining to the maintenance of the property: An inspection was conducted by the Community Preservation Division on September 18, 2007, which indicated that the fascia boards on the west and north sides of the property needed painting, the driveway at the tear of the property needed resurfacing: and the fronds of the palm tree needed to be trimmed. The applicant has addressed all'of these issues. The Anaheim Police Department submitted a memorandum regazding the request for reinstatement: The Anaheim Police Department does not oppose the request for reinstatement or the removal of the time limitation on the permit. The 6me limitation was placed on the permit because of noiseand criminal activities with restaurant and nightclub businesses along Brookhurst Street: Condinons of approval were included on the permit pertaining,to the business operation. The business continues to operate as approved, and the City has not received any complaints about the business since 2005. Therefore, staff recommends that the condifional use permit be reinstated with no fime limitation. Respectfully submitted, Con ed by, ~~2,~~ c Acting Principal Planner Tanning Services Manager Attachments:: ~ 1. Justification of Reinstatement. 2: Prior Resolution Attachment -Item fVo. 4 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT JUSTIFICATION FOR REINSTATEnAEIVT Section 18.80.1 BD of the Anehelm Municipal Code requires that requests for relnatatemente or renewals of a time- - Ilmited permit shall be made In writing no later then six (8) months after the expiration date of the parmlt sought to be reinstated or renewed and must be accompanied by en application form end-the required filing lee. 1, In order to relnelete or renew a permit, the facts necessary to support each and every finding for the odgihel approval of the anOtlemant es set forth In the 4oliowtng excerpts from the Anehelm Zoning Code still exlet; 18.88.080 (Relative to Conditional Use Parmita) Before the approval authority, or City Counoll on appeal, may approve a condltlona) use permit, It muef make a finding of tad, by resolution, that the evidence presented shows that all of the fallowing condltlona Is requUetl: .031 Thet the proposed use Is properly one for which a conditional use permit le authorized by lhls coda, or le en unlisted use fls detinad In subaaetlon .030 (Unlleted Dees Permitted) of Section 18.88.040 (Approval Authority); .032 That the proposed use will not adversely aNect the adJolning land uses or the growth and development of the area In which Il Is proposed to be located; .033 Thet the alts and shape of the site proposed for the use Is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use In a manner not detrlmehtal td the particular area or to health end safety; ,034 That the traffic generated by the proposed use wltl hot Impdae en undue burden upon the streets and highways deel~ned and lmprbved to carry the traHlc In the area; end .036 That the grantlng of the condltlona) use parmlt under the condltlona Imposed, If any, will not be detrimental to the health end safety of the cltizena of the City of Anehelm, 18.74,D80 (R®latlva to Varlancea) Before any variance may be granted by the approval authority, or Clty Council on appeal, It shall be shown: ,0201 Thet there era special oircumstances applicable to the property, Including size, ahepe, topography, location or eurroundings, which do not apply to other property under Identical zoning cleeslflcatlon in the vlclnlty; ,0202 Thet, tieoause of spedal circumstances ehowh In .D201, strict application of the zanlnp code deprives the property of privileges enJoyed by other property under Identical zoning cleasltlcetlon In the vlclnlty. 2. Seld permit or verlanoe la being exerdsed subeten8ally In the same manner and In conformenae with ell oondillons and stlpulatlone originally approved; 3, Seld parmlt or variance la being exaroleed In a manner not daMmental to the particular arse end aurrounding lend uses, nor to the public peace, health, safety end general welfare; end 4, W Ith regard only to any deletion of a tlme limitation, such deletion Is appropriate because It has been demonstrated that the use hea opereted In a manner that Is appropriate In the underlying zone and the surrounding area and that the periodic review of the use In no longer necessary andlor that Il can be determined that, due to changed dreumatanoes, the use Is oonslstent with the City's long-term plena for the area. In order to determine If ouch tindings exlat, and to eselat the Zoning Administrator or Planning Cammlaelon to arrive et a decision, pteaaa enewer the following questlone fully end as complete es poaslhle. Attach addltlonal shaeis If addltlonel spaoe la needed. _ 1. Hea any physical aspect of the property for which this use permfl or variance bean granted changed significantly sln~e Issuance o4 this use permll or varlance9 Yes ^ No Exoleln: (over) CASE N0. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT No ~~'~il 2. Have the lases In the Immediate vicinity changed since the Issuance of cnls use permit or verlancel Yes ^ No Expleln; , 3. Hes any asggct of the nature of the operation changed since the Issuance c4 this use permit or varlencel Yes [] No J~~y, Expleln; 4. Are th c:onditlone of approval pertaining to the use permit or variance being compiled with? Yes o ^ Exp Im _ 5. If you are requastin®e dsietloh of the time Ilmitetlon, Is this deletldn necessary for the oontinuad operation of thl use or variance? Yeso ^ Expeln: ~ U 'Y'om-r~ ~ o~ `I Y IO / ` ~ ~5 i n2 5s O i.il ti9-1- The applicant for this request le: ^ .Property Owner--QAuthorized Agent L`~Vnt d0 ~ MO rol ~ S ~/j~~un`r~n5'ln1 ~~~L~i Name oP Property Owner or Authorised Agent (Please Print) Signature of Property caner or Authodzed Agent Date Reinstatement ePplkatlan.aoc Revised 11I10I06 Attachment -Item No. 4 RESOLUTION NO. PC2002-171 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION REINSTATING AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1731 FOR 5 YEARS UNTIL NOVEMBER 18, 20D7, AND AMENDING CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION N0.77R-157, AS AMENDED; ADOPTED THEREW ffH WHEREAS; bn July 18, 1977, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did, by Its Resolution No. PC77-157, grant Conditional Use Permit No. 1731 to pennk on-sale beer and wine Iran exis8ng restaurant at 408 Sauth Brookhurst Street; and that Condition No. 3 of said resolu8on specifics that the propartyshali be'developed substantially In accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos.1 through 3; and WHEREAS, on July 22, 1996, the Planning Commisslon did, by Its ResoluDon No. PC98- 72, amend the aforementioned Resolution No: PC77-157 byedding certain condkians of approval (Nos. 5 through 18) InGuding that the hours of opera8on shall be limited to no later then 10 p.m. on Sundays through Thursdays, and 11 pm on Fridays and Saturdays (Condttion No. 8) and that the use permtt would expire one year from the date of the issuance of the Alcoholic Beverage Control license (Condttbn No. 17); and WHEREAS, on September 23, 1997, the Anaheim City Council did, by Its Resolu8on No. 97R-181, amend certain conditions of approval (Nos. 5, 8 and 17) of the aforementioned Resolution No. PC77-157, as amended by Resolution No. PC96-72, including that the use pennk would expire five years from the date of said resolufion on September 23, 2002 {Condition No. 17); and WHEREAS, this property is currently developed. with a freestanding restaurant (La Langosta Mezlcan Restaurant); that the zoningjs CL(BCC) (Commercal, Llmtted - Brookhuret Commercial Corridor Overlay); that the Anaheim Ganerei Plan designates the property for General Commercial lend uses; and that the property is located within the Brookhuret Commercial Corridor Redevelopment Pro)ect Area; and WHEREAS; pursuant to Sections 18.03.092 and 18:03.093 of the Anaheim Municipal Code the peti8oner has requested the following to: (a) Reinstate this conditional use permit by modifying or deleting Condition No. 17 periaining to a time Iimltagon by which this use permit. expired on September 23, 2002, to retain the previously approved sale of beer and wine in an exis8ng restaurant for on=premises cansumpUon; (b) Amend the approved exhibits (Condition No. 3) to expand the exis8ng restaurant by adding 32 sq.ft. at the front entrance of the restaurants and (c) Extend the houre of operation (Condition No: t3) to midnight, seven days a week. WHEREAS, the City Planning Commisslon did hold a public hearing at the ClvicCenter i6 the City of AnaheiMOn September 23;2002, at 1:30 p.m:,'notice of said public headng having been duly given as required by law and In accordance with the provisbns of the Anaheim Munidpal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and considerevidence for and against said proposed amendment and to investigate and' make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and that said public hearing was continued to the November 4 and 18, 2002 Planning Commission meellngs; and TracMng No. CUP2002 04600 cr5503dm.doc -1 - P2002-171 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 use, as amended, Is properly one for which a conditional use permit [s authorized by the Zoning Code. 2. The! theproposal, as reinstated and emended, will not adversely effect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which R is located; and that this use permit has been operated In substantially the same manner as onginalty approved by the Planning Commission and City CourrdL 3. Thal the size and shape of the site for the proposal is adequate to allow full development of the use in a manner not deUimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safely and generel welfare. 4. That the traffic generated by the use will not Impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry traffic Ur the area. 5.' That granting this reinstatement, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim; and that the petltioner has compiled with the previous conditions of approval, as evidenced by Information provided by the Code Enforcement Division. 6.' That this conditional use permit is being exeresed idsubsiantialty the same manner and - in conformance with all conditons and stipulations previously approved by the Planning Commission and Clly Council. 7. That this conditional use permit is being exercised In a manner not deVimental to the particular arse and surrounding land uses, nor to the public peace, health, safety and general welfare; and that the proposed expamslon to the front entry (west elevation) of the restaurant and the' amended hours of operation, as conditioned herein, will not be detrimental to the'surroundimg lend uses. 8. That no one Indicated their presence at the public hearing In oppositlon to the proposal; and that ho correspondence was received [n opposition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim CUy , Planning Commission has roviewed the proposal to retain the Bale of beer and wine In a previousy approved restaurent with on-premises consumption, to amend the exhibits on file to expand the existing restaurant and to extend the hours of operefiodompropertyconsietlmg of 0.3-acre having a frontage of 83 feet on the east side of Brookhurst Street, a maximum depth of 180 feet and being located 516 feet south. of the cen-arilne of Broadway, and further described as 406 South Brookhurst Street (La Langosta Mexlcen Restaurent); and does hereby find that the Negative Oedaraliom previously approved im connedion with Condtional Use Permit No. 1731 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation th connection with this request upon finding that the dedaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the previously approved Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further fihding 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 om the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commissbn does hereby amend Resolution No. PC77-157, adopted in connecton with Conditional Use Permit No. 1731 and amended by Resolution Nos. PC96-72 and 97R-181, to reinstate this condUlonal use permU and to amend the conditions of approval, in their entirety, to read es follows: - 2 - PC2D02-171 1. That the an-premises sale and consumption of beer and wine at an existing restaurant and the amended hours of operation (Condition No. 2 herein) shall expire five (5) years from the date of this resolution an November 18, 2007. 2. That the hours of operation shall be limited to no later than 11 p.m. on Sundays through Thursdays, . end midnight an Fridays and Saturdays. 3. That the Ilghtkig in the parking area of the premises shall be directed, posUianed and shielded In such a manner so as not to unreasonably Illuminate the window areas of nearby residences. 4. That this establishment shall be operated as a'bona fide public eating place' as defined by Section 23038 of the Callfomia Business and Professions Code. 5. That there shall be no bar or lounge maintained on the property unless licensed by Alcoholic Beverage Control and approved by the City oPAnaheim. 8. That there shall be no pool tables or other games permitted upon the premises et any Ume, except as specifically permitted herein. 7. That the grces sale of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed fortypercent (40%) of the gross sales of all retail sales during any three (3) month period. The applleant shall maintain records on a quarterly. basis Indicating the separete amounts of sales of alcoholic beverages end other kerns. These records shell'be made evaftable far inspedion by any City of Anaheim offidal when requested. 8. That a jukebox shall be permitted on the premises subject to abfaining the appropriate permit(s) from the Business License Division of the Clty of Anaheim Finance Department 9. That the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption oB the premises shall be prohibited. 10. That any free planted on-site shall be replaced In a timely manner In the event that tt is removed,. damaged, diseased and/or dies. 1 t. That the on-site landscaping and irigation system shall be maintained in compliance with dty stahdards. 12. That ell doors serving the restaurant shall conform to Uniform FIre Code requirements andahall be kept dosed at ail times dunng operation of the premises except for Ingress/egress, deliveries and emergendes. 13. That food service with a full meal shalt be avala6le from opening Ume until dosing Ume on each day of opareUon. 14. That the alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a'public premises' (bar) type license nor shall the establishment be operated as e'public premises' as defined in Section 23039 of the Calffomia Business and Professions Code. 15. That there shell be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including advertising dkected to the exterior from vrithin, promoting ocindipUng the availabflUy of alcotroUc beverages. 16. That the activities occurring In conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to surounding properties. - 3 - PC2002-171 17. That the business operator sftall comply with Section 2421)0.5 of the Business and Professions Code so as not to employ or permit any person's to solicU or encourage others, directly or Indirectly, io buy ,, _ __ them drinks in the licensed premises under any commission, percentage, salary, or other profit-sharing plan, scheme or wmspirecy. 18. That there shall be no public telephones on the premises located outside Dre building. 19. That signega shall be Ifmited to existing and approved signs and that temporary signs and other advertising devices shall not be permitted except In connection wtth an approved Spedal Event Pernik issuetl bythe Planning Department. 2D. That no advertising or identiflcatlon of any type shall be permitted on any outdoor furniture or equipment inGuding umbrellas, by Illustration, by text or by any other means of visual communication. 21. That the property shall be pertnanenUy maintained in an oMedy fashion through the provisioh of regular landscaping maintenance, removal of trash or debris, end r~noval of graffiti within twenty four (24) hours from Ume of occurrence: 22. That four (4) foot high street address numbers shall be partnenenUy maintained on the flat area of the roof in a contrasting color to the roof materiel, provided that the numbers shall not be visible to the street or adjacent properties. Said information shall be spectfiealty sttowm on the plans submitted for buiding pertniis: 23. That trash storage area(s) shall be refurbished to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sandetion Division, to complywith approved plans on file with said Department. Said infomtadon shall be speciflcelly shown on plena submitted for building pannits. 24. That subject property stlall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specir«;ations submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Deparbnent marked Revision No. 1 of F,chibD No. 1, and Exhtbft Nos. 2 and 3, and as conditioned herein. 25. That prior to Issuance of a building permit or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolufion, whichever ocwrs Urst, Condition No. 23, above-meMloned, shall be complied with: Extensions far further time to complete said conditbns may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anahe'un Municipal Code.' 26. That prior to final building and inning inspections, Condition Nos. 3, 22 and 24, above-mentioned, shell be complied wHh. 27. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Muniapal Zoning Code and arty other applicable City, State and Federal regulations: Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance ar approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulatbn or requirement - 4 - PC2002-171 THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of November 18, 2002. lOrlginal signed by Paul Bos#wick) CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: lOrlllnal signed by Eleanor iNorrid SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM } I, Eleanor M6rcis, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certHy that the foregoing resolutlon was passed'and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commissioh held on November 18, 20D2, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK BRISTOL, EASTMAN, ROMERO, VANDERBILT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BOYDSTUN, KOOS IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 2002. (Original signed by Eleanor Adorrls) SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - 5 - PC2002-1T1 RESOLUTION NO. PC2007-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION REINSTATING AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1731 (TRACKING NO. CUP2007-05253), AND AMENDING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. PC2002,-171, ADOPTED THEREWITH (408 SOUTH BROOKHURST STREET - LA LANGOSTA ROJAS RESTAURANT) 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: THE WESTERLY 210.00 FEET OF THE SOUTHERLY 83.00 FEET OF THE NORTHERLY 150.44 FEET OF THE SOUTHERLY 210.44 FEET OF LOT 4 IN BLOCK B OF TRACT NO. 13, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 9, PAGE 12 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. WHEREAS, on November 18, 2002, the Anaheim Planning Commission, by Resolution No. PC2002-171, approved Conditional Use Permit No. 1731 to permit a restaurant with beer and wine sales for on-site consumption at 408 South Brookhurst Street; and WHEREAS, said Resolution No. PC2002-171 includes the following condition of approval: "1. That the on-premises sale and consumption of beer and wine at an existing restaurant and the .amended hours of operation (Condition No. 2 herein) shall expire f ve (5) years from the date of this resolution on November 18, 2007)." WHEREAS, this property is currently developed with a restaurant, the underlying. zoning is C-G (BCC) (General Commercial, Brookhurst Commercial Corridor Overlay); the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Corridor Residential land uses, and this property is located within the Merged Redevelopment Area; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested reinstatement of this conditional use permit to retain a restaurant with beer and wine sales pursuant to Code Section 18.60 of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on October 29, 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 1.8:60 "Procedures", to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed .amendment 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- PC2007- 1. That the proposed reinstatement of this permit and the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation to retain apreviously-approved restaurant with beer and wine sales is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized under Code Section 18.08.030.040.0402 (Alcoholic Beverage Sales - On Sales) and Section 18.60.180 (Reinstatement of atime-limited permit) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 2. That the proposal, as conditioned will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is located because the use permit has been operated in substantially the same manner as originally approved by the Planning Commission. 3. That the Community Preservation Division indicates that no complaints have been received regazding the operation of this business, the conditions of approval have been complied with and the property is being properly maintained. 4. That the facts necessary to support each and every required showing for the original approval of the entitlement exist. 5. 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. 6. That granting this reinstatement, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the peace, health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 7. That *** indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition; and that *** correspondence was received in opposition to the subject request. 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. 1722 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation in connection with this request. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission for the reasons hereinabove stated does hereby reinstate and approve Conditional Use Permit No. 1722 to permit a restaurant with beer and wine sales for on site consumption. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby amend the conditions of approval, in their entirety, for Resolution No. PC2002-171, adopted in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 to read as follows: 1. That the hours of operation shall be limited to no later than 11 p.m. on Sundays through Thursdays, and midnight on Fridays and Saturdays. 2. That the lighting in the pazking azea of the premises shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably illuminate the window azeas of nearby residences. 3. That this establishment shall be operated as a 'bona fide public eating place' as defined by Section 23038 of the California Business and Professions Code. -2- PC2007- 4. .That there shall be no bar or lounge maintained on the property unless licensed by Alcoholic Beverage Control and approved by the City of Anaheim. 5. That there shall be no pool tables or other games permitted upon the premises at any time, except as specifically permitted herein. 6. That the gross sale of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed forty percent (40%) of the gross sales of all retail sales during any three (3) month period.. The applicant sha1T 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. 7. That a jukebox shall be permitted on the premises subject to obtaining the appropriate permit(s) from the Business License Division of the City of Anaheim Finance Department. 8. That the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises shall be prohibited. 9. That any tree planted on-site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed,. damaged, diseased and/or dies. 10. That the on-site landscaping and imgation system shall be maintained in compliance with city standards. 11. That all doors serving the restaurant shall conform to Uniform Fire Code requirements and shall be kept closed at all times during operation of the premises except for ingress/egress, deliveries and. emergencies. 12. That food service with a full meal shall be available from opening time until closing time on each day of operation. 13. That the alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged fora `public premises' (bar) type license nor shall the establishment be operated as a `public premises' as defined in Section 23039 of the California Business and Professions Code.. 14. 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. 15. That the activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to surrounding properties. -3- PC2007- 16. That the business operator shall comply with Section 24200.5 of the Business and Professions 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. 17. That there shall be no public telephones on the premises located outside the building. 18. That signage shall be limited to existing and approved signs, and that temporary signs and other advertising devices shall not be permitted except in connection with an approved Special Event Permit issued by the Planning Department. 19. That no advertising or identification of any type shall be permitted on any outdoor furniture or equipment including umbrellas, by illustration, by text or by any other means of visual communication. 20. 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 time of discovery. 21. That Four (4) foot high street address numbers shall be permanently maintained on the flat azea of the roof in a contrasting color to the roof material, provided that the numbers shall not be visible to the street or adjacent properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 22. That trash storage area(s) shall be refurbished to the sarisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, to comply with approved plans on file with said Department: Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 23. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans .and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Revision No. 1 of ExhibitNo. 1, and Exhibit Nos. 2 and 3, and as conditioned herein. 24. 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. Failure to pay .all charges shall result in the revocation of the approval of this application. -4- PC2007- THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 29, 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 maybe replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION . ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALLFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Grace Medina, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on October 29, 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 -5- PC2007- Item No. RESTAURANT I 0 Q W J D] W COMMERCIAL W SHOPS J J 0 U W H Q F- V) UNDER LON6TRUCTION 011PTMU) RLL 9&-00-15 RCL fit-82A9 RCL fifi-fit-14 RCL 535T-0] VqR ]962 VAR ]fi06 VAR 3501 OFFICES PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE n ,. PR (PTMU) RCL 20604-00129 RCL fib-67-14 ANGEL STADIUM OF ANAHEIM I (PTMU) RCL 2004-06129 RCL 99-00-15 RCL 66-07-14 RCL 56-57-83 VAR 4235 RCL 66714 e ,3.ta `"6 1(PTMU) RCL 56-57 93 t ~"~' '-'u~ ~s VACANT alnp FIRM1t x t VACANTF~-~biJ /, s *« B50'~ ORANGEWOOD At ~ 1 IIPiM01 lR 8&00.15 ~L' 1LL 8691-19 ILL 56fii-BJ cur 2m TPM 200fi-262 RCL 2004-00129 RCL 99-00-15 I (PTMU) RCL 2004-00129 CUP 2006-05130 RCL 99-00-75 RCL 04-05-00 (Res. of IRL W CR) RCL 6fi-67-14 RCL 5fi-57-83 CUP 3552 CUP 2fi23 FSP 2006-0OOD6 SMALL IND. FIRMS RCL 5fi-57-B3 IND. FIRM I RCL 930045 RCL 63fii-14 RCL fit-63-09 i RCL 2007-00207 - IIPrMUI Iry R4u1 RCL 58.57-93 RCL 99-00.15 RLL fi66id1 qCL 20aw0a9 CUP 2803.Oai02 RCL 66-67-14 RCL S3sa] aP z6n SMALL IND. RCL 62-63-09 1 TASr FOae I P FIRMS RCL 56-57-93 ~'T' RCL 93oM115 2 CUP 2007-05222 i IIPIMU) RCL 8361-14 ¢ t+ W ~ VAR 4206 RcL 06oo-ts RCL 82-fi3-00 O ~ MI6 2007-00202 ® RLL 666144 RLL eze] oe RCL5357A3 FlRM INO ? p GPA 2006-00445 - j rcw zael.w]]a . 9 - Rcl sssi.m I(PTMUI o t n F Z ZCA 2007-0669 TLIIP ]05}01668 1 TLW x00]-0INt RCL 9380.15 m 0 d S D. TLUP 2000.0RN RCLfi367-14 ~ FRMS ~ C N RCL 56-5]-93 i ~ ~ I IP ]OBB IND. FIRM LL do p LuP U25 ~ LtN 2fl30 E CUP2~301iBJ ~ > ~ ~ >N O I 1 ZLA 3o03000z5 ~ y RC BBAO-05 E 1 RLL 5&57.9J ~ LL VAR 2003-04501 I NIMVI I (PTMUI CUP 2003-046fi6 E 6MALL INO. AI ~ RLL ]OOafi0rz9 B 0.15 N ,FIRMS IV RCL 9-0 ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE 2005 Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05093 Development Agreement Na. 2006-00002 Tentative Tract.Map No. 16860 Requested By: PLATINUM TRIANGLE PARTNERS, LLC 2050 South State College Boulevard and 2015-2125 East Orangewood Avenue Subject Property Date: October 29, 2007 Scale: 1" = 250' O.S. No. 118 '10394 l 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite#162 Anaheim, CA 92605 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net ITEM NO. S PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: OCTOBER 29, 2007 FROM: PLANNING SERVICES MANAGER SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.2006-05093 `' DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTIVO.2006-00002 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16860 LOCATION: 2050 South State College Boulevard and 2015 = 2125 East Orangewood Avenue. APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The property owner and applicant is Andrew Han with Lennart representing Platinum Triangle Partners, LLC: REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of the A-Town Stadium'project, an 878- unitresidentialprojecYconsistingbfsix development areas; two public pazks and'new public connector streets: RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission take the following 'actions: (a) By motion, recommend that the City Council' determine that previously-certified SEIR No. 332 and its Second Addendum are adequate to serve'as the required environmental documentation fofthis project. (b) By resolution; approve Conditional Use Permit No.2006-05093. (c) By resolution, recommend to the City Council that Development Agreement No. 2006-00002 be approved and entered into by the Citybf Anaheim and Platinum Triangle Partners, LLC. (d) By resolution, approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16860. BACKGROUND: This property is currently developed with one industrial building_ Four'industratbuddings were demolished earlier this yeaz: Tt is located in the Industrial, Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone -Gateway District (I' (PTMU)). Thee: General Plan designates this property for Mixed Use land uses. Anger Stadium of Anaheim is adjacent to the northern boundary of the property:'` 1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05093 Ocrober29, 2007 Page2of4 General Plan Amendment No. 2006-00449, Amendment to The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP) (Miscellaneous Permit No. 2007-00187), and Zoning Code Amendment " No. 2007-00057, to increase the maximum number of dwelling units permitted in the Gateway District from 2,075 to 2,142 and the total number of dwelling units in The Platinum Triangle from 9,500 to 9;567 was approved by City Council on June 5, 2007. This requestwas a joint request by Lennar and West Millennium Homes to provide for the development of the A-Town Stadium project and the adjacent Orangewood Condominiums'project? PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes a master site plan to develop a mix of new residential uses within six development azeas. The master site plan includes a general site plan that indicates proposed development areas, parks, and streets. It also provides a development summary table indicating the proposed development intensities; a maximum building height exhibit; a public facilities plan; a development phasing plan; and a description of the proposed residential product mix. The master site plan is Exhibit "B" to the proposed development agreement, which has been provided to the Planning Commission and is on file with the Planning Department: The project would be comprised of a maximum of 878 units in a mix of stacked flats, lofts, podium townhomes, and two urban towers with maximum heights of 350 feet. The development azeas have a residential density range between 47 to 153 units per acre. The average density is 70 units peracre. Access to the project would be provided at "D" Street and Orangewood Avenue as well as "A" Street and State College Boulevard. Aninternal street system would provide pedestrian and vehicular access to all development areas. Pazking would be provided in underground parking facilities. A limited number of on-street parking spaces would be provided near public parks along "B" and "C" Streets. "D" Street will also provide access to the adjacent Orangewood Condominiums project: The project includes two public Barks totaling 0.89 acres. The 0.5-acre Public Park 1 would be located between Orangewood Avenue and "C" Street and would contain open turf areas with shade trees, a water feature with sculptural element,'a shade structure and pedestrian path. The. 0.39-acre Public Park 2 is located north of "C" Street and would contain open. turf areas, a garden, play area for children, and sculptural elements. In addition, two open space easements totaling 0.13 acres and a 0.15-acre covered flood control channel adjacent to Public Pazk 2 will serve as extensionsof the public pazk. Pazks 1 and 2 would be dedicated to the City; whereas the open. space easements would not be dedicated because underground parking for the two residential towers is proposed underneath the easement. The public parks and open space 'easements would be maintained by the homeowner's association, ANALYSIS: Development in the PTMU Overlay Zone is implemented by the property owner entering into a development agreement with the City and the approval of either a final site plan or, for development over twelve acres, a master site plan showing conformance with the provisions of the PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone. Inaddition, Code permits building heights in excess of 100 feet subject to the approval of a conditional use permit: This project has CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 200G-05093 October 29, 2002 Page 3 of 4 been evaluated against applicable development standards and is in compliance: Staff has provided the following analysis and recommendations on various issues related to the proposed` development. Issue: Maximum Building Height. The applicant'requests aconditional use permit for a maximum building height of 350 feet in Development Areas C and E,' as shown on the master site plan. Alt other development areas would have a maximum height 100 feet. Development Areas C and E are located at the northeast corner of theproperty adjacent to Angel Stadium'of Anaheim. Mitigation measures for thisproject require the applicant to demonstrate that the buildings will not create adverse. shade/shadow impacts to residential, recreational, outdoor ` dining or pedestrian areas: Issue: Final Site Plan process. The master site plan will be implemented through final site plans foreach of the six development areas. Final site plans aze subject to'review and approvals by the Planning Commission at a noticedpublic hearing. The final site plans will provide detailed information, including site plans, floor plans, landscape plans and elevations, for the proposed development and must be in conformance with the master site plan, PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone. Conditions ofapproval may be imposed on the final site plans by the Planning Commission. Issue: Master Tentative Tract: Map. The applicant has submitted a master tentative tract map to establish a 10-lot subdivision (6-lettered lots and 4-numberedlots}. The master tentative map will be implemented by the recordation of a master final tract map and subsequent builder tract maps associated with individual development areasr The master tract map. is required to be in conformance with the provisions of the PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone and consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan Mixed Use land use designation. The submitted master tractmap complies with these requirements. Issuer Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) Channel: This property is bifurcated by an existing 25 foot wide OCFCD flood control channel that runs north to south through the project site, immediately west of Development Areas E and F. The flood control channel is ` currently covered and used for surface parking. The proposed project would protect in place the current channel and utilize this area for pedestrian and open space areas. A condition of approval has been included that requires coordination of landscaping and uses with OCFCD. Issuer Coordination with Orangewood Condominiums: The master site plan and internal street system for the A-Town Stadium project has been designed in coordination with the adjacent Orangewood Condominiums project. "D" Street would provide vehicular and pedestrian access from Orangewood Avenue to both projects. The two projects would be required to coordinate fair share construction costs for various infrastructure improvements including street and signalized intersection improvements at "D" Street and Orangewood Avenue, storm drains, water, sewer and electrical infrastructure. Issue: Remainder Parcel adjacent to the Stadium Parking Lot: The project site includes a roughly triangularly-shaped portion of land, shown as Development Area G on the master site plan that protrudes into the Angel Stadium of Anaheim parking lot. Both the master site plan ;1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.2006-05093 October 29, 2007 : Page 4 of 4 and master tentative tract map indicate that this azea will be dedicated to the City. of Anaheim. This dedication will assist in the eventual re-striping of the Angel Stadium pazking lot in a more efficient manner. The dedication of Development Area G has been made a condition of approval of the Development Agreemenf. Issue: Correspondence from Anaheim Union high School IDistrict Staff received a letter from the Anaheim Union High SchoolDistrict dated September 18,'2007 indicafing that students living in the proposed development would' attend South Junior High: and Katella High School. The letter. further states that both schools are currently operating beyond their existing capacities and that payment of developer fees will be insufficient to adequately address the issue of overcrowding: Staff continues to work cooperatively with Anaheim Union High School District and Anaheim City School District to identifynew school sites and/or school expansion opportunities: Staff also`continues to verify collection of required school fees prior to the issuanceof building permits. State law preempts local regulationof fees' and development conditions to mitigate school impacts. State law also prohibits a`city from denying approval of a project under the Map Act or CEQA on the basis of the inadequacy ofschool facilities. C®NCLUSION; The proposed A-Town Stadium project is in conformance with the PTMLUP and PTMU Overlay Zone, is compatible with adjacent land uses in the area, and will contribute to the goals'of The Platinum Triangle asset forth in the General Plan: Therefore, staff recommends approval of this request. Respectfully submitted, Con~urred y, I''G~ f C~i'~ Acting Principal Planner Platuung Se 'ces Manager Attachments: L Project Summary ~``-- //~ 2. Draft Resolution -Conditional Use~ermit 3. Draft Resolution - Development Agreement 4; Draft`Resolution-Tentative Tract Map 5: Anaheim Union High School District Letter ATTAC~IMEI~TT 1 PROJECT SiJ1VIMARY CUP 2006-05093; DAG 2006-00002; TTM 16860 Development Summary Table IDevelopffienti Area/Y~ot:No. ~ ~ ~ Acres ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ Dvrelling~iTnits ~ "~ I9ensity IVlalrimym Heeght A / 1 1.52 71 47 100 B / 4 1.86 126 68 100 C / 2 1.91 270 141 350 D / 5 1.70 96 56 100 E / 3 1.50 230 153 350 F / 6 1.24 85 69 100 G/LotB (Remainder Pazcel) 0.13 Public Park 1 0.50 Public Park 2 0.39 Public Streets 1.73 Total 12.48* 878 70 ___ * The gross project azea is 15.6 acres. 12.48 acres is measured after required dedication on Orangewood Avenue and State Ilege Boulevard i "A" Street tr~_ _~-_ lnn~ l ~x ~a a ~ rLeuv 4151-~'-~ OCFCD_Channel OEVELOPMEM AREA G DEVELOPMENT AREA A "B" Street .~._~. -.-I..r ~i DEVELOPMENT AREA 8 ~- GRAN H-350ft DEVELOPMENT ~ AREA c Pazk ~ Easement "C" Street DEVELOPMEM AREA D i DEVELOPMENT i .AREA E H-350ft ~ i Easement DEVELOPMENT AREA F Street I I [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2007-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO: 2006-05093 (2050 SOUTH STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD AND 2015 - 2125 EAST ORANGEWOOD AVENUE) 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. WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit to permit two residential towers up to 350 feet in height as part of the A- Town Stadium master site plan, for certain real property situated in The Platinum Triangle azea of the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as more pazticularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on October 29, 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 "Procedures", to heaz 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 request to permit two residential towers up to 350 feet in height as part of the A-Town Stadium master site plan is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.20.050. 2. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the proposed project is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses, and will further provide a protect that is compatible and consistent with the General Plan Mixed-Use land use designation and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP). 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, with implementation of the mitigation measures set forth in FSEIR No. 332 and its Second Addendum, Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 142, the approval of the proposed maximum building heights will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. -1- PC2007- 5. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 6. That *** indicated their presence. at said public hearing in opposition; and that one letter was received expressing concerns with the subject petition: CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05093 - to permit two residential towers up to 350 feet in height as part of the A-Town Stadium master site plan; and did find .and determine, by motion, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental. Quality Act ("CEQA"), based upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial Study/Addendum conducted pursuant to CEQA for the Conditional Use Permit, 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 FSEIIZ No. 332 and its Second Addendum, together with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 142, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Conditional Use Permit and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Conditional Use Permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05093, upon the conditions attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by this reference, and 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 welfaze of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: BE IT 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 herein set forth. Should any such condition, or any pazt thereof, be declazed 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.. AND 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 chazges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 29, 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 maybe replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING -2- PC2007- ATTEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Grace Medina, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on October 29, 2007, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES; COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IIQ WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 2007. ; SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC2007- EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY PARCEL A: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH 667.79 FEET, MEASURED ALONG THE WEST LINE OF.LOT 3 OF TRACT N0. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3 WITH A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT EASTERLY 781.93 FEET MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, FROM THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF 667.79 FEET; THENCE EAST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3 A DISTANCE OF 250.00 FEET; THENCE. SOUTHERLY, PARALLEL WITH SAID WEST LINE OF LOT 3, A DISTANCE OF 667.79 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF LOT 3 A DISTANCE OF 250.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGB~iNING. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 3 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 667.79 FEET OF SAID LOT, NORTH 89° 59' 00" EAST 272.10 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID LINE WITH A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND EASTERLY 781.93 FEET, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT;THENCE SOUTH $9° 59' 00" WEST 139.13 FEET, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO A POINT ON THESOUTHEASTERLY LII~IE OF THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY'S 30.00 FOOT WIDE RIGHT OF WAY AS DESCRIBED IN A DEED RECORDED TUNE 17, 1960 IN BOOK 5292 PAGE 508 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADRIS OF 374.26 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 16° 17' IS" EAST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY 283.43 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 43° 23' 26" TO A POINT OF CUSP WITH A COMPOUND CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 3672.29 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 61.23 FEET ALONG SAID COMPOUND CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 0° 57' 19" ;THENCE SOUTH 31° 16' 19" WEST 8.53 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 344:26 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY 119.12 FEET ALONG SAH) CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19° 49' 31" TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL Al: A RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENT FOR RAILROAD PURPOSES OVER THAT PORTION OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, AS SAID LOT 3 IS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY', CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT NORTHERLY 667.79 FEET, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3 (CENTERLINE OF ORANGE WOOD AVENUE) SAH) POINT BEING DISTANT NORTH 89° 59' 00" BAST 1031.93 FEET FROM THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 3 (CENTERLBdE OF STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD); THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE NORTH 89° 59' 00" EAST A DISTANCE OF 22.26 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY AND HAVEQG A RADNS OF 344.25 FEET (RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID INTERSECTION SEARS SOUTH 78° 2] 47" EAST); THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11° 47' 33" AND AN ARC -4- PC2007- DISTANCE OF 70.85 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89° 50' 40" WEST 5.00 FEET TO A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE SOUTH 0° 09 20" EAST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE 411.38 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89° 50' 40! WEST ] 0.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0° 09' 20" WEST 481.79 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL B: THE EAST 25 FEET OF THAT PORTION OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE OWEN COMPANY, RECORDED APRIL 9, 1963 IN BOOK 6500 PAGE 838, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY. PARCEL C: PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS CORRECTED BY JUDGMENT RENDERED ON JUNE 30, 1999, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH WAS RECORDED NOVEMBER 8, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 99-0777133, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED MAY 2, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 97-0222990, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY. PARCEL D: THE WEST 203.67 FEET, MEASURED FROM THE CENTERLINE OF PLACENTIA AVENUE, ADJOINING ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTH 195.00 FEET OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPT ALL RIGHTS, 1TFLE AND INTEREST IN ANY OIL, GAS, PETROLEUM OR OTHER MINERAL OR HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES WITHIN OR BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND OR TO USE SAID LAND OR ANY PORTION THEREOF TO A DEPTH OF 500 FEET BELOW THE PRESENT SURFACE, AS RESERVED IN THE DEED FROM REESE MILNER, A MARRIED MAN, RECORDED JULY 13, 1965 IN BOOK 7590 PAGE 498, OFFICIAL RECORDS. EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN THE NDGMENT AND FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED ON MAY 2, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 97-0222990, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, PARCEL E: THE EASTERLY 310.00 FEET OF THE WESTERLY 513.67 FEET OF THE SOUTH 195.00 FEET OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. SAID WESTERLY 513.67 FEET BEING MEASURED FROM THE CENTERLINE OF PLACENTIA AVENUE, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP AS AN UNNAMED ROAD. -5- PC2007- EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN THE NDGMENT AND FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED ON MAY 2, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 97-022299Q, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL F: THE NORTH 472.79 FEET OF THE SOUTH 667.79 FEET OF THE WEST 513.67 FEET OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE OUNTY, SAID WEST 513.67 FEET BEING MEASURED TO THE CENTER OF PLACENTIA AVENUE, NOW STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD, TOGETHER WITH EASEMENTS FOR DRAINAGE AND RAILROAD PURPOSES AS SET FORTH AND DESCRIBED IN THE GRANT DEED RECORDED AUGUST 10, 1978 IN BOOK 12794 PAGE 1212, OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL G: PARCEL 2 AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 27 PAGE 33 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS AMENDED BY NDGMENT RENDERED ON JLiNE 3Q 1999 IN THE ACTION ENTITLED DOUGLAS MELUGIN, ET AL. VS. THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ET AL, ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 765097, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH BEING RECORDED ON NOVEMBER 8, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 99-0777133, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL G 1: AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD PURPOSES OVER THE EAST 25.00 FEET OF THE WEST 781.93 FEET OF THE NORTH 371.04 FEET OF THE SOUTH 667.79 FEET OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITX OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN PARCEL A AS STATED ABOVE. SAID LAND IS DELINEATED WITHIN THE AREA SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 27, PAGE 33 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL G2: AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES 30.00 FEET IN WIDTH OVER PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A PARCEL MAP FILED IN BOOK 27, PAGE 33 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. -6- PC2007- EiBI'T CB" CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05093 Conditions of Approval COA/ Responsible for MMP Conditions of Approval Monitoring t ~ ' ~ ~r ~BP~~~gy~ ~ ~~~Q~Y~!~~~g~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ fi ~~ `r~+£~ ~~y~ i.~E^A`ri wa e,' ~ (r^+ f e' ?' Y i p S+#~k i~ ~B~ ~~ ~~~L~6'~~~J~F~~ ~ '~ ' ~~~ S~~ ~~~~ ~~ A ~ M.` $1 w s+ e - t~ 3 -l ^~" 1 X iP PI . L YY L :C L i +:.° ~ ~ y "..,: p~ *F S- f "~ f+ vai `$ '~ b MwM4 Z F rv' s"+r-i`~J `~ 9» Itb k'?I..d~ Yk.^~ ' $ '~t ~ ' '~ ~'=fi Y '~ ~ ' - a Y - vA .er~ /A S t e ~ . t ,;.G,a.u,., 4 s X- u, ..4=F .~ ~>E ... 3H.r„s i ,r ¢,~ m.r = . s n ~s~., S. Y.,.lm .. ~. .€ :S'r „ ..: 9 . XY.. COA 1 Final Site Plans shall indicate compliance with the maximum building heights as Planning identified in the Maximum Height Exhibit (Exhibit B-2) of Development Agreement No. 2006-00002 and which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. COA 2 Final Site Plans for high-rise towers over 100 feet in height shall show that ' Planning townhomes, at a height of two to three stories, shall be constructed at the base of each tower structure to screen the parking podium and provide apedestrian- fi-iendly street edge and scale and, further, that the subten'anean parking podiums shall contain space for utility equipment rooms: MM 5.1- Final Site Plans shall demonstrate, where adjacent uses aze deemed to be shadow Planning 1 sensitive (i.e., residential, recreational, outdoor restaurants, and pedestrian areas), that the proposed project would not preclude shadow sensitive receptors' exposure to natural sunlight for at least 50 percent of duration for the season, for at least 50 percent of the shade sensitive azea, to the satisfaction of the Planning Duector. r ,,~~FTT~~i++sJ`~ c.. h ¢'ig33~~ ~sr~ ate' w ~ d ~ ~ i v "Y'" {"J''I".ww ,~ Y ''~ m lipi A' ~keY' &. G p' apv vh,~. ~.?^.+rc ~ K~ s. `'{ ^ zd~ r~ ry. rc' a~'` }~~~~ ~> ~, *f~~ ~ '_''+ ~?k d ~~ } ? ~~~ 4G¢ ~~ ~ Y Ga° K~ _Y. y~~7 i "'s ~' ~: 'zts¢ ~ ~s ~'~"~"~"~'`h~ ~' S"" `~-` ~~~s"r m ~C `vv ;z ~~'n + ' nTi~ - rt~~ ~~ ~" :~ ~ ~ ~ re "~ ~~~~ y y, Y , , a + .i. ., : .,, .xa . -8 n. z . ~, i y ' . „ .. COA 3 That this Conditional Use Permit is ganted expressly conditioned upon approval . Planning of Development Agreement No. 2006-00002. COA 4 That this Conditional Use Permit, shall be valid for a period of time coinciding Planning with the timing set forth in Development Agreement No. 2006-00002, which provides for the A-Town Stadium project to be developed in up to three (3) development phases commencing from the adoption date of Development Agreement No. 2006-00002 and extending no further than the fi$eenth (15) anniversary of the Development Agreement Date provided that milestones aze completed as shown in Exhibit E (Development Milestones) of Development Agreement No. 2006-00002. -7- PC2007- COA/ Responsible for MMP Conditions of Approval Monitoring COA 5 That timing For compliance with conditions of approval maybe amended by the Planning 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. COA 6 That the property owner/developer shall be responsible for compliance with all Planning mitigation measures within the assigned time frames and any direct costs associated with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 142 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. COA 7 That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only Planning 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 ftndings as to compliance or approval of the request regazding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. -8- PC2007- RESOLUTION NO: PC2007-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2006-00002 BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND PLATINUM TRIANGLE PARTNERS,. LLC, AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATED THERETO (2050 SOUTH STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD AND 2015 - 2125 EAST ORANGEWOOD AVENUE) 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 Califomia (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, 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 consideration of development agreements upon receipt of an application by the City; and WHEREAS, on May 25, 2004, the Anaheim City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00419 setting forth the City's vision for development of the City of Anaheim ("General Plan Amendment"), and certified Fina] Environmental Impact Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans ("FEIl2 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 Califomia Edison Company Easement on the north ("The Platinum Triangle"); and WHEREAS; in order to carry out the goals and polices ofthe 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 Page 1 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-five 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 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 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, on October 25, 2005, the City Council certified Final Subsequent Environmental 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 September 4, 2007, pursuant to the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance, and the Procedures Resolution (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Development Agreement Law"), Platinum Triangle Partners, LLC, (hereinafter "Applicant"), submitted an application to the Planning Department for approval of Development Agreement No. 2006-00002 (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 A-Town Stadium Project; and WHEREAS, in conjunction with the Development Agreement, the Applicant also requested approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05093 and Tentative Tract Map No. 16860; and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement pertains to approximately 15.6 acres of real. property in the City of Anaheim, owned by the Applicant, commonly known as 2050 South State College Boulevard and 2015 - 2125 East Orangewood Avenue, 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 Gateway District of the PTMU Overlay; and Page 2 WHEREAS, the Applicant desires to develop the property with an 878-unit residential project consisting of six development areas, two public parks and new public connector streets, as more particularly set forth in Exhibit "B" of the Development Agreement (the "Master Site Plan"), Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05093, and Tentative Tract Map No. 16860 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "A-Town Stadium Project"); WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on October 29, 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 recommendatipns in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has demonstrated that the Project meets the eligibility requirements of the Procedures Resolution to enter into the Development Agreement by showing that, upon completion, the Project will result in the construction of a residential development consisting of up to 878 dwelling units within a period of not more than fifteen (15) years, consisting of one (1) initial five (5) year period and two (2) five (5) year extension periods that shall be granted pursuant to the attainment of certain' milestones contained in Exhibit "E" of the Development Agreement ("Development Milestones"); 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 Project is consistent with the City's General Plan 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. 2. That the Project is compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district in that the Project is in compliance with the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements as set forth in the Master Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit 2006-05093 and Tentative Tract Map No. 16860. 3. That the Project is compatible with the orderly development of property in the sun•ounding area in that it is in conformance with and implements The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements and has been coordinated and designed to be compatible with the adjacent Orangewood Condominiums project. 4. That the 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 power and authority under the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance and the Procedures Resolution. Page 3 6. That the Development Agreement is entered into pursuant to and in compliance with its charter powers 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 opposition; and that one letter was received expressing concerns with the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed Development Agreement No. 2006-00002 - to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Platinum Triangle Partners, LLC for an 878-unit residential project consisting of six development areas, two public pazks and new public connector streets and did find and determine, by motion, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), 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 its Second Addendum with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 142, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for 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 aforesaid findings and determinations, the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby recommend. to the City Council the approval of the Application and the Development Agreement.. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 29, 2007. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION Page 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Grace Medina, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on October 29, 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 Page 5 'a EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY: PARCEL A: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH 667.79 FEET, MEASURED ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3 WITH A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT EASTERLY 781.93 FEET MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, FROM THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF 667.79 FEET; THENCE EAST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3 A DISTANCE OF 250.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY, PARALLEL WITH SAID WEST LINE OF LOT 3, A DISTANCE OF 667.79 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF LOT 3 A DISTANCE OF 250.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 3 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 667.79 FEET OF SAID LOT, NORTH 89° 59' 00" EAST 272.10 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID LINE WITH A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND EASTERLY 781.93 FEET, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT;THENCE SOUTH 89° 59' 00" WEST 139.13 FEET, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO A POINT ON THESOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY'S 30.00 FOOT WIDE RIGHT OF WAY AS DESCRIBED BV A DEED RECORDED IiINE 17, 1960 IN BOOK 5292 PAGE 508 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIDS OF 374.26 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 16° 17' IS" EAST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY 283.43 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 43° 23' 25" TO A POINT OF CUSP WITH A COMPOUND CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 3672.29 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 61.23 FEET ALONG SAID COMPOUND CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 0° 57' 19" THENCE SOUTH 31° 16' 19" WEST 8.53 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADNS OF 344.26 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY 119.12 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19° 49' 31" TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL AI: A RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENT FOR RAILROAD PURPOSES OVER THAT PORTION OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, AS SAID LOT 3 IS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY', CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT NORTHERLY 667.79 FEET, MEASURED AT ffiGHT ANGLES FROM THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3 (CENTERLINE OF ORANGE WOOD AVENUE) SAID FOINT BEING DISTANT NORTH 89° 59' 00" EAST 1031.93 FEET FROM THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 3 (CENTERLINE OF STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD); THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE NORTH 89° 59' 00" EAST A DISTANCE OF 22.26 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 344.25 FEET (RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID INTERSECTION SEARS SOUTH 78° 21 47" EAST); THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11° 47' 33" AND AN ARC DISTANCE OF 70.85 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89° 50' 40" WEST 5.00 FEET TO A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE SOUTH 0° 09 20" EAST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE 411.38 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89° 50' 401 WEST 10.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0° 09' 20" WEST 481.79 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL B: Page 6 THE EAST 25 FEET OF THAT PORTION OP LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED EV BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE OWEN COMPANY, RECORDED APRIL 9, 1963 IN BOOK 6500 PAGE 838, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE- COUNTY. PARCEL C: PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS CORRECTED BY JUDGMENT RENDERED ON NNE 30, 1999., A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH WAS RECORDED NOVEMBER 8, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 99-0777133, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED MAY 2, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 97-0222990, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY. PARCEL D: THE WEST 203.67 FEET, MEASURED FROM THE CENTERLINE OF PLACENTIA AVENUE, ADJOINING ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTH 195.00 FEET OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPT ALL RIGHTS; 1TFLE AND INTEREST IN ANY OIL, GAS, PETROLEUM OR OTHER MINERAL OR HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES WITHIN OR BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND OR TO USE SAID LAND OR ANY PORTION THEREOF TO A DEPTH OF 500 FEET BELOW THE PRESENT SURFACE, AS RESERVED IN THE DEED FROM REESE MILNER, A MARRIED MAN, RECORDED JULY 13, 1965 IN BOOK 7590 PAGE 498, OFFICIAL RECORDS. EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN THE JUDGMENT AND FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED ON MAY 2, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 97-0222990, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, PARCEL E: THE EASTERLY 310.00 FEET OF THE WESTERLY 513.67 FEET OF THE SOUTH 195.00 FEET OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. SAID WESTERLY 513.67 FEET BEING MEASURED FROM THE CENTERLINE OF PLACENTIA AVENUE, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP AS AN UNNAMED ROAD. EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN THE NDGMENT AND FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED ON MAY 2, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 97-0222990, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL F: THE NORTH 472.79 FEET OF THE SOUTH 667.79 FEET OF THE WEST 513.67 FEET OF LOT 3 OF TRACT N0. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE OUNTY, SAID WEST 513.67 FEET BEING MEASURED TO THE CENTER OF PLACENTL4 AVENUE, NOW STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD, TOGETHER WITH EASEMENTS FOR DRAINAGE AND RAILROAD PURPOSES AS SET FORTH AND DESCRIBED IN THE GRANT DEED RECORDED AUGUST 1Q, 1978 IN BOOK 12794 PAGE 1212, OFFICIAL RECORDS. Page 7 PARCEL G: PARCEL 2 AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 27 PAGE 33 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM; COUNTY OF ORANGE; STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS AMENDED BY JUDGMENT RENDERED ON JUNE 30, 1999 EV THE ACTION ENTITLED DOUGLAS MELUGIN, ET AL. VS. THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ET AL, ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 765097, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH BEING RECORDED ON NOVEMBER 8, 1999 AS BISTRUMENT NO. 99-0777133, IN THE OFFICE OP THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL G I AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD PURPOSES OVER THE EAST 25.00 FEET OF THE WEST 781.93 FEET OF THE NORTH 371.04 FEET OF THE SOUTH 667.79 FEET OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN PARCEL A AS STATED ABOVE. SAID LAND IS DELBQEATED WITHIN THE AREA SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 27, PAGE 33 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL G2: AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES 30.00 FEET IN WIDTH OVER PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A PARCEL MAP FILED IN BOOK 27, PAGE 33 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. Page 8 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2007-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR TENTATNE TRACT MAP NO. 16860 BE GRANTED (2050 SOUTH STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD AND 2015 - 2125 EAST ORANGEWOOD AVENUE) WHEREAS; the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Tentative Tract Map for certain real property situated in The Platinum Triangle area of the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on October 29, 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, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed tentative tract 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:. t. That the proposed tentative tract map, including its design and improvements, is consistent with the Anaheim General Plan and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. 2. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development at the proposed density and therefore would not cause public health or safety problems or environmental damage. 3. That *** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that one letter was received expressing concerns with the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed Tentative Tract Map No. 16860 to establish a 10-lot (6- numbered and 4-lettered) residential subdivision and did find and determine, by motion, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), based upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial Study/Addendum conducted pursuant to CEQA For the tentative tract map, 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 its Second Addendum, together with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 142, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this tentative tract map and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this tentative tract map. -1- PC2007- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Tentative Tract Map, upon the conditions attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by this reference, 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: BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission ddes 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 approval of the final map for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the approval of the final map or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 29, 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, Grace Medina, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on October 29, 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- EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY PARCEL A: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH 667.79 FEET, MEASURED ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE .SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3 WITH A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT EASTERLY 781.93 FEET MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, FROM THE-.WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG .SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF 667.79 FEET; THENCE EAST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3 A DISTANCE OF 250.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY, PARALLEL WITH SAID WEST LINE OF LOT 3, A DISTANCE OF 667.79 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF LOT 3 A DISTANCE OF 250.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 3 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 667.79 FEET OF SAID LOT, NORTH $9° 59' 00" EAST 272.10 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID LINE WITH A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND EASTERLY 781.93 FEET, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT;THENCE SOUTH 89° 59' 00" WEST 139.13 FEET, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO A POINT ON THESOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY'S 30.00 FOOT WIDE RIGHT OF WAY AS DESCRIBED IN A DEED RECORDED .TUNE 17, 1960 IN BOOK 5292 PAGE 508 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 374.26 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 16° 17' 15" EAST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY 283.43 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 43° 23' 25" TO A POINT OF CUSP WITH A COMPOUND CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 3672.29 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 61.23 FEET ALONG SAID COMPOUND CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 0° 5T 19" ;THENCE SOUTH 31° 16' 19" WEST 8.53 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 344.26 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY 119.12 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19° 49' 31" TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL Al: A RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENT FOR RAILROAD PURPOSES OVER THAT PORTION OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, AS SAID LOT 3 IS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY', CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT NORTHERLY 667.79 FEET, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3 (CENTERLINE OF ORANGE WOOD AVENUE) SAID POINT BEING DISTANT NORTH $9° 59' 00" EAST 1031.93 FEET FROM THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 3 (CENTERLINE OF STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD); THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE NORTH 89° 59' 00" EAST A DISTANCE OF 22.26 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 344.25 FEET (RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID INTERSECTION SEARS SOUTH 78° 21 47" EAST); THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11° 47' 33" AND AN ARC -4- PC2007- DISTANCE OF 70.85 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89° 50' 40" WEST 5.00 FEET TO A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL W1TH THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE SOUTH 0° 09 20" EAST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE 411.38 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89° 50' 40! WEST 10.00 FEET; THENCE NORTII 0° 09' 20" WEST 481.79 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL B: THE EAST 25 FEET OF TFIAT PORTION OF LOT 3 OP TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE OWEN COMPANY, RECORDED APRIL 9, 1963 IN BOOK 6500 PAGE 838, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY.. PARCEL C: PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS CORRECTED BY JUDGMENT RENDERED ON JUNE 3Q, 1999, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH WAS RECORDED NOVEMBER $, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 99-0777133, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED MAY 2, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 97-0222990, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY. PARCEL D: THE WEST 203.67 FEET, MEASURED FROM THE CENTERLINE OF PLACENTIA AVENUE, ADJOINING ON THE WEST LB~IE OF THE SOUTH 195:00 FEET OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPT ALL RIGHTS, 1TFLE AND INTEREST IN ANY OIL, GAS, PETROLEUM OR OTHER MINERAL OR HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES WITHIN OR BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND OR TO USE SAID LAND OR ANY PORTION THEREOF TO A DEPTH OF 500 FEET BELOW THE PRESENT. SURFACE, AS RESERVED IN THE DEED FROM REESE MILKER, A MARRIED MAN, RECORDED JULY 13, 1965 IN BOOK 7590 PAGE 498, OFFICIAL RECORDS. EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN THE JUDGMENT AND FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED ON MAY 2, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 97-0222990, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, PARCEL E: THE EASTERLY 310.00 FEET OF THE WESTERLY 513.67 FEET OF THE SOUTH 195.00 FEET OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA. -5- PC2007- SAID WESTERLY 513.67 FEET BEING MEASURED FROM THE CENTERLINE OF PLACENTIA AVENUE, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP AS AN UNNAMED ROAD. EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN THE JUDGMENT AND FINAL ORDER QF CONDEMNATION RECORDED ON MAY 2, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 97-0222990., OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL F THE NORTH 472.79 FEET OF THE SOUTH 667.79 FEET OF THE WEST 513.67 FEET OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, .STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE OUNTY, SAID WEST 513.67 FEET BEING MEASURED TO THE CENTER OF PLACENTL4 AVENUE, NOW STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD, TOGETHER WITH EASEMENTS FOR DRAINAGE AND RAILROAD PURPOSES AS SET FORTH AND DESCRIBED IN THE GRANT DEED RECORDED AUGUST 10, 197$ IN BOOK 12794 PAGE 1212, OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL G: PARCEL 2 AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 27 PAGE 33 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE CTTY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE; STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS AMENDED BY 7UDGMENT RENDERED ON JUNE 3Q, 1999 EJ THE ACTION ENTITLED DOUGLAS MELUGIN, ET AL. VS. THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ET AL, ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 765097, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH BEING RECORDED ON NOVEMBER 8, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 99-0777133, IN THE OFFICE OP THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL G 1 AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD PURPOSES OVER THE EAST 25.00 FEET OF THE WEST 781.93 FEET OF THE NORTH 371.04 FEET OF THE SOUTH 667:79 FEET OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10 PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.. EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN PARCEL A AS STATED ABOVE. SAID LAND IS DELINEATED WITHIN THE AREA SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 27, PAGE 33 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL G2: AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES 30.00 FEET IN WIDTH OVER PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A PARCEL MAP FILED IN BOOK 27, PAGE 33 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. -6- PC2007- ~n 3 ~L+~~TSYHDF'P` fLDff TTiNTATBVLL1T~A1~ Al1DCA3T 11VIAP N®. 1660. Conditions of eLpproval COA/ Responsible for MMP Conditions of Approval Monitoring. -~ ~~cs~ t vy'«yu cx~ r.-^'~3~' ~f" ~ e~' r ':5 f~ r ~ ` s y ' ~ ' s`" a ~ ~, t~"-mf " Trn~tc r ruoazo~:~Rax~~cr~ .~uarix~~z~ c~ ~ ~ t ~ ~~ ~' ~ ~4 °_' ~~ k ~ ,~r: > ,o- ~, r%w...~%.. ~>rt.Lrn v^.ias,:~.+"a ,``.Y,z'""+. ~4..J ,x.aw 'R~''~~s. fi't+ ^" rr. va'S.ACr'"J. at}`. ya s.'.Sr 2'N'v"~ '~ y '.i.x izf¢ ~ nW¢ COA 1 That prior to final map approval, street names for new public streets shall be reviewed and approved. Building COA 2 The property owner/developer shall be responsible for ensuring that all existing stmctures within Building the boundaries of the Final Master Tract Map shall be demolished. The OWNER shall obtain a demolition permit from the Building Division of the Planning Deparhnent. Plans submitted for fire demolition permit shall include a demolition recycling plan which has been reviewed and approved by the Public Works Deparhnent, Streets and Sanitation Division. The demolition recycling plan shall indicate type of material to be demolished, anticipated tonnage diverted and ply _ Sanitation anticipated tonnage landfilled: Inert demolirion material (dirt, concrete, masonry, asphalt, etc.) shall be disposed of in an inert reclamation site, or diverted by other means rather than Lrndfdled. COA 3 That the Final Master Tmct Map shall encompass the entire 15.6-acre project site and shall include PW -Dev Svcs the fallowing: and MMP 5.10-6 a) Irrevocable offers of dedication, including necessary constmction easements and easements for street, public utility and other public purposes, for the ultimate right-of--way improvements for the following arterial highways and connector streets, pazk sites, and Development Area G (remainder parcel adjacent to Anaheim Stadium parking lot) listed below and identified in these conditions of approval, shall be made prior to recordation of the Master Final Tract Map:. L Arterial highways along the project site frontage including: 1.1. State College Boulevazd 1.2. Orangewood Avenue 2. Connector Streets within the Master Site Plan boundaries (Connector Street "A", "B", "C", and "D" as shown on the Master Site Plan in Exhibit "B-1" of this Development Agreement); and 3. Public Park Site 1 and Public Pazk Site 2 in the locations shown on the Master Site Plan in Exhibit `B-1" of this Development Agreement. 4. Development Area G, as shown on the Master Site Plan in Exhibit "B-1" of the Development Agreement. COA 4 , The Final Master Tract Map shall include the alignments and dimensions of all streets including PW -Dev Svcs easements. The boundaries of the numbered residential lots on the Final Master Tract Map shall coincide with the boundaries of the development azeas as identified in the Master Site Plan. These areas maybe further subdivided in connection with the processing of subsequent Builder Tentative Tract or pazcel maps provided that a Final Site Plan showing the configuration of the subdivided lots and the proposed buildings is approved prior to or concurrently with the builder tentative tract or azcel ma . COA 5 The property owner/developer shall finalize the abandonment of any existing driveways and public PW -Dev Svcs -7- PC2007- COA/ Responsible for MMP Conditions of Approval Monitoring utilities easements and vehicular access rights to Orangewood Avenue and Stale College Boulevard shall be released and relinquished to the City of Anaheim. COA 6 The properly owner/developer shall submit mass grading, street, sewer, storm drain and landscape . PW -Dev Svcs (including street tree) improvement plans for the public improvements along State College Boulevard, Orangewood Avenue, and Connector Sheets "A", "B", "C", and "D" prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. COA 7 Improvement bonds, except for Connector Street "D" in the event that it has been previously PW -Dev Svcs constmcted, shall be posted in amounts approved by the City Engineer and a form approved by the City Attpmey prior to approval of the Master Final Map. COA 8 That the property owner/developer shall post a bond to the City for all required sewer PW -Dev Svcs improvements/upgrades, including the removal of any abandoned lines and/or off site improvements. COA 9 That the property owner/developer shall execute a Subdivision Agreement, in a form approved by PW -Dev Svcs the City Attorney, to complete the required public improvements at the property. owner/developer's expense. Said agreement shall be approved by the City Attorney and City Engineer and then recorded concurrently with the Master Final Map: COA 10 That the OWNER shall submit a maintenance covenant (the "Covenant") to be approved as to form PW -Dev Svcs by the City Attorney's Office. The Covenant shall include provisions for maintenance of public and private facilities as identified in Exhibit "E", "Development Requirements and Maintenance Obligations" of the Development Agreement, including compliance with an approved Water Quality Management Plan, provisions for maintenance of all special surface improvements within the public right-pf--way, and a maintenance exhibit showing the boundaries of the maintenance area. COA 11 That the property owner/developer shall pay the current City of Anaheim Arterial Highway PW -Dev Svcs beautification/aesthetics impact fee. COA 12 That the current City of Anaheim Platinum Triangle Drainage Impact Fee shall be paid. PW -Dev Svcs MMP 5.5- The property owner/developer shall cause the City Engineer to review the location pf the project to PW -Dev Svcs 3 determine if it is located within an area served by deficient drainage facilities, as identified in The Platinum Triangle Drainage Study. If the project will increase storm water flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan drainage study for the area or if the project currently discharges to an existing deficient storm drain system or will create a deficiency in an existing storm drain, the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impact [o adequately serve the area to the safisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney's Offtce. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the drainage facilities, as required by the City Engineer to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the Development Mitigation within Benefit Zones (Appendix E of The Platinum Triangle Drainage Study), prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by [he City or Final Building and Zoning ins ec[ion for the buildin /structure, whicheveYOCCUts first. Addifionall ,the ro erty -8- PC2007- COA/ Responsible for MMP Conditions of Approval Monitoring owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, if adopted for the Project Area, as determined by the City Engineer, which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, constmction, or a combination thereof. MMP The property owner/developer shall cause the City Engineer to review the location of theproject to PW - Dev Svcs 5.11-5 detemune if it is located within an area served by deficient sewer facilities, as identified in The Platinum Triangle Sewer Study. If the project will increase sewer flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan sewer study for the area or if the project cuixently discharges to an existing deficient sewer system or will create a deficiency in an existing sewer line, the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impact to adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attomey's Office. The property owner/developer shall be required to instal] the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the Benefit Parcels and Development Mitigation (Appendix D of The Platinum Triangle Sewer Study); prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or fmal Building and Zoning inspection for the building/strncture, whichever occurs first; Additionally, the property ' owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, if adopted for the Project Area, as determined by the City Engineer, which could include fees, credits,: reimbursements, constmction, or a combination thereof COA 13 The property owner/developer shall submit a focused project access analysis that addresses trip PW -Traffic generation comparisons to the approved Master Site Plan, project access to the internal street system and the local arterial street system, project circulation phasing, cumulafive effects of on- site development [o the phasing of intemal streets, loading areas, delivery areas, gate stacking requirements (if security gates are proposed), and pedestrian linkages.. COA 14 The property owner/developer shall post a bond guaranteeing that all traffic related street PW -Traffic improvements shall be completed prior. to the fast final building and zoning inspection, except for Connector. Street "D" and the traffic signal at Connector Street "D"/Orangewood Avenue in the event that Connector Street "D" and the signalized intersection have been constructed by the adjacent property owner, including, but no[ limited to, traffic signals, directional signage, striping, and median islands. COA 15 Final backbone Street Improvement Plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and. Transportation PW -Traffic Manager for review and approval. The plans shall include, but not be limited to, street revisions necessary to implement and conform to the Master Site Plan; notes to indicate that on-street parking spaces shall be posted, "No Overnight Parking, Except by Permission of the Management' ;the location of traffic signal box locations; the alignment of the intersection of "A" Street and State College Boulevard and the KB Homes project; and, the alignment of the intersection of "D" Street and Orangewood Avenue. The plan shall indicate all constmction staging areas with reserved space for construction parking and shall also designate truck routes to the satisfaction of the Traffic and Transportation Manager. The final backbone Street Improvement Plan shall provide details sufficient to ensure that all street improvements will occur during the initial street construction. Streets shall be constructed in accordance with Section 9.3 (Timing, Phasing and Sequence of Public Improvements and Facilities) of this Development Agreement COA 16 The Final Master Tract Map shall indicate the final park acreage and boundaries, as depicted on the Community Master$ite Plan. Park obligations of the OWNER shall be secured by performance bonds, letters. Services of credit or another form of security, in an amount and form approved by the City Attorney's Office and the Communi Services De artment: AlYdedicated ark ro ernes shall be free of -9- PC2007- COA/ Responsible for MMP Conditions of Approval Monitoring encumbrances or easements unless otherwise acceptable to the Community Services Department. Before the dedication of any park area is accepted by the City, a Title Report for that park must be provided to and approved by the City Attorney's Office.- COA 17 The property owner/developer shall post a bond to the City for the undergrounding of all overhead Electrical electrical utility structures located on the property. All improvements/undergrounding shall be completed to coincide with the level of development that would require this improvement, to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department and other utility companies. COA 18 The Final Master Tract Map shall indicate that any existing City of Anaheim public utilities Electrical easements that conflict with potential building footprints shall be abandoned. COA 19 The property owner shall past a bond to the City for the installationbf street lights on Connector: Electrical Streets "A", "B", and "C", and Street "D" in the event that it has not been constructed by the adjacent property owner. Street lights shall be in accordance with the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, as it may be amended. Street lights shall be installed prior to the first final building and zoning inspection. COA 20 The property owner/developer shall submit to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Water and MMP Utilities Department for review and approval the following. 5.11-2 1. A water'systemmaster plan, including hydraulic disMbution network analysis and estimates of the maximum required fire flow rate and the maximum day and peak hour water demands For ultimate development of the Master Final Tract Map; 2. An engineering study showing the adequacybf the existing water system to provide the estimated water demands to the ultimate development; 3. A layout of the proposed water system, with a minimum of two (2) connections to public water main and water line looping inside of the project, a minimum often (10) ; feet clearance between proposed sanitary sewer and water lines, and a minimum clearance of three (3) or six (6) feet between curb face and water lines; and 4. Water system improvement plans showing the water system backbone infrastructtre required to serve the entire Master Final Tract Map development area: - The water system backbone infrastructure may be'constiucted inc>ementally; provided that said incremental phasing is adequate to provide municipal demands and fire flow protection with looping for the phased development and the adjacent development. Water system improvements shall be completed prior to the fmal building and coning inspections: _ A, GENERAL: COA 21 That this Tentative Tract Map No. 1 fi860 is granted expressly conditioned upon approval of Planning Development Agreement No. 2006-00002 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05093; COA 22 Tha[ this Conditional Use Pertnit, shall be valid for a period of time coinciding with the timing set I Planning forth in Development AgreementNo. 2006:00002, which provides for the A-Town Stadium project to be developed in up to three (3) development phases commencing from the adoption date of Development AgreementNo. 2006-00002 and extending no futiher than the fifteenth (15) anniversa of the Develo meat A Bement Date rovided that milestones are com leted as shown -10- PC2007- COA/ Responsible for MMP Conditions of Approval Monitoring in Exhibit E (Development Milestones) of Development Agreement No.2006-00002. COA 23 That approval of this application constitutes approval of [he proposed request only to the extent that Planning 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. COA 24 That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director Planning 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. COA 25 That extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval maybe granted in accordance Planning with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. -11- PC2007- Attachment -Item No. 5 aNawnN ntE uwlow srmlT wIDN DF 5(wODL IFARNING DIARI(T Sltt(E1890 September 18, 2007 Mr. Ted White Senior Planner City of Anaheim Planning Department 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92803 Re: Platinum Triangle -Tentative Tract No. 16860 Dear Mr. White: This letter is in response to your letter dated September 6, 2007notifying us of the potential impact the above referenced tract would have on student enrollment within our school district. The information provided indicates that this project falls within the boundaries of the Anaheim Union High School District for students in grades 7-12. Students living in this area would attend the following schools: Grades 7-B South Junior High School 2320 E. South Street Anaheim, CA 92806 Grades 9-12 Katella High School 2200 E. Wagner Avenue Anaheim, CA 92606 Presently, both schools are operating beyond their existing capacities and are severely overcrowded. The project will have a severe and significant impact on the Anaheim Union High School District. Payment of appropriate developer fees as required by law will not adequately mitigate the Impacts of the project and will be Insufficient to adequately address the overcrowded school facilities available to the new residents of the project. Since(rely~, ~' ~.// n Oskoui Director of Planning, Design, Construction JO:In Facilities and Planning 501 Crescenc Way • Post Office Box 3520 Anaheim • California 92003.3520 Tel: 714.999.2180 Fax:714.520.5741 We are an Equal Opportunity District Item No. F I ( ~ I MALL INDUSTRIAL SMALL INDUSTRIAL I FIRMS I I FIRMS i VAC I ANT ~ ~ ~ I a I 4 I 1 RCL fifi17-14 ~ RCL 6213-30 o W ~ 7 Z 1 I RCL 5314-3 9 UJ RCL 6213-39 ~ I ~ CUP 3446 ~ RCL 53-54-3 - N I I CUP 3163 Q Q ~ VAR 4002 ~ I I 4 5 ~ VAR 3951 ? VAR 3951 ® Z VACANT BUILDINGS I ' ADJ 0076 I I INDUSTRIAL FIRMS B i 4 I I I m I I O CL ORANGEFAIRLANE ~{ 60' Imo--196'• 1 ~' rn N k ~ RCL 6617-U p I ~ ,-, RCL 6213.3( CUP 3484 ~ ~ OJQ~' ~ U RCL 53-54-3 ~ ~,: CUP 2707 VAR 2007 S S ALL INDUSTRIAL FIRMS ~ SERVICE 1 - STATION I I RCL 6617-14 T-CUP 2607-05252 RCL 6213-30 7-CUP 2902-04556 CUP 3205 CUP 3950 VAR 4365 'SMALL INDUSTRIAL VAR 4336 FIRMS VAR 2016 P 6 O COLD LOGISTICS LLC RIVERSIDE FREEWAY Conditional Use Permit No. 3950 TRACKING NO. CUP2007-05252 Requested By: DAVID L RUDAT 1110 East Orangefair Lane 0 A 6 a ~~„ Subject Property Date: October 29, 2007 Scale: 1" = 200' O:S. No. 80 10400 s nenni rnutu Conditional Use Permit No. 3950 TRACKING NO. CUP2007-05252 .Requested By: DAVID L RUDAT Subject Property Date: October 29, 2007 Scale: 1" = 200' Q.S. No. 80 1110 East Orangefair Lane ~oaco 200 S. Anaheim Bivd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 vaww.anaheim.net 1 ITEM N0.6 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENIDA REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: OCTOBER 29, 2007 FROM: PLANNING SERVICES MANAGER SUBJECT:' CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3950 (TRACKING NO. CUP2007-05252) LOCATION: 1110 East Orangefair Lane APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Jesse Gilhom with Synergy Development Services and the property owner is David Rudat. REQUEST: The applicant requests to'retain a telecommunications facility and remove a condition of approval pertaining to"a time limitation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission take the following.:.: actions: (a) By motion, approve a previously approved Negative Declaration* (advertised as Mitigated Negative Declaration). (b) By resolution, approve the amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 3950. BACKGROUND: This p.25-acre property is developed with an industrial building, and is zoned Industrial (I}: The General Plan designates this property and surrounding properties for Industrial land uses. A conditional use permit was approved in 1997 to retain and modify a legal nonconforming telecommunications monopole for a period of five years: A time extension was approved in 2002 for an additional five yeazs, which expired on July 21, 2007: PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to retain an existing telecommunications facility. A condition of approval for the permit states that it expires on July 21, 2007. The .applicant has requested the deletion of this condition to continue operation of the telecommunications facility. The applicant has stated that because this monopole is in` an industrial azea and there is a current lack of funding, there aze currently no plans to alter the existing facility. Please refer to the project summary chart attached to the staff report for project details. .CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-05252 October 29, 2007 Page 2 of 2 ANAI,YSISc The condition of approval regarding a time limitation was in place to allow the protect to be subject to periodic review to ensure compliance with the zoning code. Since approval in 1997, the monopole has operated in conformance with the pemut and conditions of approval`. Code requires findings for the approval of a reinstatement. and deletion of a time limitation: The findings relate to condition compliance and safe operation. A recent inspection by staff indicates that this facility is currently operating in compliance with all conditions of approval. The deletion of the time limitation is .appropriate because it has been demonstrated that the use has operated in a manner that is appropriate for the site and the. surrounding azea, and staff believes that the periodic review of the use is no longer necessary. In addition, reinstatement of this telecommunications facility supports the citywide wireless service coverage initiative.. Staff recommends approval of this reinstatement request and removal of the time limitation. Respectfully submitted, Co carte by, ~~~ ~' _ c Acting PrincipalPlanner %P arming ervices Manager r Attachments' L Project Summary 2: Justification of Reinstatement 3. PriorResolution AT1'ACIIMEPIT iVO. 1 PR®.TI1CT SI1MI!'IAItI' CIJP2007-05252 Develo mentStandard Pro osedPro'ect I none standards Site Area 0.25 acres N/A Building and Landscape Adjacent to: Feet Setbacks Orangefair Lane 10 10 Interior property lines None, 65 to reaz None Building Height Re uirements 61 100 Attachment -Item No. 6 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT JUSTIFICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT - Section 18.60.180 of the Anaheim Municipal Cade requires that requests for re(nsfatements or renewals of a lime- limited permit shall be made in writing no later than six (fi) months after the expiration date of [he permit sought to be reinstated or renewed and must be accompanied by an appllcailon form and the required filing fee. , 1. In order to reinstate or renew a permit, the facts necessary to support each and every finding far the original approval of the entitlemeht as set forth in the following excerpts from the Anaheim Zoning Code still exist: 18.66.060 (Relative to Conditional Use Permits) Before the approval authority, or City Council on appeal, mayapprove a oonditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact, by resolution, that the evidence presented shows thatall of the following conditions is required: .031 That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by this code, or is an unlisted use as defined in subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); .032 That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adJolning landyses or the growth and development of the area in which it is prdposed to be located{ ..033 That the size and shape of the site proposed far the use is adequate to allow the full development of fhe proposed use in a manner not detrimental fo the particular area or to health and safety; .034 That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burderupon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the trafFlc in the area; and .035 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. 18.74.060 (Relative to Variances) Before any variance maybe granted by the approval authority, or City Council on appeal, it shall be shown: .0201 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; .0202 That, because of special circumstances shown in .0201, strictapplication of the zoning code deprives the propertyof privileges enjoyed by other property underidentical zoning classification in the vicinity. 2. Said permit or variance Is being exercised substantially In the same manner and in conformance vrilh all conditions and stipulations originally approved; 3. Said permit or variance is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular area and surrounding land uses, nor to the public peace, healfh, safety and general welfare; and 4. With regard only to any deletion of a time limltafion, such deletion is appropriate because it has beer demonstrated that the use has operated in a manner that is appropriate in the underlying zone and the surrounding area and that the periodic review of the use in no longer necessary and/or that i1 can be determined that, due to changed circumstances, the use is consistent with the City's long-term plans for the area In order to determine if such findings exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer the following questions fully and as complete as possible. Attach additional sheets if additional space is needed. 1. Has any physical aspect of the property for which this use permit or variance been granted changed significantly since the issuance of this use permit or variance? Yes ^ No Explain: C,f'~ C%~SgT'`P~e'c~ . (over) CASE N0. !~l'Q 'qJ~' ~ 2. Have the land uses in the immediate vicinity changed since the issuance of this use permit or variance? Yes ^ No Explain: `~'~ G-'C~-r-,~nl/tu'.~"'~' 3. Hasany aspect of the nature of the operation changed since the issuance of this use petmit or variance? Yes^No® Explain: ~~ Gt`~"~P/`!M'PJ`~ 4. Are the conditions of approval pertalning td the use permit or variance being complied with? Yes No ^ r Explalni seef~~~Pi~e+~ 5. If you are requesting a deletion of the time limitation, Is this deletion necessary for the continued operation of this use or variahce? Yes® No ^ ~~~ cti ~-yv~th'~ Explain: The applicant for this request Is: ^ Property Owner Authorized Agent Name of Pro erty Owner r ut rized A ent (Please Print r ~~~ Sig ture of Property Owner or Authorized Agent ~/r~ Reinstatement appllcalicn.doc Revised 11!10105 n~r~ ~~~ Dc vclopmrnc Service;, t1C Exhibit A 0.. I+fa 2~_hanges to Prbpt~rty The wirePess facility operotxs on property used #or aontntarciztf and industrial usas, and is surn>unded by prapettles with al.tttilattfstas..A`Vv'S' radio roam wti~s in~rorparatcd itrtr, uct existiltg building an tine ~pttitniges ottd'ramarlta eo today, e'1e substatttiaV changes have occueicd on this ptt'tporty: iklthough litY5 loos frtsan tirue to lima upgraded equipment on site, this has not cltattgcd the physsael cPramoderisticr> o£the £ncility. 2. Laud Usos in lnttne<liutt Vicinity Pia+°e Not Glaanped Ta fha north, west e~pd south am commercialdaulustrisl ltuiltlings, Ta the east is' a. gas statinit. No sensitive uses havo been introduced to this creel sinew tha grantiffig cf tllc anginal paEncit. 5, Natrtrt; of the L3pecetion o€Pacihty Has Not Chantged The nature of the operation of the facility has not changed: the wireless facility continues to carry telephone calls and data from wireless customers in the area. The facility is receiving more traffic now than ever before due to a growing customer base, most significant is the combining of former ATT wireless customers with the former Cingolar Wireless customers whom now utilize the one network, and an increase in the use of data transmission. 4. Compliance Hdth Conditions The w'veless fatiility'.s physicnt eppcarnnce has not changed, though some aspects of the rpdia aquipntent hnve,. PtWS continues to mpke large ittvaatttrants in tto`tt ~eneratian wiroless oguipmett2 foa• this facilPey and ihrcugltaut tlle.ttctwot9+, All equipment upgtsdcs a6 iltis fiicilPty havo occurrcct vritlt;n else confines of the origitral t:ondidons, of appravat. 5. Itcttncst for ;]clction of Timc Limitadorr 71us witeEess facility has bacoma increatdttgly imporixnt for pravfdin$ service to the community ixt twv tespects: i;l} at; notcd'en #~ ahovc, uac of thin partieuiar facility is .growing rapidly, {2) Dues the years, radio e2tgPneers have dasigtaetl new silos based upon lha IccaEion of'tha axisiing silos. I£AV75 locos a faoiPify„ h will affect not anPy tho iftuttediate service area but also the sitirctnvding araas which have Post tEtt:ir hand-v>f partner, tf n sensitive use comes into tllJs step witB a wiraPess £pciiity already egrabiished; the useta wily akaady have mn ertpactation that we are there and will coadimue to ba tlrera. If AV~S tsve5 last 1Tte fatilily dui ten a stalest pmvisian in. a permit and a changat cit~umstance jt[me intrnductirat ofthe sensitive ttsnj, the same rationale that Yed the City to deny the permit wall a@so prevent. AW8 fFona placing a stew facility in.clase proximity to the ari~inpi location, 'lll>is wiPl erects a Gaxdship for 11te ttebvotk and can ®ffect scrwia fnr die dtousands of cvstnlners aacYl da}~ wCta obtain service fiam iha facility. Thus, in onier to mairdaiet a stable service eivvironntent tot out austocnxrs, AWS requests that the sxtanded psxmiS root bs sub}ect to a tim4limitation. Attachment -Item IVo. 6 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CI1Y PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDI11ONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3950 BE GRANTED WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission dkJ receive a verlfled Petklon for Condklorial Use Pemrlt for certain real property skuated In the Cky of Anaheim, County of Orange; State aF Calffomla, described as: LOT 2 OF TRACT NO. 6383, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 244, PAGE 48 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY: WHEREAS, 4he Cfty Planning Commission dki hold a publk:'headng et the Chic Canter In the Cky of Anehelm on July 27, 1997 at 1:30 p.m., notice of ~~ pualc heartng having been duly gNen es require by !aw arrcf In axordance wkh the prwlslons of the Anaheim Munidpal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear end comber evkience for arms against eat proposed coruiklonal use parmk and to irnestigate aril make flrxlinga armi racommerrdaflons in connec0on therewkh; arid: WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, Irneatigatlon arms study made by kself arms In ke behalf, arms after due cwiskleretlon of ell evMence and reports Wfered at saki hearing, does find arms determine the fdlaroing facts: 1. That the proposed use Ia properly one for which a oorxiklonal use parnk b authorized by Anaheim Mtarldpal Code Section 18.61.050.460 to retain and modky a legal noncoMorning cellular telecommunir~tlona monopole antenna 2. That the etdstMg monopole was Installed In tl~1 (prior to curent Code requirements for a condklorm~l use pernk) with Zoning Division approval and bu®ding penults, but that this request to malNY the monopole ezce~s ks curent legal nonconforming status and requires approval of a corxlklonal use pernk; 3. That the proposed use will not adversely effect the adjoining land uses arms the growth and development of the area in which k B proposes to ba located; 4: That the size arms shape of tF~ ske for the proposed use la adequate to allow fWl development of the propoeed'uae In a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, salary and gert~ai weHare because subject monopde is Dated in an Industrial eras and Is not tmgar any res~entlal properties: 5. That the traffic generated by the proposed use w~i not Impose an undue burden upon the streets end highways design~i and Improved to eery the tafflc in the area; 6: That the granting of the condkional use permk, under the condklons Imposed., will net be detrimental to the peace, health, safety arms general welfare of the ckizens ~ the City of Anaheim: 7. Tt~t the helgM of the monopole is less than the maximum permkted In the underlying zoning armi the proposed modiflcatlon of the southeast amenna array brings the structure Into conformance with Code since k would no longer e~dend over adjacent property to the east; CR2985PLWP -t- PC97-100 ~p NQ 3950 S. That the replacement and addftion aF antenna panels Is a minor modification to the monopole aril Is Ilkety to go unnotical by those who see the structure; and 9. That no ors Indlt~ted tFtelr presenw et the pudic hearing In oppoahlon; attd that,no cortesporxfence was receNed In oppoaldon to the eub)ect :petition.. f,~A1JFORNiA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FlNDING: That the Anaheim Chy Planning Commisalan has reviewed the pro~sal to retrain anii modHy a legal noncoMorming cdluler telecommunications monopoe antenna located on a 0.25,acre rectengulady-shapes tercel having e frontage of ~ feet on the south skfe of Otangsfair Lana, a maximum depth of 178 feet, and Ming located 1~ feet west of the centedine of Raymond Avenue (1110 East OrengefaN Lane); arxt does hereby approve the Negative Dedaradon upon finding that the dedaredon reflects the IrxlependeM judgement of the lead agencyar~ that h has consklered the Negathte Dedaretion together with any comments receN~ dudng the publk: review process and further finding On the basis of the Infdel study and any comments receNed that there LS no substanilal evidence that the project wtll have a signflicant effect on the environment NOW, THEREFORE, BE R RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby greM subject Petitbn for Corxlfdonal Use Permft, upon the fdiowing corxlftions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequiske to the proposed use of the subject property In order to preserve the safety and general wNfare of the Calzens of the City of Anaheim: t. That the cellular tdecommunk:ation facility Is approved for a period of flue (5) years, to expire on July 21, 2002. 2. That only three (3) antenna artays w&h a total of four {4) antennas, one (1) fit by four (4) feet, may located on the monopoe at a maximum height of sixty one (81) feet, as shown on Exhibits Nos. 1 through 4. No additional antennas shall be permitted wf[hout the prior approval oP the Planning Commieslon. 3. That the monopole structure shall be painted to 61end with, aril match, the surrourxfing structures and sky.. a. That no signage, flags, banners, or any other form of advertising shall be attached to ttte proposed monopole arxf array structure.... 5. That subject property shall ~ developed substantially in accordance wflh plans and apecflicatlans submitted to the City of Artahelm by, the petitioner, artd which dens are on fAe with the Planning Department marked F.xhibks No. 1 through 4, atxf as corxlftioned herein. 6. That the height of the tnanopde shell not excel the height of the attached antenna arrays at any time. If the artaya are lowered, the monopoe haigM must he reduces (removed) to aortespond wRh the haigM. of the arrays. 7. That prbr to final building and zoning inspections or whhin a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolu[bn, whk:hever occurs first, Conditlon Nos 2, 3 arxf 5, atmve-mentioned, shall be compll~ with. Extensbns for further dme to complete saki cotxiflions may be granted In accordance with Section 18.03.0 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 8. That approval ~ this application consthutea approval of the proposed request only to the extent that K compiles wkh the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Cade and any other appl~ade City, State erxt Federal regulations. Approval does not Indude any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other appllcaf~e ordinance, regulation w requirement -2- PC97-100 Cup ~0. 3 9 5 0 BE R FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Plannlnp Commisebrt dose hereby find ervi determine that adopter ~ thb R ul~ ~ pradk~ttad upon applloarrt'a eompl~nce with each and aA oP the t~lttbne fortlt. Shad any such ~ ~ any pate thereof, be det~ar~ irwal~ or urtenf Ma by tits f )ud of atry caM ~ Juri~kxton, then this..,:. Resdutbrt, and any approvals herein t~tsined, shaA bad null and voki. THE :FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopter a< the Plannlrp Commisalon meeting of July 21, 1Sff7. IOriginsl signed by P2ul Bostwick) CHAIRPERSON ANAHEIM CfTY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: ~t„.e~na1 signed by Margarita Soloriol SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Margarita Sdorb, SetxaPary ~ the Anaheim City Planning Commisabn, do hereby certify that the foregoing rea~trtbn was passed erg edopt~f at a meeUnp ~ the Anaheim Ctty Planning Commissbn held on July 21, 1s~7, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTIMCK BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, MAYER, NAPOLES, PERA; NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE 1997. IN yYITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereumo set my hand this day of SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ~ PC97-1 tm ~O 3950