PC 82-16RESOLUTION r~o. Pf.82-iC
A P,ESOLUTI ON OF THE A~lAHE IM C I TY PLA~dM I ~~~ Cn~1M I SS I OPJ
THAT PETITIOP! FOR CONDITIONFlL USE PEP,~qiT ~JO. 2?f~$ DE GR,qFJTED
IJHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified
Petition for Conditional Use Permit from TNE CITY OF ANAIIEI'1 and C-D III, a
general partnership, on certaln real property o~vned by the City of Anaheim
situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, StatP of California, more
particularly described as set forth on Exhibit "A" actached hereto and
incorporated herein I~y this reference as if set forth in full; and
WfiEREAS~ the Ctty Planning Commission did sch~dule a public hearing at the
City Hall in the City of Anaheim on January 7_5, 1982, at 1;3`~ p.m., notice of said
public hearing having been duly given as required by tao-~ and in accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim f4unicipal Code, Chapter 13.u3, to hear and consider
evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and
malce findings and recomriendations in connection therewith; satd p~blic hearing having
been continued to the Planning Commission meeting of Februarv B, 1982; and
tlft[REAS, said Comml=sion after due inspection, tnvr_stigati~n and study made
by itself ~nd in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports
offered at said hearing, does find and determine the foilo~ving facts:
1. That the proposed use is properly one for t~hich a conditional use
permit ~s authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 1£~,8~,,'t,n~ ~g,/~g,r~r,~.p3~ and
~a•~Eg•~~~•070 t~ wit: To permit an 11-story, 1~0-foot h(gh, tf..~~-room convention
hotel witli accessory uses and on-sale alcoholic beverages and ~~rith a~aiver of:
SECTIO~lS 18,06.050 ~;r~~ 1~3,Q(,06p - Minimum number and design of parking soaces.
3~ spaces required; 32~~ spaces proposed
as follows: inS4 stan~iard snac~s ($-1/2~xlo~)~
.Li small car spaces (7-1/?_'x1;'),
'~ tandem standard spaces and
611r tandem small car spaces).
2. That the proposed use ~aill not adversely affect the ad_joining land uses
and the gro~ath and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located in
that the ad.joining land uses cons(st of the Anaheim Convention Center, the Jolly
Roger Inn, the Inn-at-the-Park Hotel~ the Marriott liotel and other commerctal
recreational, public recreational and tourist-oriented uses ~lhich are compatible with
the proposed project.
3. That the requested i,~aiver is hereby granted on the following basis:
(a) That the petitioner stipulated to entertna into an
agreement ~~ith the City of Anaiieim that additional
parl<ing will be provided by the petitioner in the event
pari<ing deficfenctes arise or if the proposed parkino
proves to be inadequate; and that the developer ~atll
provide, at no cost to the City, appro~riately desioned,
engineered, and constructed footings anri columns which
PC82-16
-~., -~
will support two additional floors on top of the
proposed three-story parl<Ing structure.
(b) Tliat tlie draft Parking Code Revision Study r~cently
prepared for thc City of Anaheim by Linscott, Latv and
Greenspan, Inc, discusses the special circumstances
represented by convention hotels and otlier uses in the
commercial recreational areas and a~idresses the
overlapping use of parl<ing in multi-functi~n hotel
complexes; and that the study also addr~sses the issue
of small csr spaces; and that the petitioner stipulated
that their tandem parking plan is feasibir. and efficient
and has worked very successfully to serve the parking
needs of many of their other major and similar
developments.
(c) That there are special circumstances applicahle to the
property such as size, sha~e, topography, location or
surrounCings, r~hich do not applv to otlier identially
z~ned properties in the vicinity, as follotas:
(1) That the project ~vill be the only hotel lacated
tvithin tl~e "PR" Puhlic Recre~tional Zone of the
City of Anaheim and will he located immedtately
adjacent to, and upon the same property as, the
Anaheii~ Convention Center.
(2) That a substantial number of the hotel guests wili
arrtve and depart by means of puh)tc transit or by
rental cars, and that from 30o to ~t~~ of the
available rentals are small cars.
(d) That strict application of the zoning code deprives the
property of privileges enjoyed hy other property under
identical zoning classification tn th~ vtcinity in that
simiiar or more stgnificant parE:ing ~•~ai~~ers have been
granted by the City of Anaheim for other properties in
the commercial-recreation area as folloa~s:
(1) Conditional Use Perm(t No. zt3n permitted a 10~n-
room hotel project (!Jrather/Hilton; adjacent to the
Anaheim Convention Center with a waiver of 32~ of
the minimum number of parl;ing spaces. The project
was never constructed,
(2) Conditional Use Permit No. 2265 perm~tted a 3~n-
room hotel expansion (Marriott) v~ith a waiver of
25~6 of the minimum number of parkTng s~aces.
~3) Cond;tional Use Permit No. 22'1.. permitted a~0-room
hotel expansion (Hoa~ar~i Johnson Motor Lodge) with a
waiver of lOm of th~ minimu~ nu~nher of pari<ing
spaces.
-2- PC82-16
~ ,
4. That tne size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to
allow ~he full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the
particular area nor to Yne peace, health, safety and general welfare of the Citizens
o` the City of Anaheim in that the proposed hotel ~•rill have a favorahle tmpact on the
adJacent Anaheim Convention Center and the general welfare by providing a large
number of guest rooms and support facillties in proximity to *_he Convention Center
which should improve tl~e abllity of tlie Conventton Center to attract maJor
conventions to the C1ty and the pr~posed project ~~ill providr economic benefits to
the surrounding restaurants, financtal institutions, service stattons, retail
facilities and the Anaheim Convention Center.
5. That the granting of the conditional use permit under thP conditions
imposed will not be detrimental to the oeace, health, safety, and general welfare of
the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
6. That the tra`fic c~enerated by the proposed use ~•rill not impose an undue
burden upon the streets and hfghways designed and improved to carry the traffic in
the area.
7. That approximately three persons indicated thetr presence at the
January 25 and February u, 1987_, publtc hearings in ~ppositfon; and that
correspondence iaas received in opposition to the subject petttion.
ENVlRO~J~IENTAL IMPACT FINDIN~; That after considering EIR N0, 251 for the
proposed develupment o a 1 00-room convention hotei ivith ancillary uses and
reviewing evidence, both wrttten and orai, to supplement Draft EIR N0. 251, the
Planning Commission finds:
(1) DraPt EIR td0, 251 is in compliance ~~~ith the California
Envlronmental Quality Act and City and State EIR Guidelines.
(2) The following envtronmental impacts have been identified as
beinq associated with the ~ropose~l prnject:
(a) There ivill be temporary inconvPntence to surroundtng
properties as a result of noise, dust, lighr, and trucks
during construction.
!b) The project will cause an incremental tncrease in air
pollution.
(c) There 4ei11 be additional vtsual and noise intrusion to
surroundfng land uses adjacent to the project.
(d) The project may contribute to the need for addttional
sewage treatment plant capacity in the future.
(e) The increased number of hotei employees may cause
further pr~ssure on the supplv of low and moderate
income housing in the area.
(f) The prcject a~ill generate substantial Increases in
vol~mes to the existing traffic control system.
(g) The project ~aill incrementally decrease ~•~ater main
pressure during periods of peal: demand,
(h) Cumulatlve traffic from tiie attractions surrounding the
project area could severely imp~ct the Fire Department
response time.
-3- PC82-16
(i) The current level of police service is expected to
decrease, though an increase in manno~•ier ~!ould not be
necessary.
~3) The follo~ai~g mitigation measures ~•~tll he ~mployed to reduce these
environmental impacts:
(a) Complfance with city cades, policies, and procedures.
(b) An on-site secondary water system shall be revie~~ied and
approved by the city.
(C) The developer will 4~orF: i~ith the city to construr,t the
necessary se~~~er )tne improvements.
(d) The intersection of Harl~or 6oulevard/Katella Avenue wili
be improved to include turn lane storaoe facilities,
signing, channeltzation and parl<ing rem~val on Katella
Avenue.
(e) The City ~~ill pursue financing improvements at the
Harbor/Ball intersection with the state, prtvate
developers and the city's Signal Assessment Fund.
(f) The ~ity ~aiil continue to pursue mass transit
improvements s•~ith the Oran9e County Transit District in
order to maintain acceptable traffic conditions in
/~naheim's Conmercial-Recreation llrea.
(g) The hotel's parl;ing activity U~ill be visually monitored
by the city to assure that changes in use
characteristics and/or hotel operations do not create
parking deficie~cies for tlie hotel patrons. The
developer will covenant in the lease agreement to
provide additional parkin~ in the event such parking
defictencies arise as a result of the hotel parking
waiver and/or use of tandem parking.
(h) As a part of final ~IPSinn ~f thQ pro_j~ct,
comprehensive progran of guide signing arill be included
as approved by the CiCy's Traffic Engineer,
(i) A parking security and control program, to be approved
by the C(ty Police Department, shall be lnstituted for
the operation of the parking structures.
(J) A1l taxi, bus and truck loading and unloadinq areas
shall he subject to revie~o and approval of the Ctty
Traffic Engineer.
(k) A construction truck routing plan identifying the routes
to be used during peak and non-peal: traffic conditions
shall be submitted to the City Traffic ~ngineer for
revie4r and approvai.
(1) A detailed traffic and par4;ing operations plan shal) be
developed and approved prior tn construction. Said
plans shall address location of construction fencing,
haul routes, parl;ing access, traffic restrictions,
temporary median access and 1~;,C closu;es, modification
of bus routes, er~ergency acc~ss, and location of flanmen
and construction signing and markings.
-4- PC82-16
(m) T'he hotel i•~i11 be developed in comol~ance ~•~ith energy
conservation measures as set forth in Title 7_1+ of the
California Administrative Code.
(n) lmplementation of a double-shift t~ork period for
construction of the Conventfon Center replacement
parking structure.
(o) An emergency access plan ~~~ill be submitted for review
and approval by the City Fire Marshall,
~p) The City of Anahelm and Hilton Hotel Corporation ~vi11
preF~re and adopt an agressive market plan for the
proposed project and Anaheim Convention Center.
Therefore, the Planning Commtssion hereby certifies that EIR tdo. 251 has been
completed in compliance ~vitli CEQA and State EIR Guidelines and that the Planning
Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained therein prior to
approval of the project and adopts tl~e following Statement of Overrlding
Considerations:
1. The approval of Conditional Use Permtt No. 22£;g and ~aatver of off-street
parking requirernents for the proposed development of a 16r1~-room hotel wtth
ancillary uses cou)d result in the significant envtronmental impacts whir.h
have been identified a6ove and whtch may be reduced to an acceptable level
by the mitigation measures hereinabove indfcated,
2. That the Planning Commtssion of the City of Anaheim does hereby further find
that the specffic econonic, social or other considerations as set forth
hereafter make infeasible further mitigation measures or pro.ject
alternatives identified in the Final EIR for the follo+,~ing slgntficant
environmenta) effects:
a. Increased traffic congestlon on nearby streets and highways,
b• Increased noise and atr pollution resultino fr~~ the
increased traffic,
~. Increased requirement= for water, electrlr_ity~ ses•~age and
solid waste disposal facilities.
d. Increased requirements for affordable housing and public
services for employees of the facilities.
e. Temporary disruption to the surroundtnq area caused by
construction activlty during an approximate 3-year period,
f. Proposed structures ~•~tll permanently obstruct views from
surrounding tand uses,
9. Proposed structures wtll pertodically cast shada~~s onto
surrounding land uses.
h. Adequate funding to improve the in±ersection of Narbor
doulevard/ [ial) Road cannot be guaranteed.
i• Periodic increases in demand for parl;ing at the Anaheim
Convention Center ~•~ill not be fully met.
J. Temporary drop Pn occupancy to hotel/mntel facilities servin~
2he Anaheim Commercial-Recreation Area, '"
3. That the Planning Commissia;t of the City of Anahr_ir~ has balanced the
benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidabl~ environmental rtsks
in determtning ~,~hether to approve said project, The Planning Commission of
the City of Anahei^~ does hereny further fi~~{~ r~~termTne and state, pursuant
to the provisions of Sectton 150~3!~ of the State Guidclines, that the
-5- Pc82-16
/~\
occurrence of those certain significant environmental effects identifted in
the Final EIR and set forth ahove ~•iill be permitted a~tthout further
miti7ation due to the follo~ying overridin~ considerations:
a. The project will result in the follo~•~ing suhstantial economic
and social benef(ts to the City of Anaheim and surrounding
a rea :
(1) 7he city's net revenue for the ne~~~ 1600 rooms is
estimated at $6,(1~+9,270 annually.
(2) The project will create additional employment for 7~i8
people and additional tourist trade.
(3) '1a.jor city revenues pro,jected to he generated by this
project include annual ground lease payments of
approxinately $1,57~,~0~; annual transient occupancy tax
of approximately $3,z52,413; and annual sales tax of
approximately $221, 737 (all dollar value re.presentation
for first year of full liotel operation as measured in
1987 dollars.)
(4) The city taill attain a hote.l with a full range of
ancillary facflities to serve as the ~rincipal host
facility for the Anaheim Convr_ntion Center.
b. Each of the feasible alternatives to the project, except for
double-shift constiruction of parking structure, a~ould prod~ce
significantly less economic and social benefits to the City
of Anaheim than a~ill be produced hy the pronosed project, to
wit:
(1) The no-project alternative would remave this potential
revenue source of $G million annually to tlie City. of
Anaheim and v~ould alirn•~ a high-occupancy rate to oresist
in the Anahe(m Commerctal-Recreation Area i•~hich could
negatively impact ti~e scheduling of events at the
Ananeim Convention Center,
(2) The alternative sire offered at the Anaheim Convention
Center could potentlally produce tl~e same revenue as the
proposed project. Primary dis~dvantages relate to
access, the site's relationshin to surroundinn land
uses, and the fact that thts location ~rould hloc!< the
most logical site for any further expanston of the
convention exhibit space.
~3) The 4frather Corporation fiad offered the ctty a f.-acre
parcel of land near the Oisneyland Ilotel as an
alternative to proceedin~ ti•~itl~ the proposed project.
The city could sell the parcel far approximat~ly S4
million. The primary disadvantage to that alternative
is that such action v~ould not be as econom(cally viable
to the city as securing the proposed project a~d a S6
million annual revenue stream, tdithout dtspos(ng of the
-6- PC82-16
~_......... .. . _
---~
parcel, the city coull lease the land to a hotel
developer. The primary disadvantages to such action
relate to the length of time a~hich arould he involved in
securing a nea~ pro.ject, loss of a Convention Center
hotel and resulting ground-lease ~ayments, potential
loss of the Hilton liotel's ~•~orldo~ide reservations and
convention experience, and creatinn a need for more
vehic]e transportation to and from the Convention
Center,
~~~) Reduced size alternative ~•iould significantly decrease the
annual r•evenue stream to the city. In additi~n to revEnue
tmpacts, a smaller hotel would generate proportionatPly lower
area employment and resultin9 revenues to the community.
~5) The LJrather Corporatian has proposed expanding its Inn-at-
the-Park by approximately 500 rooms in lteu of the proposed
projecL. Primary dtsadvantages relate to significantly less
revenue to the city; loss of approximately 11~0 additional
rooms ~•~ith a full range of ancTllary faciltties; and the
alternative project would not fulfill tlie city's desire for a
host hotel facility to serve ti~e Anaheim Convention Center.
~~) The increased sized hotel alrernative is subject to
supportive mar~:et conditions 4~htch are presently lacking in
the Anahetn Commercial-Recreation Area. City revenue from a
larger pro_ject iaould increase generally in prop~rtion to the
size of the increase.
c. It is not economically feasible to further mitigate or avoid
the environmental effects identified above.
d. The aforesaid economic and social constderations make it
infeasib'te to eliminate enttrelv the sianificant
environmentai impacts ~~rhich have been identified in the F!nal
Environmental Impact Report.
~dOW, THEREFORE, 6E IT RESOLVED that the Anahein City Planning
Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit,
upon the following cond(tions which are hereby found to be a necessary
prcrequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to
preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of
Anaheim:
1. That a qualified archeologist and/or paleontologist shall be
retained on-s1te, as needed, to monitor grading operations on
subject property.
2. That the traffic slgnal assessment fee for commercial buildin9s
sha11 be paid in an amount determined by the City Council
(0 rd i nance No, 3A~36) ,
3. That a bond, certiflcate of dep~sit, letter of crrdit or cash in
the amount of forty-thousand dollars ($40,ODD) shall he nosted
-7- PC82-16
i~.
witi~ the City of Anaheim to guarantee improvements at the
intr_rsection of I;atella Avenue and Harbor goulevard. Sair1
improvements shall include turn lane storage facilities, signing,
ehanneli~ation and removal of on-street parl<ing on I:atella
Avenue.
4. That the number, type, and location of replacement parl:in9 spaces
for the Anaheim Convention Center shall be subject to the revie~•~
and approval of tlie Anaheim City Council,
5. That a Development Phasing Plan shall be submitted for revie~.ti and
approval hy the Convention Center Authority. Said plan shall set
forth an acceptablr_ scliedule interfacing construction activities
with Convention Center activities.
6. That a Parking Security and Control Program for operation of ~he
proposed parking struc*_ures (proposed hotel and Convention Center
replacement parking) shall be submltted to thr City Police
Department for revie~•r and anproval.
7. That an Emergency Access Plan shall be submitted to the Fire Chtef
for review and approval.
8. That a detailed Traffic and Parking Operations Plan shall be
submitted to the City Traffic Engineer for revie~.a and approvat.
Said plan shall addrass location of construction fencin~, haul
routes, parking access, traffic restrictions, tempnrary median
access and lane closures, modificatton of bus routes, emerqency
access, location of fla9men and construction signing and marking.
9. That a construction truck routing plan for the construction phase
of the hotel, hotel parktn9 and ConventTon Center replacement
parl;ing shall be suhmitted to th~ City Engineer for revieo~ and
app~oval.
10. That a comprehensive Signing Plan for vehicul~r and pEdestrian
circuiation shall be submitted to the City Tra`fic Enqiner for
revie~d and approval.
11. That the destgn and location of all taxi and b~~s loading ar.d
- loading areas shall he suhject to review and approval by the
`:~ty Traffic Engtneer,
11., fhat an on-site secondary water system shall I~e revie~~e~ and
aprroved by the Public UtilFtes Department.
13. That trash storage areas sliail be provided in accordance ~aith
approved plans on file a~itli the Office of t~~e Executive Dlrector
of Public Works.
14. That the developer shall confer ~~~ith the City to construct the
necessary sewer line tmprovements to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
-8- PC82-16
~~.. _,.... .
15. That subject property shall be developeci substantially in
accordance ~~~ith plans and specifications on file with the Citv of
Anaheim marl:ed Exhibits Plo, 1 through 21 provided, however, that
all parking spaces designated as "standard" s~iall have min(mum
dimensions of 3 1/2' x lQ~.
16. That the the proposed hotel shall conply ~•~ith all siqning
requirements of the CR (Commercial, Recreation) Zone. ~!o sTgn or
other advertising devices shall he placed so as to exceed the
height permitted by the Height Standard Gutd~lfne for such zo~e
~15( feet at subject location).
17. That appropriate water assessment fees as de*.ermined by the
Office of Utilities General !lanager shall he paid by the develooer
to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a building permit.
13. That prior to the issuance of huilding permits t'ie developer of
subject property shall submit a l~tter requesting termination of
Cond i t i ona 1 Use Perm i t PJo. 21 3!1.
19. Tliat Conditions PJo, 2, 3, 4, S, 6, 7, 3, ?, 11. and 12, above-
mentioned, shall be complied wit'~ prior to the commrncement ofi the
activity authorized under this resolution, or prior to the tfine
that the bullding permit is issued, or within a ~eriod of one year
from date hereof, whichever occurs first, or such further time as
the Planning Commission may grant.
20. Tliat Condition No. 10, 13, 14, 15, and 1F above-mentioned, shall
be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections.
21. That the developer shall provide and maintain a television antenna
or cable system, without charue to the resid~nts, to assure
satisfactory television reception to any residences which are
unable to receive a satisfactory level of television stgnats as a
result of interference caused by the ~ro.ject structures.
BE IT FURTIIER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Ctty Planning Commisston does hereby
find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon
applicant's compliance roith each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth.
Should any such condttion, or any part the~•eof, be declared invalid or unenforceable
by the final judgment of any court of competent jurtsdiction~ then thls Resolution~
and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
THE FOREGOINr, RESOLUTIOtd is signed and a~proved hy me this ~th day of
F~ebruary, 1982.
~c-ss~SL (,~ ~~-
CIiAIRHAN, AMAHE111 C1TY PLAhININf; COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~d~ ~
SECRETARY, AMAIIE iFl C iT PLAilN I P! ; COMM ~ SS I O~J
-9- PCF~2-16
STATE OF Cl1LIFORNIA )
COU~ITY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF APIANEIM )
I, Edith L. Ilarris, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do
hereby certify that the foregoing resolutton a~ac ~assed and adopte~! at a meeting of
the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on Fehruary 'i, i~~i?_, by the following vote
of the members thereof:
AYES; COMMISSIOMERS: BARPJES, 60Ul1S, FRY, HERB5T, KI~J~, MC BURNEY
fd0E5: COMNISSIONERS: ~JOPdE
ABS[P1T: COMMISSIONERS: IlOME
ADSTAIP~: COMMISSIONERS: EiUS1i0RE
I~I WITNESS WIfERCOF, I have hereunto seC my liand this 9th day of
February,t932,
~.~~, ~ ~,, -
SECRETARY, A4JAHEIN CIT PLAP1taINr, CO!1-41SSIO~J
-10- PC82-16