Resolution-PC 2008-15•
RESOLUTION NO. PC2008-15
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2008-00235 BE DENIED
(1150 NORTH MAGNOLIA AVENUE)
WHEREAS, Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.40.060 authorizes the City
Engineer to approve waivers of public right-of--way improvements subject to the following
findings:
1. That there is no reasonable relationship between the need for the required
dedication and improvements and the type of development project on which such requirements are
imposed; or,
2. That the cost of the required dedication and improvements unreasonably exceeds
the burden or impact created by the development project; and,
WHEREAS, Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.40.060 states that the City
Engineer's decision maybe appealed to the Planning Commission to be processed in accordance
with the procedures for processing of variances from the code, except that the findings shall be
those set forth in Section 18.40.060; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant submitted a letter to the City Engineer dated December
10, 2007, requesting a waiver of public right-of--way improvements associated with a proposed
expansion of an existing office building; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2007, the City Engineer denied the applicant's
request for a waiver of public right-of--way improvements; and
WHEREAS, the applicant filed an appeal of the City Engineer's decision and the
Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for waiver of public right-of--way
improvements for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State
of California described as:
PARCEL 38, AS PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 135, PAGES 19, 20, 21 AND 22
OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF
SAID COUNTY.
WHEREAS, Miscellaneous Permit No. 2008-00235 is proposed to waive the public
right-of--way improvements associated with a proposed expansion of an existing office building;
and
-1- PC2008-15
• •
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic
Center in the City of Anaheim on January 23, 2008 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 variance 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:
That the petitioner requests waiver of the following:
(a) SECTION NO. 18.40.060.030 Improvement of Right-of-Way.
(Parkway required along Magnolia
Avenue , No parkway~roposed;
Sidewalk required along Woodland
Drive, No sidewalk proposed.)
2. That there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the required dedication
and improvements along both Magnolia Avenue and Woodland Drive and the proposed office
expansion as described below:
a. The code anticipates that changes will occur in the local neighborhoods
and the City generally. As a result of activities associated with the City's
development and growth, dedications ofright-of--way and improvements are
deemed necessary to prevent congestion and other hazards that are related to the
intensified use of the land, and to preserve public health, safety and welfare.
b. The development would create pedestrianlvehicular traffic and other
conditions necessitating the improvement of the public right-of-way.
Employees and customers are anticipated to be on-site as a direct result of the
operating business. These visitors would create additional vehicle and
pedestrian activity to and from the property that may commute to work or walk
to other local points of destination. Providing pedestrian access to the property
is vital along the frontage of the property to ensure pedestrian safety.
In an evolving or growing urban area each additional development adds to
the traffic burden. It is reasonable and necessary to construct the public
improvements since the characteristics of industrial areas have changed over
time. Previously, employees would typically drive to work and then leave at
the end of the day with their vehicles. Previous street standards in industrial
areas did not include provisions for sidewalks. Today, there are public
transportation routes, restaurants and other service businesses that serve people
in the area. Additionally, a certain percentage of public transportation use is
even taken into account in the development of the City's Planned Roadway
Network.
_2_ PC2008-15
• •
d. Improvements are necessary and would benefit the development. Public
transportation is highly encouraged within the City and County and there is a
highly used bus route along Magnolia Avenue with bus stops located just north
of Woodland Dr. With that, pedestrian activity would be prominent along
Magnolia Avenue, enforcing the need for a parkway and sidewalk. Woodland
Dr., as a connector street, would still benefit from a sidewalk. Understanding
the existing conditions for Woodland Drive, only a 6' sidewalk to provide
pedestrian access is being requested of the applicant.
e. The City has approved requirements and standards to insure uniformity
and orderly development. Public Works Standard Detail 160-A for public
streets in industrial areas does indicate a parkway and sidewalk. The proposed
street improvements would establish conformity with neighborhood design.
The development's location on a corner lot along a Primary Arterial only
furthers the need for it to meet city's requirements. Having a landscaped
parkway adjacent to the roadway along Magnolia Ave. would buffer
pedestrians from vehicular traffic along the arterial. The improvements would
set the precedence for future neighboring developments and be aligned with our
City's Street Beautification Committee's goals.
3. That the cost of the required dedication and improvements do not unreasonably
exceed the burden or impact created by the development project based upon the following:
a. Citywide Traffic and Transportation Impact and Improvement Fees were
developed based on actual construction costs to widen a public street and then
apportioned to the different land uses and anticipated traffic impacts created,
(i.e. single family, apartment, general office, retail, industrial, church, etc). The
City Council then reduced by 68% the actual cost for purposes of establishing
the impact fee.
b. Public Works staff used the City Council approved traffic impact fees and then
calculated the 100% value of the traffic impacts associated with the
development request.
Based on estimates prepared by Public Works staff, the cost for the required
improvements in the public right-of--way does not unreasonably exceed the
burden or impact created by the development project.
4. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that
no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: The Planning
Director's authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the
definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities), as defined in
the State CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional
environmental documentation.
_3_ PC2008-15
• •
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission
does hereby deny subject Petition for Miscellaneous Permit No. 2008-000235 on the basis of the
aforementioned findings.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all
charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the
issuance of the final invoice.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission
meeting of January 23, 2008. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in
Chapter 18.60, "Zoning Provisions -General" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to
appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal.
ATTEST:
CHA AN NAHEIM NNING COMMISSION
SENIOR~CRETARY, 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 approved denying Miscellaneous Permit No. 2008-00235
at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on January 23, 2008 by the following
vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAINED: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
BUFFA, VELASQUEZ, ROMERO
AGARWAL, KARAKI
FAESSEL
EASTMAN
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 20th day of
February, 2008.
G~ ~- //~
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
_4_ PC2008-15