Resolution-PC 98-86CORRECTED
RESOLUTION NO. PC98-86
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4926 4027 BE DENIED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for
Conditionai Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State
of California, described as:
PARCEL 2, AS SHOWN ON LOT LINE ADJUSTNicNT PLAT NO. 196,
RECORDED SEPTEMBER 22, 1989 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 89-509923 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
WFiEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Canter in
the City of Anaheim on May 27, 1998 at 1:30 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 18.03, 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, inv~stiganon and stucly 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 for which a conditional use permit is authorized by
Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.44.050.300 and 18.84.061 to expand an existing drive-through
restaurant by construCting a second story, 817 sq. ft. indoor children's playground (proposed 3,232 sq. ft.
total) and with waiver of the following:
Sectinns 18.06.050.022 - Minimum number of ~arkina soaces.
18.06.050.0233 ~ required; 104 existing and recommended by the City Tra~c and
18.06.080 Transportation Manager)
and 18.44.066.050
2. That the proposed use is hereby denied because it will adversely affect lhe adjoining land
uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be iocated because the
proposed second story addition is not consistent with the City's objective of protecting and enhancing
City's scenic areas by encouraging a high quality of development as a valuable resource to the
community.
3. That the proposed second story will have an imposing aesthetic appearance from the
adjoining Scenic Expressways, and that it will obstruct visibility from the roadways to the other commercial
buildings in the commercial center as well as to the distant view of the mountains and skyline because the
proposal is higher than the existing restaurant and the other commercial buildings.
4. That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is not adequate ta allow the full
development of the proposal in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health,
safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim because the size and scale of the
proposed second story addition will not be compatible with the surrounding one-story retail commercial
buildings, particularly when located along Santa Ana Canyon and Weir Canyon Roads, both of which are
designated as Scenic Expressways.
CR3301 PL.DOC -1- PC98-86
5. That granting this Conditional Use Permit would be detrimental to the peace, heaith,
safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
6. That traffic generated by the proposed use would impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the proposed
intensification of this sitz will furlher impact the existing di~cuit vehicular maneuvering situation and
congestion.
7. That the proposal wouid set an undesirable precedent since there are no similar lwo-story
restaurants or retail buiidings in the vicinity, particularly in conjunction with fast food restaurant uses
located in the Scenic Corridor Zone Overlay.
8. Tha; the requested waiver is denied because this Conditional lJse Permit is denied.
9. That no one indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City
Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to expand an existing 2,415 sq. ft. drive-through
restaurant by constructing a second story, 817 sq. ft. indoor children's playground (proposed 3,232 sq. ft.
total) and with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces on a 2.3-acre parcei located on the
northwest corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Weir Canyon Road, and having frontages of 325 feet on
the north side of Santa Ana Canyon Road and 163 feet on the west side of Weir Canyon Road, and
further described as 8295 East Santa Ana Canyon Road (Burger King); and does hereby deny the
Negative Deciaration 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 substantial evidence that the projecl will have a significant effect on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission
does hereby deny subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, on the basis of the a'orementioned findings.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
May 27, 1998. ./
~c _~ `.a,.- - _+ •u.-
CH E SON, ANAHEIM CIN PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~~%~.u~ufGUU-~~LI..J ~/~U
SECRE'~ARY, AHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-2- PC98-86
~
1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Margarita Solorio, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning
Commission held on May 27, 1998, by the foliowing vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, NAPOLES, WILLIAMS
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: EOYDSTUN, PCRAZA
~ IN WITNESS WNEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ~ day of
, 1998.
6~O~J~
SECRETf.R ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIaN
-3- PC98-86
RESOLUTION NO. PC98-66
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.,9?.~BE DENIED
yd2?
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City 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, descr~bed as:
PARCEL 2, AS SHOWN ON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT NO. 196,
RECORDED SEPTEMBER 22, 1989 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 89-509923 OF
OFFICIAL RECOROS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFOR~IIA.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in
the City of Anaheim on May 27, 1998 at 1:30 p.m., notice of said pubiic hearing having been duly given as
required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, 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 inspeclion, investigation and study mada by itself
and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidenca and reports offered at said hearing, does find
and determine the following facts:
1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by
Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.44.050.300 and 18.84.061 to expand an existing drive-through
restaurant by constructing a second story, 817 sq. ft. indoor children's piayground (proposed 3,232 sq. ft.
total) and with waiver of the following:
Sections 18.06.050.022 - Minimum number of oarkina spaces.
18.06.050.0233 (161 required; 104 eaisling and recommended by the City Traffic and
18.06.080 Transportation Managerl
and 18.44.066.050
2. That the proposed use is hereby denied because it will adversely affect the adjoining land
uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the
proposed second story addifion is not consistenl with the City's obJective of protectin~ and enhancing
City's scenic areas by encouraging a high quality of deveiopment as a valuable resource to the
community.
3. That the proposed second story will have an imposing aesthetic appearance from lhe
adjoining Scenic Expressways, and that it will obslruct visibility from the roadways to the other commercial
buildings in the commercial center as weil as to the distant view of the mountains and skyline because the
proposal is higher than the existing restaurant and the other comm~rcial buildings.
4. That the size and shape of tho site proposed for the use is not adequate to ailow the full
development of the proposal (n a manner not detrimental to lhe particuiar area nor to the peace, heaith,
safety and general welfare of the Cilizens of the City of Anaheim because the size and scale of the
proposed second story addition will not be compatible with the surrounding one-story retail commercial
buildings, particularly when located along Santa Ana Canyon and We(r Canyon Roads, both of wlii~h are
designated as Scenic Expressways.
CR3301 PL.DOC -1- PC98-86