Resolution-PC 96-23S~
~
RESOLUTION NO. PC9S-23
A RESOLUTIQlJ OF THE ANAHEIM ClTY PLANNING COMMISSlON
THAT PETITION FOR C~NDITIONAL IDSE PERMIT NO. 3822 BE GRAt~i~ED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Ciry Planning Commission did recefve a veriHed Petitfon for
Canditionai Use Permft for cR!tain real property sftuated in the Cfry of Anaheim, County of Orange, State
of CalKamia, described as:
THAT ?OR i ION OF LAND ALLOT I~D IN THE FINAL DECREE OF PARTITIO~I OF
THE RANCHQ CANON DE SANTA ANA, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH WAS
RECCIRDED FEBRUARY 8, 1974 IN BOOK 28, PAGE 158 OF DEEDS, RECORDS
OF LOS AI~GEL~S c:4U~TY, CALIPORNIA, DESCRIBED A~ FOLLOWS:
PARCEL t~0. 1 AS SHQWN ON A MAP FILED IPI BOOK 85, PAGES 20 AND 21
OF PARCEL M~'S IN ~"HE -0FFICE OF 7HE ~OUNTY RECORDER OF SAID
ORAlJGE COUNTY, CALiFORNIA. ~
~~HEREAS, .~h~ City Planning Commis5lon did hdd a public hearing at the Civic Centar
in the Ciry of Arwheim pn Febrc~rti~ 21, 193i at ~:30 p.m., notice of said pubiic hearing having bsen duly
gNen as required by Ir~v- ard fn a~cordance wfth the provisions of the Anaheim MuNcipal Cale, Chapter
1£i.a3, to hear ar~d ~ca~~,ider evidance for and against sa~d proposed conditional use permR and to
irrv~stlgate and make r:idin~s a~~i recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHERE.:a, saFd C~ommission, after due inspect(on, fnvestigation and study made by itseif
and i~i fts bshalf,' and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does ftrxi
anc! determine th~~ ~oilowing facts:
1. . That the proposed use !s properly one for which a condftional use permit is authorized by
Anahe(m M~nicipa~ Code Section 18.44.050.300 to peRnit a 6,000 sq.ft. drive-through restauraM wfth waNer
of the fdlowing
sw-tions 18.06.050.021.0212 - `:vlfnfmum number of aarkina snaces.
18.06.050.022 ~7 4 required; 41~ approved by the Tra~c and
18.0fi.050.0221 Transporiation Manager; _4~ existing)
18.06.050.0231
18.06.050.0233
18.06.050.0234
18.06.080
~,nd 18.44.06G.050
2. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposeci, wiil not cause fewer off-street
parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate
all vehides attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable condftions of operation
of such use;
3. That the parking waNer, under the conditions Imposed, wAI not lncrease the demand snd
competition for park(ng spaces upon the publlc streets in the immedtate vicinity of the proposed use;
CR2604DM -1- PC96-23
~
~•
rkin waiver, under ihp corxiftions imposed. will not increase the demar~d and
q. That the ~' 9 R ad acen4 private prope-tY in the immediate vi~innY of the proposed
competition for parking spaces upo 1 ~~~ for such use under an agroement In comp~~n~
u~ (which property is not exprassly Provkled as pa 9
with Section 18.06.010.020 of this Code)
5. Thatthe parki~gw~wer, underthe ~~dn~ he ~?~ ~' ~~ingfareas ort ~ CP o~~ for
no~se, a1r pollution, or traf~c circulation cor~licts,
such use
6. That the parking waNer, urxier ths condnions imposed will not increase ~~c ~he puiblic
e vehicular (ngress to or egress ftom adjacent properties, upo
noise, air pollution, or imped ~ the proposed use;
st~eets fn the immediate viciniry ~te parking
7, That the City Trafflc and T~nsPo~tiun Manage~ has determined that adeq
exists far the proposed drive'through restaurant in this is specffic ~o~mercial retail ~~ lS ~~ho~~ by
g. That the prQPos~ us~' fs prope~lY one for which a condiNonal use Pe Zone;
CL SC Commercial-Umited-S~e~~° ~°~°r ~eday'
the Zoning Code in the underiying (~~ ~~h and
g, That the proposed usa W~~~ not adverselY a~~ the adjolning land uses and the g
sed to be located;
d~~opment of the area in wh~ch R is propo
~p. That the size and shape of the ske for the proposed use is ad9quato to al~ow the fu~~
rticular area nor to the peace,
development of the proposed use ~n a ma~ner not deMme a~~th ough restaurant is located at the
health, safoty~ and general welfare ~ rovides ngre~sseand egress for restauraM customers without
soucheast comer of the properb/ which p
impacting the parki~9 and ~~rculstton ~f the 6xist(ng commerckil retafl ce~,ntoer, n the
the proposed use Will not {n~ se an undue burden upo
~" j ~, 'f hat the traffic generated by t~ t~~~ in the~ s~rea;
~r~~ and highways designed anc fmproved to ~RY rm~, u~~~r tfia conditions imposed~ will not be
12. That the granting of the condftional ~se P8 0{ qnaheim; and
detrimentai to the ~~~ h~th, safety and general welfare of tiie cllfzens of the Cicy
1 g, That no one indicated their presence at sakl publ~c h~3aring in oppositior; and that no
correspondence Was receNed in opposnion to the subject petition.
AL1F RNIA E' IRONMEh Al QUAUTY ACT FINDING: That the Nnahefm Ciry Planning
uare foot building to a drNe-
Commission has reviewed the proposal to Permn the cornerslon of 6~~ ulad shaPed Par~ °f
through restaurant wnh waiver of minimum number oS parkinq spaces on an irreg Y'
lancl consisting of apProximately 9.9 acres lacated no o~~ ~yg~9ffeet on h enoRh slde ~~~
Highway and I.a Palma Avenue, havin9 nontages ~f aPP n~~in that the declaration reftects the
Avenue and 372 feet on the east skle of Imperia~ Hi9h~ay, and further de~cribed as 5799 East l~ P~
ao rove the NegatNe Declaration upo 9 tNe Dedaration together
Avonue; and doe~s I~ereby p
irxlependent jud9emant of the lead agencY a~d that ft has considered the ~ Wi~~ ~ve a
wfth any comments receNed during t tha4ublie eefseno s bstantial ¢evklence~tih~t ~hehPro ect af the inftial
stuciy arxl any con-ment~ recefved
~~g~~pM ef(ect on the ernironment.
-2-
pCg6-23
~ ~i ~
~~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE R RESOLVED that the Anahelm Ctry Pianning Commission does
hereby graM subject Petftfon for Condftlonal Use Permit, upan the fdlowfng condftions which are hereby
found to be a necessary prerequtsfte to the proposed use of the subJect property tn order to prsserve the
safery and general welfare of ths C(tizens of the Ciry af Anaheim:
1. That a speaker b~rc1 sound system shell bo designed and fnstalled with day and nigM settlnps that
are no loucier than sbcty (60) dB st the property Une. Sai~ system shall ba designed such that the
vdume adjustment is corKrolled from (nside the restaurarrt.
2. That, unless determined unnecessary by the Department of Malntenance, a trash storage area for the
exdusive use of the subject restauraM shall be provkied and matrrtalned tn a location acceptablo ?o
the Department of Maintenance and in accor~ance with approveJ ~lans on fi!e with safd depa~tme~t
Such (nfomiation s;~ali be specffically shown on the plans submftted for building permits.
3. Thai the proposal shall comply with all signing requiremeMs of the CL (SC) Zon~ 'Commerc0al-
Umited-Scenic Corridor Overlay' Zone unl~sss a varianc:e allowing s(gn waNers (s a~~~roved by the
Planning Commission or City Council.
4. That Iighting the signage from dose of business untii 6:30 a.m., as specified by Zoning Code Sectfon
18.05.091.Q52, shall be prohibfted unless a variance fs flrst app8ed for and granted.
5. That a minimum of fourteen (14), minimum fifceen (15) galion sized, trees shall be planted arx'
maintained with approprfate irrigation facilfties atong the La Palma Avenue and Chrisden Street
frontag9s.
6. That any tree pfanted on-site shatl be replaced !n a timely manner in tha event that ft is removed,
damaged, d(seased and/or dead.
7, That on-site traffic circulatlon shall bo reviewed and approved by the City Traffic and Transportatlon
Manager.
8. fhat a uniformed securfty guard shall be provlcfed'tc m~nitor the premises to discourage loftering
from dusk until dasing, as dfrected by the Anaheim Pdica Department.
9. That subJect property shall be develaped substantially in accordance with plans ar~ specffications
submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petftioner and which plans are on flie wfth the Pienning
Department marked Exhibft Nos. 1, 2 and 3; provided, however, that encroachment of any parMng
area into the required landscape setback along La Paima Avenue shall not be permittod and any
existing encroachment shall be remaved.
10. That prior to fssuance of a buUding perm(t or wRh(n a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resoiution, whichever occurs flrst, Condftion Nos. 2 and 7, above-meMioned, shall be complled wfth.
Extensions for further time to complate said conditions may be grarited fn accordance wkh Section
18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipaf Code.
1~. That prior ta the commencement of the actNity authorized by thfs resoluc(on or prior to flnal building
and zoning fns~ections, whichever occurs flrst, Conditbn Nos. 1, 5 and 9, above-merrtioned, shall be
complied with.
~ 2, That approval of this appiication cons4i~utes s~pRroval of the proposed request only to the exteM that
ft ccmplies wfth the Anaheim Munfcipal Zon(ng Code arid any other appi{cable Ciry, State and Fede~l
regulations. Approval does not indude any act!on or flr~dings as to compliance or approval of the
request regarding any other applicable ordfnance, reg~ation or requirement
•3- PC96-23
•. ~
.,~,.
13. That the granttng of the parking waiver is contingent upcri oparation of the use in coMormance wfth
the assumptions relating to the operatfon and irrtensfty of use as contained In the parki~ig demand
study that formed the basts for approval of sa(d vartance. Exceeding, violating, trrte~~sifying or
otherwise devtating ftom any of said assurr~ptluris~ as conta~ned in the parking dema~d study, sha~~
be deemed a vidation of the expressed c~ndhlons Imposed upon said varlance which shall subJect
that vrxriance to termination or modffir,ation pursuant to the provisfons of 5ections 18.03.091 and
18.03.092 of the Anahefm Mur+icipa! C,~de.
BE IT FURThiER RESOL~~ED that the Anahefm City Planning Commissfon does hereby find
and determine that adopt(on of thls Resolucion is expressiy predicated upon $pplica~st's campliarsce w1~h
each and all of the condftfons hereinabove set fortt~. Should any such condftion, or any paK thereof, be
dedared Irnalid or unenforc-eable by the flnal JudgmaM of any court of competent jurisdictton, then this
Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION v.~s adopted at the Planning Commission meet~n9 of
February 5, 1996.
~ /~ /
CH 1R OMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLN ING COMiViISSION
ATTES7:
~~
SECR ARY, NAHF_IM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALJFORNIA )
CAUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CIIY OF ANAHEIM )
1; Margarlta Sdorio, Sfacretary of the Anaheim Ciry Planning Commission, do hereby certffy
Ukat the foregofng resolution was passed arxf adopted at a meeting of the Anahehr~ City Planning
C~mmission held on February 5, 1996, by the fdlowing vote ~ the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BHISTOI, HENNINGER, MAYER, MESSE, PERAZA
NOES: CONMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -
/, i
IN WITNESS WHEREGF, I have hereunto set my harxl this ~7~ day of ~~ h~ ~
t 996. ~
e~
SECRE~'ARY, AHEIM CITY PLAtJNING COMMIS310N
~ PC96~23