Resolution-ZA 2002-08DECISION NO. ZA 2002-08
A DECISION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
APPROVING VARIANCE N0.2001=04466 ,
OWNERS: Susan Manuel
201 Ocean Ave.; #601-8
Santa Monica, CA 90402.
- Athanasios and Sofia Tatsis
5051 'E. Orangethorpe,Ave.
Anaheim,'CA 92807..
Christopher Drakos
1741 N. Kellogg Drive'
Anaheim; CA 92807:
AGENT: Gerald Mintz
EATACOS
19081 Spicewood Lane.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
LOCATION: 5031 East Orangethorpe, Unit B-1
CEQA STATUS: CEQA Categorical Exemption, Class 1
HEARING DATE: February 21, 2002, continued from the Zoning Administratormeetings of
December 13, 2001 and February 7,.2002.
OPPOSITION: Three people indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition to the
proposal, and 15 letters and a petition with 98 signatures in opposition to the proposal .
were received.
SUPPORT: A petition with 8 signatures in support of the proposal was submitted.
REQUEST: Petitioner requests waiver of the following to increase the seating in an existing
restaurant (with accessory outdoor seating) within a commercial retail center in the
CL(SG) (Commercial, Limited -Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone:
Sections 18.06.050.020.021.0211 - ~ Minimum number of parkino spaces.
18.06.050.020.022 (289 required;
18.06.050.020.023.0231 192 proposed and concurred with by the City
18.06.050.020.023.0233 Traffic and Transportation Manager)
18.06.080
18.12.060.110
and 18.44.066.050 .
Having been appointed Zoning Administrator by the Planning Director, pursuant to Anaheim Municipal
Code Section 18.12.040, to decide the above-referenced petition and a public hearing having been duly
noticed forand held on the date-set forth above, I do hereby find:
1. That the parking waiver is hereby approved on the basis that the number of additional parking
spaces required by the Zoning Code for the proposed additional seating is minimal (only 3 parking
spaces}.
V2001-04466.doc -1 of 3 - ZA 2002-08
__ ~~
2.. That the petitioner submitted a pa~kicig study prepai'ed~ by a registered traffic engineer, RBF
Consulting; dated September 28, 2001, to analyze the~parkirig waiver and to determine.whethersdequate
parking was available and the waiver was justified; and that the City Traffic and Transportation Manager
reviewed the study, concurred with the findings, and determined that there wi0 be sufficient parking for the
proposal to, increase seating for this existing restaurant. ~ ,
3. That the parking study included parking counts during typical weekday and weekend periods,
which are summarized in the parking analysis; that tlie~peak parking demand experienced was on
Saturday with 100 occupied parking spaces{52% utilization), which indicates a vacancy of 92 spaces;
that similar findings were recorded for the weekday peak parking demand with 97 occupied parking
spaces {51 % utilization); indicating a vacancy of 95 spaces; and that based on these findings, there is
ample parking provided bn-site.
4. .That City Traffic Engineering staff also conducted an on-site parking survey and determined
that adequate. parking was provided on-site during weekday peak hours..
5. That this commercial retail center is legally.nonconforming in that it was developed over 25
years ago (in 1975):under parking requirements and standards which have since been up-dated; that
some of the on-site parking spaces may not be conveniently located for every patron of all the various
businesses in the center, but that subject restaurant (Eatacos Mexican Food) is located in an area with
easily accessed parking; and that the various businesses in the center (restaurants, medical offices,
services such as television repair, and retail businesses including a supermarket] and have different peak
parking demands throughout the day and the week.
6. .That granting of the parking waiver will not cause an increase in traffic congestion in the
immediate vicinity nor adversely affect any adjoining land uses.
7. That granting of the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to
the peace, health, safety or general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
8. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not significantly increase traffic
congestion within the off-street parking areas nor will it impede vehicular ingress/egress to adjacent
properties.
Based on the evidence and testimony presented to me, I do hereby determine to approve Variance No.
2001-04466, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the granting of this parking waiver is contingent upon operation of the use in conformance with
the assumptions andlor conclusions relating to the operation and intensity of use as contained in the
parking demand study that formed the basis for approval of said waiver. Exceeding, violating,
intensifying or otherwise deviating from any of said assumptions andlor conclusions, as contained in
the parking demand study, shall be deemed a violation of the expressed conditions imposed upon
said waiver which shall subject this permit to termination or modification pursuant to the provisions of
Sections 18.03.091 and 18.03.092 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
2. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications
submitted to the Ciry of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning
Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2, and as conditioned herein.
3." That permits shalt be obtained from the Building Division if required for any improvements proposed in
connection with this proposal.
4. That prior to commencement of the activity herein approved, or within a period of one {1) year from
the date of this decision, whichever occurs first, Condition No. 2, above-mentioned, shall be complied
with. Extensions for further time to complete this condition may be granted in accordance with Section
18.03A90 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. .
V2001-04466.doc - 2 of 3 - 7A 2002-08
5. 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 ardinance, regulation or requirement.
This decision is made, signed, and eritered in#o the file this 28~" day of February 2002. '
~'f ~ ,~
4~ `~ (' ~L' Lu
Annika M. Santalahti, Zoning Administrator
NOTICE: This decision shall became final unless an appeal to~the City Council, in writing, accompanied
by an appear fee, is filed with the City Clerk within 15 days of the date of the signing of this decision or
unless members of the City Council shah request to review this decision within said 15 days.
DECLARATION OF SERVICE 8Y MAIL: ~i do hereby declare under penalty of perjury that on the date set
forth below, I. did deposit, in the United~States Mail, a copy ofi the decision to the applicant and did forward
a copy to the City Clerk.
DATE: February 28; 2002. ~ ~~
. Patricia Koral, Senior Wor Processing Operato
V2001-04466.doc - 3 ofi 3 - ZA 2002-08