Loading...
PC 2005/05/02Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda Monday, May 2, 2005 Council Chamber, City Hall 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California Chairman: Gail Eastman Chairman Pro - Tempore: Commissioners: Kelly Buffa, Cecilia Flores, Pat Velasquez, Ed Perez, (Two Vacant Seats) . Call To Order Preliminary Plan Review 1:00 P.M. • Staff update to Commission on various City developments and issues (As requested by Planning Commission) • Preliminary Plan Review for items on the May 2, 2005 agenda Recess To Afternoon Public Hearing Session • Reconvene To Public Hearing 2:00 P.M. For record keeping purposes, if you wish to make a statement regarding any item on the agenda, please complete a speaker card in advance and submit it to the secretary. . Pledge Of Allegiance . Public Comments . Consent Calendar . Public Hearing Items . Adjournment You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following e -mail address: plan ningcommission(danaheim .net H: \tools /planningcommission /agendas \ \050205.doc (05/02/05) Page 1 Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 2:00 P.M. Items Of Public Interest: Oath or Affirmation of Allegiance: New Planning Commissioner — Joseph Karaki. Planning Commission Appointments: Selection of Planning Commission Chairman Pro - Tempore Request For Consideration Of Potential Appointment Of Planning Commission Representatives And Alternates For The Following: • Anaheim Transportation Network Board of Directors • Utilities Underground Conversion Subcommittee • General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) Public Comments: This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the Anaheim Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public hearing items. Consent Calendar: The items on the Consent Calendar will be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless members of the Planning Commission, staff or the public request the item to be discussed and /or removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action- 1 A. (a) CEQA Environmental Impact Report No. 313 (Previously- Certified) (b) Conditional Use Permit 2002.04657 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04977) Agent: Louis Hauge, Carousel Inn & Suites, 1530 South Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92808 Project Planner: Kimberly Wong Location: 1530 South Harbor Boulevard. Carousel Inn & Suites. (kwong2 @anaheim.net) Requests a time extension to comply with conditions of approval for a Q S. 87 previously- approved conversion and expansion of an existing legal SR- CUP2005- 04977kw.doc nonconforming retail building into a semi - enclosed fast food restaurant with waivers. 1B.(a) CEQA Environmental Impact Report No. 313 (Previously - Approved) (b) Conditional Use Permit 2003.04661 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04978) Project Planner: Agent: Dwyer Beesley, P.O. Box 17783, Anaheim, CA 92817 -0000 Marie Newland (mnewland@anaheim. net) Location: 155 North Gilbert Street. Q. S. 26 Requests a retroactive time extension to comply with conditions of SR- CUP2005- 04978mn.dm approval for a previously- approved 9 -unit senior apartment complex with waivers of maximum structural height and minimum structural setback. H:\ tools /planningcommission /agendas \ \050205.doc (05/02/05) Page 2 7C.(a) CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously- Approved) (b) Variance No. 2004 -04634 Owner: City - Initiated (Tracking No. VAR2005- 04650) Location: Ci -wide Owner: Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, Attn: Elisa Stipkovich, 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Request Planning Commission to provide direction pertaining to Agent: Cheryl Stump, Brookfield Anaheim, LLC, 3090 Bristol Project Planner: Street, Suite 200, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 David See (dsee @anaheim.net) Location: (No Address). doc Q. S. 30 Requests to construct 17 detached single family homes with waiver of ds d�2005 -04650 report - City Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects. 1D.(a) Reguest for Policy Direction from Planning Commission Pertaining to Building- Mounted Telecommunication Facilities within the SC (Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone Owner: City - Initiated Location: Ci -wide Project Planner: Request Planning Commission to provide direction pertaining to John Ramirez building- mounted telecommunication facilities within the SC (Scenic Opramirez @anaheim.net) Corridor) Overlay Zone. SrTelecomon Parks050205JR. doc Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of April 18, 2005 (Motion) Receiving and approving supplemental detailed Minutes for Item No. 2 from the Planning Commission Meeting of April 18, 2005. (Motion) ITEM NO. 2 • Garza Annexation H:\ tools /planningcommission /agendas \ \050205.doc (05/02/05) Page 3 2a. CEQA Negative Declaration (Readvertisment) 2b. Reclassification No. 2004.00141 2c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004.04951 2d. Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 Owner: Marci Odon, 3117 West Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92804 Agent: Walter Bowman, Bonanni Development, 5622 Research Drive, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Location: 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road. Property is 1.4 acres, having a frontage of 198 feet on the north side of Ball Road located 741 feet east of the centerline of Western Avenue. Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 - Request reclassification of the property from the T (Transition) zone to the RM -3 (Residential, Multiple - Family) zone, or less intense zone. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 — Request to permit a 16 -unit attached and detached single - family residential subdivision. Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 —To establish a 1 -lot 16 -unit attached and detached single - family residential subdivision. Continued from February 7, 23, March 7, and April 4, 2005, Planning Commission meetings. Reclassification Resolution No. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 3a. CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously- Approved) 3b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04979 Owner: Shahraz Danesh, 26996 La Paz Road, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Agent: Meg Beatrice, 800 East Ocean Boulevard, Suite 105, Long Beach, CA 90802 Location: 676 South State College Boulevard: Property is approximately 0.42 -acre located at the northeast corner of State College Boulevard and South Street. Request to construct a third tenant space within a previously- approved two -unit commercial retail building. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. H: \tools /plan ningcommission /agendas \ \050205.doc Request for continuance to June 13, 2005 Project Planner: Amy Vazquez (avazquez @anaheim. net) Q.S. 10 SR RCL2004 -0141 050205 akv.doc Project Planner: John Ramirez (jpramirez @anaheim. net) Q.S. 113 SRCUP2005 04979jpr.doc (05/02/05) Page 4 4a. CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration Request for 4b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005.04975 continuance to 4c. Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 June 1, 2005 4d. Development Agreement No. 2006.00005 Project Planner: centerline of Orange Avenue (Seafood Place Restaurant). Owner: US Southeast Corporation, 181 South State College (dherrick @anaheim. net) Boulevard, Suite 200, Anaheim, CA 92806 beverages and a banquet facility in conjunction with an existing Agent: John Stanek, Integral Partners, 160 Newport Center Drive, restaurant. Sr8876dh.doc Suite 240, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Location: 1818 South State College Boulevard. Property is approximately 3.4 acres, located south and east of the southeast corner of State College Boulevard and Katella Avenue, having a frontage of 327 feet on the east side of State College Boulevard and 105 feet on the south side of Katella Avenue (Platinum Centre Condominiums). Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04975 - Request to modify the required setback abutting State College Boulevard for a 265 -unit residential condominium project. Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 - Request to establish a 1 -lot, 265 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision. Project Planner: Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 - Request to adopt a Amy Vazquez (avazquez @anaheim.net) Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and U.S. Southeast Corporation for a 265 -unit residential condominium project. Q.S. 117 Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. SR- cUP2005- 04975.doc Development Agreement Resolution No. 5a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 1 Owner: Gock W. Jung, 433 South Vicki Lane, Anaheim, CA 92804 Agent: Jonathan Hua, 12201 South Brookhurst Street, Garden Grove, CA 92840 Location: 420 -504 South Brookhurst Street. Property is approximately 1.5 acres, having a frontage of 205 feet on the east side of Brookhurst Street, located 492 feet north of the Project Planner: centerline of Orange Avenue (Seafood Place Restaurant). Della Herrick (dherrick @anaheim. net) Request to permit on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages and a banquet facility in conjunction with an existing Q.S. 40 restaurant. Sr8876dh.doc Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. H:\ tools /planningcommission /agendas \ \050205.doc (05/02/05) Page 5 6a. CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously - Approved) 6b. Conditional Use Permit No. 3985 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04973) Owner: Anaheim Hills Village Center, LP, 8383 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 532, Beverly Hills, CA 90211, Attm Jack Mussry Agent: Raymond Villanueva, In -N -Out Burgers Restaurant, 13502 Hamburger Lane, Baldwin Park, CA 91706 Project Planner: Location: 5624 -5646 East La Palma Avenue. Property is Amy Vazquez approximately 3.2 acres consisting of two properties, (avazquez @anaheim. net) located south and west of the southwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Imperial Highway (In -N -Out Burger and Q.S. 117 Anaheim Hills Village Center). Project Planner: David See Request to amend previously- approved exhibits to reconfigure the drive- (dsee @anaheim.net) through lane and parking lot for an existing fast food restaurant and adjacent commercial retail center- Q.S. 184 Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Sr4973repor ds.doc 7a. CEQA Negative Declaration 7b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2006.04966 Owner: Mike Sanford, Equity Office Properties, 1 Market, Spear Tower, Suite 600, San Francisco, CA 94105 Agent: John Hill, Robinson Hill Architecture, 3195 Airport Loop Drive, Suite B, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Location: 2430 East Katella Avenue. Property is approximately 2.4 acres, having a frontage of 600 feet on the south side of Katella Avenue, located 37 feet east of the centerline of Project Planner: Howell Avenue (Stadium Towers Plaza). Amy Vazquez (avazquez @anaheim. net) Request to construct a commercial retail center- Q.S. 117 Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. sr- CUP2005- 04966ay.doc Adjourn To Monday, May 16, 2005 at 1:00 P.M. for Preliminary Plan Review. H:\ tools /planningcommission /agendas \ \050205.doc (05/02/05) Page 6 M 4AIIy[aA11150z go] 2161-111zV I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: 12:00 p.m. April 28. 2005 (TIME) (DATE) LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK SIGNED: {Original Signed by Danielle C. Masciell If you challenge any one of these City of Anaheim decisions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in a written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. RIGHTS OF APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL FROM PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Any action taken by the Planning Commission this date regarding Reclassifications, Conditional Use Permits and Variances will be final 22 days after Planning Commission action and any action regarding Tentative Tract and Parcel Maps will be final 10 days after Planning Commission action unless a timely appeal is filed during that time. This appeal shall be made in written form to the City Clerk, accompanied by an appeal fee in an amount determined by the City Clerk. The City Clerk, upon filing of said appeal in the Clerk's Office, shall set said petition for public hearing before the City Council at the earliest possible date. You will be notified by the City Clerk of said hearing. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department, (714) 765 -5139. Notification no later than 10:00 a.m. on the Friday before the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. Recorded decision information is available 24 hours a day by calling the Planning Department's Automated Telephone System at 714- 765 -5139. H:\ tools /planningcommission /agendas \ \050205.doc (05/02/05) Page 7 SCHEDULE 2005 May 16 11 June 1 (Wed) 11 June 13 June 27 July 11 July 25 August 8 August 22 II September 7 (Wed) II September 19 October 3 October 17 October 31 II November 14 II November 28 II December 12 II II December 28 (Wed) II H:\ tools /planningcommission /agendas \ \050205.doc (05/02/05) Page 8 ITEM NO. 1 -A \ t � — MANCHESTER AVENUE � R 666781 (41) P2001-04 6 SP 92 -2 P2001-04405 cuP2210 RCL66 -67 -61 (4) AR 2001 -04448 CUP 3332 CUP 2001 -04405 SP 92 -2 VAR 2001 -04448 RcL6667(4) ANAHEIM RESORT CUP 2001-044346 CUP 2oo1-04a06 TRANSPORTATION G P CENTER VAR 2W 1 -08 2001 SP 92 -2 RCL 66 -7 -61 (73) o SP 92 -2 CUP 438 n RCL 66 -67-61 (104) VAR 2917 S MILLIE'S CUP 2776 PENNY SLEEPER COUNTRY VAR4352 INN SP 92 -1 KITCHEN VAR 3566 DISNEYLAND RESORT FAIRFIELD INN RCL 66 -67 -61 (108) RCL 66 -67 -61 (14) CUP 3121 S A.P.D. CUP 968 'POLICE' SP 92 -2 SP 92 -2 VAR 1424 TRAILER RCL 66 -67 -61 (104) RCL 66 -67 -61 (108) VAR 393 (Temporary) CUP 2598 CUP 438 DISNEYLAND McDONALD'S VAR 2270 RESTAURANT VACANT OFFICE Q BLDG. SP 92 -2 � RCL 66 -67 -61 (108) PARK NN LU CUP 3594 INTERNATIONAL 7 O m ' — SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -2 m RCL 66£7£1 (108) of ) SP 92 -2 RCL 66 -67 -14 Q THE ANAHEIM RESORT RCL 55 -56 -24 71r = RCL 66 -67 -61 (9) INDUSTRIAL !_CU 2005 -04977 BUILDING T -CUP 2003 -04795 CUP 2002 -04657 RCL 66 -67 -61 (30) CUP 481 CUP 591 T -VAR 2003 -04686 VAR 1929 S VAR 3289 VAR 1333 VAR 611 PARK PLACE INN CAROUSEL INN AND SUITES ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE ANAHEIM RESORT I Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -04657 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04977 Date: May 2, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: LOUIS HAUGE AND MARSHALL WEINSTEIN Q.S. No. 87 REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED CONVERSION AND EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING LEGAL NONCONFORMING RETAIL BUILDING INTO A SEMI - ENCLOSED FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH WAIVERS. 1530 South Anaheim Boulevard - Carousel Inn and Suites 1800 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 1 -A 1 -A. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 313 (PREVIOUSLY- CERTIFIED) (Motion) b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002 -04657 —REQUEST FOR A (Motion) RETROACTIVE TIME EXTENSION TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (TRACKING NO. CUP2005- 04977) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 1.19 -acre property has a frontage of 85 feet on the east side of Harbor Boulevard, a maximum depth of 610 feet and is located 790 feet south of the centerline of Manchester Avenue (1530 South Harbor Boulevard, Carousel Inn and Suites). REQUEST: (2) Louis Hauge, representing Carousel Inn and Suites, is requesting a one -year retroactive time extension to comply with conditions of approval under the authority of Code Section No. 18.60.170 for a previously- approved conversion and expansion of an existing legal nonconforming retail building into a semi - enclosed fast -food restaurant with waivers of minimum number of parking spaces and minimum structural and yard requirements abutting interior lot lines- BACKGROUND (3) The property is developed with a 5 -story, 131 -room hotel and a 1,185- square foot legal nonconforming retail gift shop and is zoned SP92 -2 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92- 2). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property for Commercial Recreation land uses. (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -04657 (to permit the conversion and expansion of an existing legal nonconforming retail building into a semi - enclosed fast food restaurant with waivers of minimum number of parking spaces and minimum structural setback and yard requirements abutting interior lot lines) was approved by the Planning Commission on February 10, 2003. On January 26, 2004, a time extension was approved by the Planning Commission (Tracking No. CUP2003- 04795) for one year to expire on February 10, 2005. DISCUSSION: (5) The applicant has provided the attached letter dated March 24, 2005, to request a one - year retroactive extension of time to comply with the required conditions of approval. This is the second and final request for a time extension to comply with conditions of approval. The Zoning Code allows the granting of a maximum of two time extensions subject to the findings below. (6) The previously- approved Conditional Use Permit remains consistent with the Anaheim General Plan and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. No code amendments have occurred that would render the approval inconsistent with the Zoning Code, and the circumstances under which the project was approved remain the same. Further, a site inspection, by Community Preservation staff was conducted on April 13, 2005, and staff found that the property is currently being maintained in a satisfactory condition and there are no code enforcement actions that apply to this property. SR- CUP2005- 04977kw Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 1 -A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (7) Staff has reviewed the proposal for an extension of time to comply with conditions of approval for the previously- approved Conditional Use Permit and the previously - certified Environmental Impact Report No. 313 and finds there are no changes to the originally approved project and the request will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously - certified EIR No. 313 serve as the required environmental documentation for this request- FINDINGS (8) Zoning Code Section No. 18.60.170 specifies that the applicant shall, within one year after receiving approval (or within any greater or lesser time limit specified in the Resolution of Approval) comply with all conditions imposed with time limits. In addition, subsection 18.60.170.020 specifies that before granting any request for an extension of time to comply with conditions of approval, the Commission must make a finding of fact that the following findings exist: (a) That the extension of time will not extend the approval beyond two extensions of time with each extension not to exceed one year, or any greater or lesser time increment specified in the original resolution of the conditional use permit. (b) That the approval remains consistent with the General Plan and the zone district designation for the property. (c) That either no Code amendments have occurred that would cause the approval to be inconsistent with this title, or the petitioner has (i) submitted revised plans demonstrating that the approved project can be modified to bring it into conformance with such Code amendments and (ii) agreed to modify the project to conform to such Code amendments. (d) That the subject property has been maintained in safe, clean, and aesthetically pleasing condition with no unremediated code violations on the property, as confirmed by an inspection of the subject property by the Code Enforcement Division. (e) That no additional information or changed circumstances are present which contradict the facts necessary to support one or more of the required findings for approval of the project- RECOMMENDATION ( Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing that the Planning Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the previously- certified EIR No. 313 is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for this request. (b) By motion, approve the request for a one (1) year extension of time for CUP No- 2002-04657 (to expire on February 10, 2006) based upon the following: Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 1 -A That this is the second and final request for an extension of time to comply with the conditions of approval. That the approval remains in conformance with the current zoning and General Plan land use designation for this property. Further, there have been no code amendments that would cause the approval to be considered inconsistent with the Zoning Code. That the property is currently being properly maintained in a safe, clean and aesthetically pleasing condition and that there are no outstanding complaints or violations on file with the Community Preservation Division. (iv) That no additional information or changed circumstances are present which would contradict the facts used to support the required findings for approval of this conditional use permit. Page 3 [DRAFT] May 2, 2005 Louis Hauge, Carousel Inn & Suites 1530 South Harbor Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92808 Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim City Planning Commission meeting of May 2, 2005. 1. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002 -04657 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04977) Agent: Louis Hauge, Carousel Inn & Suites, 1530 South Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92808 Location: 1530 South Harbor Boulevard. Carousel Inn & Suites. Requests a retroactive extension of time to comply with conditions of approval for a previously- approved conversion and expansion of an existing legal nonconforming retail building into a semi - enclosed fast food restaurant with waivers. ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED (one Commission vacancy), that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby determine that the previously- certified Environmental Impact Report is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED (one Commission vacancy), that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve the request for a one (1) year retroactive extension of time to expire on February 10, 2006, for Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -04657 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04977) to comply with conditions of approval for a previously- approved conversion and expansion of an existing legal nonconforming retail building into a semi - enclosed fast food restaurant with waivers, based on the finding that (i) the request is the final request and that granting of this request would not extend the approval of the permit beyond the maximum time period permitted by Code, (ii) the approval remains in conformance with the current zoning and General Plan land use designation for the property, (iii) the property is being properly maintained and (iv) no additional information or changed circumstances are present which would contradict the facts used to approve the project. Sincerely, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary Anaheim Planning Commission cr2002- 04657EXC.doc 0 RESOLUTION NO. PC2003 -29 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002-04657 BE GRANTED 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, described as: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO SAN JUAN CAJON DE SANTA ANA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 10 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 22, SOUTH 0 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST 128.40 FEET FROM THE CENTER OF SAID SECTION 22, SAID CENTER POINT BEING THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF CERRITOS AVENUE FROM THE WEST. WITH THE NORTH AND SOUTH QUARTER SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 22, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO ROGER H INGRAM AND OTHERS, RECORDED FEBRUARY 28, 1958 IN BOOK 4213, PAGE 81 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 56 MINUTES 00 SECONDS EAST, 660.70 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID INGRAM LAND; THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREES 15 MINUTES, 00 SECONDS WEST 85.75 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO CARMEN SCALZO AND WIFE, RECORDED FEBRUARY 13, 1958 IN BOOK 4194, PAGE 511 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SCALZO LAND 660.65 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 22; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE OF SECTION 22, A DISTANCE OF 85.87 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on February 10, 2003 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, 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: 1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.48.020.050.0505(b), 18.48.070.050.0511 and 18.48.070.050.0521 to permit the conversion and expansion of an existing legal nonconforming retail building into a semi - enclosed fast food restaurant with waivers of the following: (a) Sections 18.06.050.020.023.0233 - Minimum number of required parking spaces. 18.06.050.020.024.0241 (131 spaces required; 74 spaces proposed) 18.06.080 and 18.48.110.120 (b) Section 18.48.070.090.0903 Minimum structural setback and yard requirements abutting interior lot lines. ( 10 -foot wide fully landscaped setback required; none proposed) cr1PC2003- 029.doc -11- PC2003 -29 • 2. That waiver (a), minimum number of required parking spaces, is hereby approved based upon the information and conclusions set forth in the Parking Study submitted by the petitioner; that said approval will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for the approved use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use inasmuch as the parking provided on the property meets the demand for off - street parking; and that the parking study indicates the hotel and fast food restaurant uses on the property will generate a peak demand of 69 spaces, which is lower than the proposed 74 parking spaces. 3. That the parking waiver, based upon the information and conclusions set forth in the parking study, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use inasmuch as no street parking is permitted along Harbor Boulevard which is the public street immediately adjacent to the site, and that an adequate supply of parking will be provided on site 4. That the parking waiver, based upon the information and conclusions set forth in the parking study, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use inasmuch as an adequate supply of on -site parking will be provided and all project- related parking is expected to occur on the subject site. 5. That the parking waiver, based upon the information and conclusions set forth in the parking study, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use inasmuch as the parking demand forecast for the site Is addressed by the supply provided on the site and a surplus of parking spaces is expected to exist on the site at all times. 6. That the parking waiver will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use inasmuch as adequate parking is proposed to meet the projected parking demand for the proposed use; and that no street parking is permitted along Harbor Boulevard and the sight lines and turning areas for existing driveways on properties adjacent to the subject parcel will not be affected by the access or parking proposed for the subject property. 7. That waiver (b), minimum structural setback and yard requirements abutting interior lot lines, is hereby approved on the basis that the submitted evidence identifies special circumstances with regard to the configuration of the property which do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity and that strict application of the Zoning Code would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Zone, as described in paragraph (17) of the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated February 10, 2003. 8. That, as conditioned herein, the proposed semi - enclosed fast food restaurant will not adversely affect any adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the surrounding area inasmuch as the modification and conversion of the existing legal nonconforming building into a semi - enclosed fast food restaurant will bring the property into greater conformance with the intent of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan by establishing a use which is permitted in the Specific Plan area, and will enhance the property's appearance by enhancing the building facade and installing new landscaping adjacent to the public right -of -way and providing for an outdoor dining area which is encouraged in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. 9. That the size and shape of the property is adequate to allow full development of the proposed use, as approved and conditioned herein, in a manner which is not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the surrounding land uses or citizens of the City of Anaheim. 10. That the proposed use, as conditioned herein, will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry traffic in the area. 11. That granting this Conditional Use Permit, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. -2- PC2003 -29 0 12. That no one indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition to the proposal; and that no correspondence was received in opposition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal and does hereby determine that the previously - certified Environmental Impact Report No. 313 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite 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 the property owner /developer shall be responsible for compliance with all of the mitigation measures set forth in Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 049 for this project, which incorporates those mitigation measures included in the Anaheim Resort Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085 that are applicable to the project, and for complying with the monitoring and reporting requirements established by the City in compliance with Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. Furthermore, the property owner /developer shall be responsible for any direct costs associated with the monitoring and reporting requirements to ensure implementation of those mitigation measures identified in Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 049, which is made a part of these conditions of approval by reference. 2. That ongoing during project operations, no more than ten (10) seats shall be provided at any time in the outdoor patio dining area. All tables and seating areas shall be of high quality material such as wrought -iron or other comparable material (no plastic chairs or tables shall be permitted). Further, any umbrellas shall be a single color and no advertising of any business name or product on the umbrella shall be permitted. 3. a) That prior to issuance of the first building permit, the property owner /developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval which show the location of the robbery alarm and the alarm specifications. The property owner /developer shall also submit a Burglary/Robbery Alarm permit application (Form APD 516) to the Anaheim Police Department. b) Prior to final building and zoning inspections and ongoing during project operations, the robbery alarm shall be operational. 4. a) That prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner /developer shall modify the hotel's Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) security cameras to cover the fast food restaurant entrance and cashier's area to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department. b) Ongoing during project operations, CCTV monitors and recorders shall be secured in a separate locked compartment to prevent theft or tampering of the tape. The recorded CCTV tapes shall be kept for a minimum of thirty (30) days before being recorded over and CCTV tapes shall not be recorded over more than ten (10) times per tape. 5. That ongoing during project operations, the monument sign and the building address shall be illuminated during hours of darkness. 6. a) That prior to issuance of the first building permit, the property owner /developer shall submit plans to the Planning Department, Building Division, which show rooftop address numbers which would be visible to police helicopters. Said numbers shall be a minimum size of four (4) feet in height and two (2) feet in width with a minimum line width of six (6) inches. The plans shall further indicate that the numbers shall be painted or constructed in a contrasting color to the roofing material and that the numbers shall face the street to which the structure is addressed. Numbers are not to be visible from ground level. b) Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the numbers shall be painted /installed on the roof. The numbers shall be maintained so that they are legible ongoing during project operations. -3- PC2003 -29 0 7. a) That prior to issuance of a building permit, the property owner /developer shall submit plans for the Anaheim Police Department's review and approval which provide for the installation of commercial grade security hardware (e.g., deadbolt locks) on all exterior doors. b) Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the security hardware shall be installed. 8. a) That prior to issuance of a building permit, the property owner /developer shall submit plans to the Planning Department, Building Division, which show that all exterior doors have their own light source, which shall illuminate the door area at all hours to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises and provide illumination for persons exiting the building in conformance with Section 5.7.5 (Exterior Lighting) of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. The submitted plans shall show the location of the lights and the design of the fixtures and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Anaheim Police Department. b) Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the lighting fixtures shall be installed and be operational; and on -going during project operations, said lighting shall be properly maintained. 9. a) That prior to issuance of a building permit, the property owner /developer shall submit plans to the Planning Department, Building Division, which show the location of a 'No Trespassing 602 (j) P.C.' sign at the entrance to the parking area. The overall size of the sign shall be at least two (2) feet by one (1) foot, and the background shall be white with black two (2) inch high letters. The sign shall not encroach into the required twenty six (26) foot wide landscape setback area adjacent to the Harbor Boulevard ultimate public right -of -way. b) Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the sign shall be installed. 10. a) That prior to issuance of a building permit, the property owner /developer shall submit plans to the Planning Department, Building Division, which show the location of appropriate signs per California Vehicle Code §22658(a) at the entrance to the parking area. The signs shall not encroach into the required twenty six (26) foot wide landscape setback area adjacent to the Harbor Boulevard ultimate public right -of -way. b) Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the signs shall be installed. 11. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner /developer shall file an Emergency Listing Card, Form APD -281, with the Anaheim Police Department. 12. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the Petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 17, and as conditioned herein. 13. That the property owner /developer shall comply with the following conditions of approval set forth in Ordinance No. 5454 adopted by the City Council on September 27, 1994 in connection with approval of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92 -2 (the following condition numbers correspond to the numbers set forth in Ordinance No. 5454): (8) That prior to the issuance of each building permit, plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department as being in conformance with the Uniform Fire Code. (13) That prior to final building and zoning inspections, a licensed landscape architect shall provide a letter to the Planning Department certifying that all landscaping and irrigation systems have been installed in accordance with landscaping plans approved in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 - 04657. (14) That on -site landscaping and irrigation systems shall be maintained by the property owner /developer in compliance with City standards. -4- PC2003 -29 • a (15) That any tree planted within the Setback Realm shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and /or dead. (16) That a licensed arborist shall be responsible for all tree trimming. (18) That sweeping operations in the parking facilities shall be performed utilizing sweeping /scrubbing equipment which operate at a level measured not greater than sixty (60) dBA at the nearest adjacent property line. (19) That pressure washing operations for purposes of building repair and maintenance due to graffiti or other aesthetical considerations shall be limited to daytime hours of operation between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. (25) That prior to final building and zoning inspections, all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be fully screened from view of adjacent public rights - of -way and from adjacent properties by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials; and, further, such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. (27) That the property owner /developer shall be responsible for the removal of any on -site graffiti within twenty four (24) hours of its application. (33) That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in accordance with Exhibit No. 1 of Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -04657 on file with the Planning Department. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. (36) That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim, including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improvements such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, water facilities, street grading and pavement, sewer and drainage facilities, or other appurtenant work shall be complied with as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with specifications on file in the Office of the City Engineer, as may be modified by the City Engineer; and, that security in the form of a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, completion guarantee, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim, shall be posted with the City to guarantee the satisfactory completion of said improvements. Said security shall be posted with the City prior to the issuance of a building permit or final map approval, whichever occurs first, to guarantee the installation of the related improvements prior to final building and zoning inspections. (37) That prior to issuance of each building permit, the appropriate Citywide Transportation Impact and Improvement Fee shall be paid to the City of Anaheim in the amount(s) determined by City Council Resolution. Consistent with the Fee Ordinance, fees may be reduced in consideration of right -of -way dedication. (38) That the property owner /developer shall participate in the Transportation Network (TMA) created for The Anaheim ResortTM and Anaheim Stadium Business Center and coordinated with the 1 -5 Traffic Management Plan. (40) That prior to issuance of each building permit, unless records indicate previous payment, the appropriate fees for Primary Mains, Secondary Mains and Fire Protection Service shall be paid to the Public Utilities Department, Water Utility Division in accordance with Rule 15A and 20 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules and Regulations. 14. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner /developer shall submit a Certificate of Compliance application to the Public Works Department. A Certificate of Compliance shall be approved by the City Engineer and recorded in the office of the County Recorder. 15. That prior to the issuance of the first building permit or within one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, the property owner shall submit a letter to the Planning Department requesting termination of Variance No. 4300. -5- PC2003 -29 16. 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 ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of February 10, 2003. (Original signed by P aul Bostwick) CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: (Original signed by Eleanor Morris) SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior 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 February 10, 2003, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTW ICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, EASTMAN, KOOS, ROMERO, VANDERBILT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of , 2003. (O riginal signed by Eleanor Morris) SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -6- PC2003 -29 March 24, 2005 Ms. Eleanor Morris, DCM Senior Secretary Anaheim City Planning Commission 200 South Anaheim Blvd. PO Box 3222 Anaheim, CA 92803 By: In Person CAO)USEL INN & SO - TES A HOTEL IN THE ANAHEIM RESORT Re: Request for Extensions of Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -04657 and Variance No. 4300 Dear Ms. Morris: As I indicated previously I have recently taken over for Marshall Weinstein as the General Manager for the Carousel Inn and Suites. As noted in my previous correspondence 1 did not realize the project referenced above included an expiration date. Upon learning this I have acted swiftly to make certain we are in compliance and are able to move forward with this project. I am formally requesting an extension on these matters. Our architect, MCG, has been working with Scott Koehm and is scheduled to meet with him again this week to submit our plans. The approval for the permits is expected to only take a few more weeks. Our major justification for this extension is that we are close to finalizing the process for our permits and they have expired. Attached are the pictures and deposit check as required in the submittal guidelines. Thank you once again for your assistance with this matter. Sincerely, Louis Hauge General Manager Enclosure (gyp No 2002 - 046 57 Phone: (714) 758 -0444 • Fax: (714) 772 -9960 1530 South Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92802 Direction , - 7 .1-41104441 ,, , - , , Yt 91 i < ,.ZoMn ;, .' y , '-*: H.� n> n- r. ' 4 r ' North Park Inn International SP92 -2 Commercial Recreation East Odetics Corporation SP92 -2 Commercial Recreation South Tropicana Inn SP92 -2 Commercial Recreation West, across Harbor Boulevard Disneyland SP92 -1 Commercial Recreation 1 -B. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a. CEQA EIR NO. 313 (PREVIOUSLY - CERTIFIED) (Motion) b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002-04657 - REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (Motion) (Tracking No. CUP2003- 04795) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 1.19 -acre property has a frontage of 85 feet on the east side of Harbor Boulevard, a maximum depth of 610 feet and is located 790 feet south of the centerline of Manchester Avenue (1530 South Harbor Boulevard, Carousel Inn and Suites). REQUEST: (2) Marshall Weinstein, representing Carousel Inn and Suites, requests a one -year time extension to comply with conditions of approval under the authority of Code Section No. 18.03.090 for a previously - approved conversion and expansion of an existing legal nonconforming retail building into a semi - enclosed fast food restaurant with waivers of minimum number of parking spaces and minimum structural and yard requirements abutting interior lot lines. BACKGROUND: (3) The property is developed with a 5 -story, 131 -room hotel and a 1,185 - square foot legal nonconforming retail gift shop and has been zoned SP92 -2 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92 -2) since September 1994. The property is also designated for Commercial Recreation land uses in the City of Anaheim General Plan. (4) Surrounding land uses are as follows: (5) Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 26, 2004 Item No. 1-B Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 - 04657, to permit the conversion and expansion of an existing legal nonconforming retail building into a semi - enclosed fast foot restaurant with waivers of minimum number of required parking spaces and minimum structural setback and yard requirements abutting interior lot lines, was approved by the Planning Commission on February 10, 2003. (6) Pursuant to Code Section No. 18.03.090.030, the petitioner is required to comply with each and all of the conditions within one year after approval of a Conditional Use Permit unless a greater time is specked in the resolution adopting the Conditional Use Permit. sr8690mn.doc "SP92 -2 (The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92 -2); SP92 -1 (The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92 -1) Page 1 DISCUSSION (7) The petitioner has provided the attached letter dated October 14, 2003, to request a one - year extension of time (to expire on February 10, 2005) to comply with the required conditions of approval. This is the first request for a time extension to comply with conditions of approval, and Code allows the granting of a maximum of two time extensions subject to the findings described in paragraph (10) of this report. (8) Planning Commission may wish to note that the previously- approved Conditional Use Permit remains consistent with the Anaheim General Plan and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. No code amendments have occurred that would render the approval inconsistent with the Zoning Code, and the circumstances under which the project was approved remain the same. Further, a site inspection of this property was conducted on January 6, 2004 and it was found that the property is currently being maintained in a satisfactory condition and there are no code enforcement actions that apply to the property ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (9) FINDINGS: S Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 26, 2004 item No. f -B Staff has reviewed the proposal for an extension of time to comply with conditions of approval for the previously - approved Conditional Use Permit and the previously- certified EIR No. 313 and finds there are no changes to the originally approved project and the request will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- certified EIR No. 313 serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. (10) Zoning Code Section No. 18.03.090 specifies that the petitioner shall, within one year after receiving approval (or within any greater or lesser time limit specified in the Resolution of Approval) comply with all conditions imposed with time limits. In addition, subsection 18.03.090.0301 specifies that before granting any request for an extension of time, the Commission must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the extension of time will not extend the approval beyond 2 extensions of time, with each extension not to exceed one year, or any greater or lesser time increment specified in the original resolution of the conditional use permit. (b) That the approval remains consistent with the General Plan and the zone district designation for the property. (c) That either no Code amendments have occurred that would cause the approval to be inconsistent with the Zoning Code, or the petitioner has (i) submitted revised plans demonstrating that the approved project can be modified to bring it into conformance with such Code amendments and (ii) agreed to modify the project to conform to such Code amendments. (d) That the subject property has been maintained in a safe, clean, and aesthetically pleasing condition with no unremediated code violations on the property, as confirmed by an inspection of the subject property by the Code Enforcement Division. Cost of inspection is established pursuant to Section 1.01.389.030 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, and shall be paid by the applicant prior to consideration of the time extension by the determining body. Page 2 • (e) That no additional information or changed circumstances are present which contradict the facts necessary to support one or more of the required findings for approval of the project or enterprise. RECOMMENDATION: *Staff Report to the Planning Commission Jactt,,26, 2004 140.1 -B (11) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the meeting, that the Planning Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the previously- certified EIR No. 313 is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for this request. (b) By motion, approve the request for a one (1) year extension of time for CUP No. 2002 -04657 (to expire on February 10, 2005) based upon the following: (i) That this is the first request for an extension of time to comply with conditions of approval. (ii) That the approval remains in conformance with the current zoning and General Plan land use designation for this property. Further, there have been no code amendments that would cause the approval to be considered inconsistent with the Zoning Code. (iii) That the property is currently being properly maintained in a safe, clean and aesthetically pleasing condition and that there are no outstanding complaints or violations on file with the Code Enforcement Division. (iv) That no additional information or changed circumstances are present which would contradict the facts used to support the required findings for approval of this conditional use permit. Page 3 ITEM NO. 1 -A PR RCL 73 -74 -34 DAD MILLER GOLF COURSE T SAVANNA HIGH SCHOOL Q M_- COP3&15 1 DU EACH VAR 2533 LEVEL AVENUE I � _ RS -2 CUP O W 3380 C L O c -G 0 � RM-4 RCL 85 -86-29 T- CUP2005 -04978 = U) RCL 61 -62 -92 RM -4 T -CUP 2004 -04670 + ~ Of VAR 1794 RCL 69 -70.24 CUP 2003 -04661 W VAR 1744 CASA BELINDA CUP 3618 RM -3 91 DU VAR 3554 RCL 62E &W m CASA BONITA (RCL 67-68 -93) 2 D J 71 DU PARKING T DUP29 APTS. i Q rr C -G __ _______ __ _ RM-8 RCL 85 -86 -29 RCL86 -87 -31 O CUP 3618 VAR 3661 1 ^ C ' CUP 2951 APTS. - - - VAR 3691 RCL 61£2 -92 5 DU 5 DU RM-4 RM -4 RCL 68 -69-96 26 DU VAR 3554 r-* 120 ReL 83 -M -33 CUP 983 CUP 955 RCL 77 -78-21 VAR 2091 z w C-G VAR 1794 RCL 69 -70.285 DU ( Res. of Int. to CL ) APARTMENTS T z a w RCL 73 -74-5 _ VAR 1744 VAR 2971 52 DU MORTUARY o o u RCL 63- 64-136 GRANADA INN z m o J za CUP 2582 S.S. N MOTEL RESTAURANT W 4DU O 4DU MINI -MART p 00 D LINCOLN AVENUE - Q M_- COP3&15 1 DU EACH VAR 2533 LEVEL AVENUE _ RS -2 i 1 DU EACH O a • RS -2 1 DU EACH O ~ C;= C -G RCL 77 -78-23 T -CUP 2003 -04730 CUP 4085 CUP 1999 ADJ 78 SHOPPING CENTER C -G RCL 77 -78 T_ CU 2003 - CUP 199 S CENTEF CENTE( Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -04661 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04978 Date: May 2, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: DWYER BEESLEY Q.S. No. 26 REQUEST FOR A TIME EXTENSION TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED 9 -UNIT SENIOR APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH WAIVERS OF: (A) MAXIMUM STRUCTURAL HEIGHT (B) MINIMUM STRUCTURAL SETBACK 115 North Gilbert Street 1811 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 1 -13 1 -B. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED) (Motion) b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003 -04661 - REQUEST FOR A TIME EXTENSION TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (Motion) (TRACKING CASE NO. CUP2005- 04978) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 0.21 -acre property has a frontage of 78 feet on the west side of Gilbert Street, a maximum depth of 120 feet and is located 240 feet north of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue (115 North Gilbert Street). REQUEST: (2) Mr. Dwyer Beesley, the property owner, has submitted the attached letter, dated March 28, 2005, requesting a time extension to comply with the conditions of approval for a previously approved 9 -unit senior apartment complex with waivers of maximum structural height and minimum structural setback under authority of Code Section 18.60.170. BACKGROUND: (3) Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -04661 (to permit a 9 -unit "affordable " senior citizen's apartment complex with a density bonus and waivers of minimum landscape setback abutting an arterial highway and minimum structural setback abutting interior property lines) was approved by the City Council on April 29, 2003. On August 9, 2004, the Planning Commission granted a one -year extension of time retroactively from April 29, 2004 to April 29, 2005. (4) This is the applicant's second request for an extension of time to comply with conditions of approval. The applicant is requesting a time extension to allow additional time to comply with conditions of approval. (5) The property is zoned C -G (General Commercial) and is currently paved and striped with parking spaces and surrounded by a chain link fence. The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property for Residential - Low Medium land uses- DISCUSSION (6) This entitlement was approved on April 29, 2003, and expired on April 29, 2004. A one year retroactive (from April 29, 2004) extension of time was approved on August 9, 2004. The Code requires the application for an extension of time be submitted within 180 days of the date of expiration (prior to October 29, 2005). The request for the time extension was received on March 28, 2005. This is the second request for a time extension to comply with conditions of approval, and Code allows the granting of a maximum of two time extensions subject to the findings contained in Code Section No. 18.60.170 of the Zoning Code. The applicant has indicated that the time extension is being requested due to conditions of approval that are currently in process, but have not yet been completed. SR- CUP2005- 04978mn Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 1 -B (7) On June 8, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004R -95 and Ordinance No. 5920 which approved a comprehensive update of the Anaheim General Plan and an amendment of Title 18 Zoning Code in its entirety. Contained in Ordinance No. 5920 of the Zoning Code Update was Section 5c "Exemptions" which provided projects approved prior to June 8, 2004 an exemption from the new Zoning Code regulations provided the project was granted an extension of time by the approval authority. (8) The property was zoned CL and is now zoned C -G due to the recent Zoning Code update. The property has retained the same land use designation of Residential Medium. (9) An inspection by the Community Preservation staff on April 6, 2005, indicates there no existing code violations relative to the property. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (10) Staff has reviewed the request for an extension of time to comply with conditions of approval and the previously approved Negative Declaration and finds there are no changes to the originally- approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -04661 and that the request will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- approved Negative Declaration serve as the required environmental documentation for this request- FINDINGS (11) Zoning Code Section No. 18.60.170 specifies that the applicant shall, within one year after receiving approval (or within any greater or lesser time limit specified in the Resolution of Approval) comply with all conditions imposed with time limits. In addition, subsection 18.60.170.020 specifies that before granting any request for an extension of time to comply with conditions of approval, the Commission must make a finding of fact that the following findings exist: (a) That the extension of time will not extend the approval beyond two extensions of time, with each extension not to exceed one year, or any greater or lesser time increment specified in the original resolution of the conditional use permit. (b) That the approval remains consistent with the General Plan and the zone district designation for the property. (c) That either no Code amendments have occurred that would cause the approval to be inconsistent with this title, or the applicant has (i) submitted revised plans demonstrating that the approved project can be modified to bring it into conformance with such Code amendments and (ii) agreed to modify the project to conform to such Code amendments. (d) That the subject property has been maintained in a safe, clean, and aesthetically pleasing condition with no unremediated code violations on the property, as confirmed by an inspection of the subject property by the Community Preservation Division. (e) That no additional information or changed circumstances are present which contradict the facts necessary to support one or more of the required findings for approval of the project. Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 1 -13 RECOMMENDATION: (12) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the meeting, that the Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the previously- approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the appropriate environmental documentation for this project. (b) By motion, aoorove the request for a one year retroactive extension of time to comply with conditions of approval to expire April 29, 2006, based on the following: (i) That this is the second request for a time extension and Code permits a maximum of two requests for extension of time to comply with conditions of approval. (ii) That the property has been maintained in a safe, clean and aesthetically pleasing manner with no outstanding code violations affecting this property. (iii) That there is no information or changed circumstances which contradict the facts necessary to support one or more of the required findings for approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 - 04661. Page 3 [DRAFT] May 2, 2005 Dwyer Beesley P.O. Box 17783 Anaheim, CA 92817 Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim City Planning Commission meeting of May 2, 2005. 1. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: B. (a) CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously- Approved) (b) Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -04661 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04978) Agent: Dwyer Beesley. P.O. Box 17783, Anaheim, CA 92817 Location: 115 N. Gilbert Street. Requests a one year extension of time to comply with conditions of approval for a previously approved 9 -unit "affordable" senior citizen's apartment complex with waivers of minimum landscaped setback abutting an arterial highway and minimum building setback. ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby determine that the previously- approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the request for a one (1) year extension of time to expire on April 29, 2006, based on the following: (i) That this is the second request for a time extension and Code permits a maximum of two requests for extension of time to comply with conditions of approval. (ii) That the property has been maintained in a safe, clean and aesthetically pleasing manner with no outstanding code violations affecting this property. (iii) That there is no information or changed circumstances which contradict the facts necessary to support one or more of the required findings for approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 - 04661. Sincerely, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary Anaheim City Planning Commission cr2003 -04661 EXC.doc RESOLUTION NO. PC2003 -44 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-04661 BE GRANTED 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, described as: THE EAST 152 FEET OF THE SOUTH 78 FEET OF THE NORTH 1092 FEET OF THE EAST 20 ACRES OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on March 10, 2003 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, 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: 1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.44.050.305 and 18.94.020 to wit: to permit a 9-unit 'affordable' senior citizens' apartment complex with a density bonus and the following waivers: (a) Section 18.34.063.010.011 - Minimum landscape setback abutting .an arterial highway and 18.94.033.010 20400t wide fully landscaped setback required adjacent to a Collector Street; 17 feet proposed adjacent to Gilbert Street) (b) Sections 18.34.063.020.021 - Minimum structural setback 18.34.063.020.022 (10 to 11 foot wide setback required adjacent to the north, west 18.34.063.020.023 and south interior property lines; and 18.94.033.010 4 to 5 feet proposed) 2. That the applicant has proposed construction of an eligible housing development, as defined in Chapter 18.99 (Density Bonus) of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and that the proposal has a density bonus of 25% (i.e., 2 units more than otherwise permitted for such a project on the subject 0.21 - acre property in the underlying zone). S. That waiver (a), minimum landscaped setback abutting an arterial highway, is hereby approved because the petitioner proposes an eligible housing development in compliance with Chapter 18.99 (Density Bonus) of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and that the project will comply with the affordability requirements in accordance with the provisions pertaining to a density bonus with two incentives (i.e., waivers of minimum landscaped setback abutting an arterial highway and minimum structural setback). 4. That waiver (b), minimum structural setback, is hereby approved on the basis that a similar project was approved and constructed to the north and, therefore, strict application of the Zoning Code would deprive this property of privileges enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. 5. That the density bonus and the additional incentives granted are necessary for making this project economically feasible. cr1pc2003- 044 -C.doc - 1 - PC2003 -44 6. That the density bonus and the additional incentive granted further the City's affordable housing goals as set forth in the Housing Element of the Anaheim General Plan. 7. That the density bonus and each additional incentive granted shall not, on balance, be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, and shall not cause injury to property in the immediate vicinity of the eligible housing project. a. That this senior citizens' apartment complex is located within an area which offers a variety of services, including retaillgrocery stores, banks, medical offices and transit stops within close walking distance, as described in paragraph (22) of the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated March 10, 2003; and that, as conditioned herein, this senior citizens' apartment complex will comply with age and occupancy limitations as set forth in Chapter 18.94 (Criteria and Standards for Senior Citizens' Apartment Projects) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 9. That the proposed senior citizens' complex is permitted in the CL (Commercial, Limited) zone subject to approval of a conditional use permit and, as conditioned herein, will not adversely affect the adjoining residential neighborhood or growth and development of the surrounding area because it will be compatible with the existing senior citizens' apartment complex to the north. 10. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow full development of this senior citizens' apartment complex; and that this project will be constructed in a manner not detrimental to the particular area's peace, health, safety and general welfare. 11. That the traffic generated by the senior citizens' apartment complex will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. 12. That no one indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition to the proposal; and that no correspondence was received in opposition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a 9 -unit 'affordable' senior citizens' apartment complex with a density bonus and waivers of minimum landscaped setback abutting an arterial highway and minimum structural setback on a rectangular 0.21 -acre property having a frontage of 78 feet on the west side of Gilbert Street and a maximum depth of 120 feet, being located 240 feet north of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue, and further described as 115 North Gilbert Street; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration 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 no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite 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 the design modifications outlined by the Community Development Department's Architectural consultant shall be specifically incorporated into the plans submitted for building permits. Said modifications shall be reviewed and approved by Zoning staff, and shall include the following: • Provide enriched /enhanced paving at the main entrance. • Add windows to bathrooms for natural ventilation. • Incorporate more wood sheathing on the building, as opposed to portions of the second floor only as proposed. • Provide landscaping in front of the building elevation and carports to soften the front of the units. • Provide landscape screening of the existing commercial building to the west to buffer the patios and balconies. •2- PC2003 -44 Any decision by staff regarding said plans may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a'Reports and Recommendations' item. 2. That development of this site shall include the installation of two (2), twenty four (24) inch box sized, trees, one (1) on each side of the driveway. If tree wells are used, the tree well size shall be five (5) feet by five (5) feet, and if a parkway with turf is installed, it shall have a minimum width of five (5) feet. The trees shall be irrigated by an automatic irrigation system. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 3. That the legal owner of subject property shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement across the property to be determined as electrical design is completed. 4. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. Landscape and /or hardscape screening of all pad- mounted equipment shall be required and shall be shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 5. That the locations for future above - ground utility devices including, but not limited to, electrical transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications and cable devices, etc., shall be shown on the plans submitted for building permits. Said plans shall also identify the specific screening treatment of each device for existing and proposed devices (i.e., landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.) and shall be subject to review and approval by the appropriate City departments. 6. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 7. That gates shall not be retained or installed across any driveway in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic in the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan No. 609 and shall be subject to the review and approval by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. 8. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traff ic and Transportation Manager for review and approval showing conformance with the current versions of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 402, 436, 601, 602 and 604 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 9. That the driveway along Gilbert Street shall be constructed with ten (10) foot radius curb returns in accordance with Engineering Standard No. 137. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 10. That trash storage area(s) shall be provided and maintained in location(s) acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plants such as minimum one (1) gallon sized clinging vines planted on maximum three (3) foot centers or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 11. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, for review and approval. 12. That the developer shall submit satisfactory evidence (a noise study) to the Building Division showing that the senior citizens' apartment complex is in conformance with Council Policy No. 542 "Sound Attenuation in Residential Projects" and with Noise Insulation Standards specified in Title 25 of the California Administrative Code. 13. That a private water system with separate water service for fire protection and domestic water shall be provided. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. -3- PC2003 -44 0 0 14. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Services Standards Specifications. Any water service and /or fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The owner /developer shall be responsible for the cost to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line. 15. That all requests for new water service or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations or abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through the Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. 16. That prior to applying for water meters, fire lines or submitting the water improvement plans for approval, the developer shall submit to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department an estimate of the maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide the estimated water demands. Any off -site water system improvements required to serve the project shall be completed in accordance with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules and Regulations. 17. That the legal property owner shall submit an application for a Subdivision Map Act Certificate of Compliance to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division. A Certificate of Compliance or Conditional Certificate of Compliance shall be approved by the City Engineer and be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. 18. That prior to grading plan approval, the developer shall submit a Water Quality Management Plan ( "WQMP ") specifically identifying the post construction best management practices that will be used on- site to control predictable pollutants from storm water runoff. The WQMP shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division, for review and approval. 19. That trash storage area(s) shall be provided and maintained in location(s) acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plants such as minimum one (1) gallon sized clinging vines planted on maximum three (3) -foot centers or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. In the event that the trash collection method to be utilized indicates that the proposed location would require a recorded agreement for trash collection access on the adjacent commercial center property to the south, said agreement shall be approved by the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, and recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of building permits. 20. That the legal property owner shall enter into an unsubordinated, recorded Affordable Housing Agreement (the "Agreement ") in a form satisfactory to the Executive Director of the Community Development Department. Such Agreement with the City of Anaheim shall comply with California Government Code Section 65915, and Chapters 18.94 (Criteria and Standards for Senior Citizens' Apartment Projects) and 18.99 (Density Bonus) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. The Agreement shall require the following minimum affordability for this Seniors Housing Project: (a) Pursuant to Chapter 18.99, twenty five percent (25 %) of the total units constructed (two (2) units) shall be designated as Affordable Units for very, very low- income households with monthly rents at one twelfth (1/12) of thirty percent (30 %) of thirty five percent (35 %) of Orange County median - income, and twenty four percent (24 %) of the total units constructed (two (2) units) shall be designated as Affordable Units for very low- income households with monthly rents at one twelfth (1/12) of thirty percent (30 %) of fifty percent (50 %) of Orange County median - income, to comply with the Senior Citizens' Apartment Ordinance. Rents shall be calculated based on a two (2) person household size for a one (1) bedroom unit. (b) Pursuant to Chapter 18.94, twelve percent (12 %) of the total permitted units (one (1) unit) shall be designated as an Affordable Unit for very, very low- income households with monthly rents at one twelfth (1/12) of thirty percent (30 %) of thirty five percent (35 %) percent of Orange County median - income, based on a two (2) person family size for one (i) bedroom units to comply with the City Density Bonus Ordinance. _ 4- PC2003 -44 • 0 The number of affordable units are set in the following table: 2002 Affordable Units Schedule Number of Units I Median Income 3 35% VVL 2 50% VL 4 Unrestricted Total Units: 9 Such Agreement shall include appropriate rental controls as specified by the City, and the duration of the Agreement shall be for a period of thirty (30) years. If public financing is secured and such financing requires a greater level of affordability (i.e., additional units) and a longer affordability term, it shall be enforced. The total number of manager units permitted for the subject Senior Citizens' Apartments shall be subject to review and approval by the Executive Director of Community Development. The Anaheim Housing Authority shall be afforded a first right of refusal in referring eligible tenants to affordable units. The Developer shall agree to comply with all reporting requirements under the Affordable Housing Development program. After the Agreement has been recorded, copies shall be provided to the Zoning Division and the Community Development Department. Pursuant to Chapter 18.94 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and Section 51.3 of the Civil Code of the State of California not more than two (2) persons, at least one (1) of whom must be a senior citizen aged sixty two (62) or older shall reside in, or be permitted to reside in any bachelor or one (1) bedroom unit; and that all occupants and residents of any dwelling unit who are not senior citizens other than the spouse or cohabitant of, or a person who resides with and provides primary physical or economic support to, the resident senior citizen, shall be at least forty five (45) years of age except that temporary residency by a person less than forty five (45) years of age for a cumulative period of sixty (60) days in any calendar year shall be permitted; and that an unsubordinated covenant in a form approved by the City Attorney so- limiting such occupancy shall be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder by the legal owner of the property. A copy of said recorded covenant shall then be submitted to the Zoning Division. 21. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 3, and as conditioned herein. 22. That prior to issuance of a building permit or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19 and 20, above- mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions, may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 23. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 21 and 25, herein - mentioned, shall be complied with. 24. 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 ordinance, regulation or requirement. 25. That the three (3) foot block wall on the adjacent property to the north containing an identical senior citizens' apartment complex (also owned by the applicant) shall be removed in order to provide a continuous landscaping setback, as stipulated by the applicant at the March 10, 2003 public hearing. -5- PC2003 -44 • 0 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of March 10, 2003. (Original signed by Paul Bostwick) CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: (Orig inal signed by Eleanor Morriss SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior 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 March 10, 2003, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, EASTMAN, KOOS, VANDERBILT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ROMERO IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of _, 2003. (Original signed by Eleanor Morris) SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMM -6- PC2003 -44 March 28, 2005 Della Herrick City of Anaheim Planning Department 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: 115 N. Gilbert St — Time Extension - CUP # 2003 -04661 Della: I am requesting a one year time extension to comply with my Conditions of Approval for my above referenced 9 unit Senior Citizen Apartment building. 1. Complete Water Quality Management Plan ( "WQMP "). 2. A geotechnical study and consequential report needs to be completed, which will address any possible liquefaction issues. 3. Provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement across the subject property, to be determined as electrical design is completed. 4. Complete a Subdivision Map Act Certificate of Compliance. 5. Receipt of the Trash Ingress & Egress Covenant Subordination Agreement from the lender of the adjoining property. I want to insure that this project is not hurried, but rather built with all concerns properly addressed. Like my existing 9 unit Senior Citizen Apartments immediately to the North that I built 16 Years ago (and still own), I want this new project to have no compromises. Sincerely, Dwyer Beesley DJB /glm Encl. Dwyer J. Beesley P. 0. Box 17783 Anaheim, CA 92817 (714) 832-4602 CUP NO. 2003 - 0 4 6 61 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) REQUEST: (3) Sr8747dh • 1 -A. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED) b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003 -04661 - REQUEST FOR A RETROACTIVE TIME EXTENSION TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (TRACKING CASE NO. CUP2004 04870) Staff Report to the Planning Commission August 9, 2004 Item No. 1 -A (Motion), (Motion) This rectangularly- shaped, 0.21 -acre property has a frontage of 78 feet on the west side of Gilbert Street, having a maximum depth of 120 feet and is located 240 feet north of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue (115 North Gilbert Street). (2) Mr. Dwyer Beesley, the property owner, has submitted a letter requesting a retroactive time extension to comply with the conditions of approval for a previously approved 9 -unit "affordable" senior citizen's apartment complex under authority of Code Section 18.60.170. BACKGROUND: The property was zoned CL (Commercial, Limited) and is now zoned CG (General Commercial) and is currently paved and striped with parking spaces and surrounded by a chain link fence. The property is designated for Residential Medium land uses on the Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map. (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -04661 (to permit a 9 -unit "affordable " senior citizen's apartment complex with a density bonus and waivers of minimum landscape setback abutting an arterial highway and minimum structural setback abutting interior property lines) was approved by the City Council on April 29, 2003. • (5) Resolution No. 2003R -73, adopted in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2003- 04661, included the following condition of approval: "22. That prior to issuance of a building permit or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos: 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19 and 20, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted ip accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code." The conditions referenced in Condition No. 22 pertain to architectural design, landscape requirements, required public utilities and easements, traffic engineering requirements, trash /sanitation requirements, building requirements, fire and water service requirements, • water quality management plan, engineering requirements and an affordable housing agreement. Page 1 • Staff Report to the Planning Commission August9, 2004 Item No. 1 -A DISCUSSION: (6) This entitlement was approved on April 29, 2003, and expired on April 29, 2004. Code requires the application for an extension of time be submitted within 180 days of the date of expiration (prior to October 29, 2004). The petitioner has submitted the attached letter dated June 9, 2004, requesting a retroactive extension of time to comply with conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 - 04661. This is the first request for a time extension to comply with conditions of approval, and Code allows the granting of a maximum of two time extensions subject to the findings contained in Code Section No. 18.60.170 of the Zoning Code. The petitioner has indicated that the time extension is being requested due to conditions of approval that are currently in process, but have not yet been completed. (7) On June 8, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004R -95 and Ordinance No. 5920 which approved a comprehensive update of the Anaheim General Plan and an amendment of Title 18 Zoning Code in its entirety. Contained in Ordinance No. 5920 of the Zoning Code Update was Section 5c "Exemptions" which states the following: " Nothing contained in this ordinance shall apply to any project that has obtained any zoning entitlement (Administrative Adjustment, Conditional Use Permit, Tentative Parcel Map, Tentative Tract Map, Variance, etc.) that has been approved by the Planning Commission, City Council or Zoning Administrator as of 5 p.m. on the day before the effective date of the ordinance (July 8,2004). Said project shall be permitted provided that such project shall have commenced within the time limitation specified in the Resolution adopted by the Planning Commission, or the City Council, or in the Decision if approved by the Zoning Administrator, unless said time period is duly extended by the approval authority; and if a building permit is required, construction shall have commenced and shall be completed within a period of 365 days from the date the building permit is issued, unless said time period is duly extended by the Building Official. Previously- approved entitlements which expire after the effect date of the ordinance and are not granted an extension of time by the approval authority shall be subject to the new Zoning Code." (8) The property was zoned CL and has now become the C -GZone as part of the Zoning Code update. The property has retained the same land use designation of Residential Medium. (9) Staff has reviewed this project using the new zoning code requirements and has determined that the approval is not inconsistent with the new Zoning Code. The only change that would impact this development relates to interior setbacks which are now required to be fifteen (15) feet instead of ten (10) feet to eleven (11) feet). It should be noted that a waiver was granted for interior setbacks-to allow a.4 -5 foot wide setback instead of a 10 -11 foot setback. The waiver was approved by City Council based on the size and shape of the property and because the project to the north (an existing senior citizen's apartment complex) was developed with the same setback. The new complex, together with the existing senior citizen's apartments to the north, would be owned and managed as a single parcel. Therefore staff is recommending approval of the requested time extension, for a period of one year, to expire on April 29, 2005. (10) An inspection by the Code Enforcement Division indicates that there is one outstanding violation on the property (discarded couch). Due to problems that have occurred on the Page 2 FINDINGS: Staff Report to the - Planning Commission August 9, 2004 Item No. 1 -A site (illegal dumping, inoperative cars, etc.) the owner has installed a chain link fence surrounding the parking area to prevent these problems from reoccurring. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (11) Staff has reviewed the request for a retroactive extension of time to comply with conditions Of approval and the previously approved Negative Declaration and finds there are no changes to the originally- approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -04661 and that the request will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- approved Negative Declaration serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. (12) Zoning Code Section No. 18.60.170 specifies that the petitioner shall, within one year after receiving approval (or within any greater or lesser time limit specified in the Resolution of Approval) comply with all conditions imposed with time limits. In addition, subsection 18.60.170.020 specifies that before granting any request for an extension of time to comply with conditions of approval, the Commission must make a finding of fact that the following findings exist: (a) That the extension of time will not extend the approval beyond two extensions of time, with each extension not to exceed one year, or any greater or lesser time increment specified in the original resolution of the conditional use permit. (b) That the approval remains consistent with the General Plan and the zone district designation for the property. (c) That either no Code amendments have occurred that would cause the approval to be inconsistent with this title, or the petitioner has (i) submitted revised plans demonstrating that the approved project can be modified to bring it into conformance with such Code amendments and (ii) agreed to modify the project to conform to such Code amendments. (d) That the subject property has been maintained in a safe, clean, and aesthetically pleasing condition with no unremediated code violations on the property, as confirmed by an inspection of the subject property by the Code Enforcement Division. (e) That no additional information or changed circumstances are present which contradict the facts necessary to support one or more of the required findings for approval of the project. RECOMMENDATION:' (13) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the meeting that the Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the. previously- approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the appropriate environmental documentation for this project. Page 3 (b) Staff Report to the Planning Commission. August 9, 2004 Item No. 1 -A By motion, approve the request for a one year retroactive extension of time to comply with conditions of approval to expire April 29, 2005, based on the following: (i) That this is the first request for a time extension and Code permits a maximum of two requests for extension of time to comply with conditions of approval. (ii) That the property has been maintained in a safe, dean and aesthetically pleasing manner with no outstanding code violations affecting this property. (iii) That there is no information or changed circumstances which contradict the facts necessary to support one or more of the required findings for approval of Conditional Use. Permit No. 2003 - 04661. ITEM NO. 1 -A AREA 3 RS TTM 16017 RCL 2004 -00139 T -VAR 910 5 -046 5 0 •�.•`• VAR 200404634 ` MIS 200400892 •�••�• VACANT VACANT •'�••�••`• VACANT i ` �• 144 RSZ 3 1 ou E C z 1 Du EACH n ' �A • �'• lysb FRFF y'AY o < <F,g 1 o RS-2 ISO/ 'QAN ' U fACy qCy FCO CiNn' A cq�� VA CANT < y < wA1 .. ..1 �•� BRIiA WAy C) Mo 2p S Q J 0 O S yF gc y T \ R� TTM 16818 s� RCL 2004 -00138 T -VAR 2005-04650 ^ 2 h�n1lV MIS 200"-0 2 1 9 VACANT �6c� RCL 53 -54 -24 c, RCL 66 -67 -14 AREA 1 X 28 l 9 � l �i'0 CUP 4083 TTM 116810 THE RK N � ) 138 SMALL IND. F RMS rvAR VAR 2004-04634 MI5 AGMT 092 VACANT Variance No. 2004 -04634 Subject Property TRACKING NO. VAR2005 -04650 Date: May 2, 2005 Scale: Graphic Requested By: ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Q.S. No. 30 REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT 17 DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITH WAIVER OF CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO. 542 PERTAINING TO SOUND ATTENUATION FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS. No addresses 1812 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 1 -C 1 -C. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS N SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: VENTURA PARCELS (Motion) (Motion) (1) Area 1 : This 0.49 -acre area has a frontage of 105 feet on the east side of Ventura Street, a maximum depth of 287 feet, and is located at the terminus of Ventura Street abutting the 1 -5 Freeway (no addresses). Area 2 : This 1.6 -acre area has frontages of 132 feet on Ventura Street and Minot Street, a maximum depth of 700 feet, and is located at the terminus of Ventura Street and Minot Street abutting the 1 -5 Freeway (no addresses). PICADILLY PARCELS Area 3. This 0.7 -acre area has a frontage of 377 feet on the north side of Picadilly Way, a maximum depth of 80 feet, and is located 320 feet north of the centerline of Britain Way (no addresses). REQUEST: (2) The applicant, Cheryl Stump, of Brookfield Anaheim, LLC, requests approval forwaiver of Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (3) Variance No. 2004 -04634 (waivers of minimum front yard setback, minimum rear yard setback, and required improvement of private streets to construct 17 detached single family homes) was approved by the Planning Commission (Resolution No. PC2004 -149) on December 13, 2004. DISCUSSION (4) The applicant requests approval for waiver of Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects. This Policy states the following: `it is the policy of the City Council that a noise level analysis shall be performed for any proposed residential development located within 600 feet of any existing or adopted freeway, expressway, major arterial highway, primary arterial highway or railroad and that the Planning Commission be authorized to waive specific requirements, subject to appeal to the City Council. The following noise attenuation features shall be incorporated in these residential developments as required to reduce the noise levels as indicated. VAR2005 -04650 report-cisAm Page 1 CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED) Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 1 -C In single family developments located within 600 feet of any existing or adopted freeway, expressway, major arterial highway, or primary arterial highway, there shall be a sound barrier capable of reducing the sound of motor vehicles to a maximum of 65 dB CNEL at any point six feet above ground (sic) level within the development. The sound barrier may consist of an earth berm, a masonry wall, or any portion of the structure. Where vehicular or pedestrian access through the barrier is permitted, gates or baffles may be provided, however, said access shall be designed to minimize sound transmission.' (5) As indicated in the attached noise analysis summary for Tentative Tract Map Nos. 16817 and 16818, all 17 single family homes within these subdivisions are proposed to be adjacent to the 1 -5 and SR -91 Freeways. The studies conclude that exterior living areas would be exposed to worst case noise levels of 66 dB for the houses along the I -5 Freeway, and 67 dB for the houses along the SR -91 Freeway. An existing 14 -foot high block wall barrier (owned by Caltrans) currently buffers a substantial amount of freeway - generated noise for these properties. The study recommends, however, that the height of this wall be increased to 17 to 22 feet to reduce the noise to the 65 dB noise level, as required under Council Policy No. 542. (6) Staff feels that the amount of noise expected to exceed the maximum noise limitation adjacent to the freeways would be negligible (maximum 65 dB required; 66 -67 dB proposed). Moreover, it would be difficult, cost prohibitive, and unreasonable to increase the height of the freeway sound wall from 14 feet to 17 -22 feet to justify this negligible deviation in noise exposure. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this request to waive the sound attenuation policy for 17 new single - family homes adjacent to a freeway. (7) A majority of the future housing opportunity sites in the City, as identified in the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan, would be located adjacent to major arterials, railroad tracks, and freeways. To apply more appropriate noise standards to these future housing projects, Planning Services Division staff is in the process of drafting an amendment to this Council Policy pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects. This amendment will be agendized for Planning Commission review next month. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (8) Staff has reviewed the request for waiver of Council Policy No. 542 and the previously - approved Negative Declaration and finds there are no changes to the originally- approved Variance No. 2004 - 04634, that would cause significant adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- approved Negative Declaration serve as the required environmental documentation for this request based upon a finding by the Commission that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed 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 no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 1 -C RECOMMENDATION: (9) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing that the Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the previously- approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. (b) By motion, approve the waiver of Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects adjacent to a freeway, as recommended by staff based upon the finding of the noise study that the sound attenuation provided by the existing freeway walls provides a noise reduction to 66 -67 dB CNEL, consistent with other residences in the area. Page 3 [DRAFT] May 2, 2005 Dwyer Beesley P.O. Box 17783 Anaheim, CA 92817 Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim City Planning Commission meeting of May 2, 2005. 1. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: C. (a) CECIA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED) (b) VARIANCE NO. 2004 -04634 (Tracking No. VAR2005- 04650) Owner: Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, Attn: Elisa Stipkovich, 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Agent: Cheryl Stump, Brookfield Anaheim, LLC, 3090 Bristol Street, Suite 200, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Location: (No Address). Requests to construct 17 detached single family homes with waiver of City Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects. ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby determine that the previously- approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the request for waiver of Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects, based on the following: (i) That the waiver of Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects adjacent to a freeway, as recommended by staff based upon the finding of the noise study that the sound attenuation provided by the existing freeway walls provides a noise reduction to 66 -67 dB CNEL, consistent with other residences in the area. Sincerely, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary Anaheim City Planning Commission cr2004- 04634EXC.doc NOISE ANALYSIS FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 16818 (VENTURA/MINOT) CITY OF ANAHEIM Report # 05 -033 March 17, 2005 Prepared for: BROOKFIELD HOMES 3090 Bristol Street, Suite 200 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Prepared By: Fred Greve, P.E. Keith Utsler MESTRE GREVE ASSOCIATES 27812 El Lazo Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Phone (949) 349 -0671 Fax (949) 349 -0679 EXTERIOR NOISE MITIGATION SUMMARY NOISE ANALYSIS FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 16818 (VENTURA/MINOT) CITY OF ANAHEIM Mestre Greve Associates Report #05 -033 Page 2 The project site is impacted by are traffic noise along the I -5 Freeway. For the exterior living areas that are exposed to noise levels greater than 65 CNEL, some form of noise mitigation is required. An effective method of reducing the noise to acceptable levels is with a noise barrier. An existing 14.0 noise barrier is located at the north project property line along the I -5 Freeway. On -site noise measurements were conducted in order to determine the existing noise exposure and to calibrate the noise prediction model. The results of the measurements indicate that with the existing 14.0' noise barrier, exterior living areas will be exposed to worst -case noise levels of 66.2 CNEL. Therefore, with the existing 14.0' noise barrier, the project site will not meet the 65 CNEL exterior noise standard. Representative cross - sections along the I -5 Freeway (see Appendix A for analysis data) were analyzed utilizing the FHWA Model in conjunction with the on -site noise measurements, in order to determine the necessary noise barrier location and height. Exterior living areas (with the existing 14.0' noise barrier) will be exposed to worst -case noise levels of 66.2 CNEL. Therefore, in. order to meet the 65 CNEL exterior noise standard, a noise barrier will be required for exterior living areas. The required noise barrier height and location is listed in Table S1 and .shown in Exhibit S 1. The top of wall (TOW) elevation is also shown in Exhibit S I and is the critical dimension when constructing the soundwall. TABLE S1 REQUIRED NOISE BARRIER LOCATION AND HEIGHT Location Required Barrier Height Lots 1 through 12 17.0' .r. Barrier height is relative to pad elevation. The noise barriers may consist of a wall, a berm, or a combination of the two. The noise barriers must have a surface density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. The wall may be constructed of stud and stucco, 3/8 -inch plate glass, 5/8- inch plexiglass, any masonry material, or a combination of these materials. The project site plan shows Lots 2 through 9 fronting the I -5 Freeway. The exterior living areas /rear yard areas are located behind the homes. The homes act as a noise barrier and provide the necessary noise reduction for the rear yard areas. However, the rear yards for Lot 1 and Lots 10 through 12 front the I -5 Freeway. If the plotting of homes on Lot 1 and Lots 10 through 12 could be reconfigured in the same manner as Lots 2 through 9, the exterior noise standard could be met with the existing 14 -foot soundwall. However, additional building upgrades, not addressed in this report, might be needed to meet the indoor noise standard. INTERIOR NOISE MITIGATION The project must comply with the City of Anaheim indoor noise standard of 45 CNEL. To meet this standard, the building must provide sufficient outdoor to indoor building attenuation to reduce noise to acceptable levels. Representative cross - sections along the 1 -5 Freeway were analyzed to determine building surface noise exposure. Based on the construction details and EWNR values, the exterior to interior noise reduction was calculated (see Appendix B). First Floor Interior Noise Mitigation Mestre Greve Associates Report #05 -033 Page 3 With the exterior mitigation measures mentioned previously, first floor building surfaces along the I -5 Freeway will be exposed to noise levels of less than 65 CNEL, and will therefore require less than a 20.0 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard. With construction practices common in California, residential buildings achieve outdoor to indoor noise reductions of at least 20 dB. Therefore, all first floor rooms will meet the City's 45 CNEL interior noise standard without building upgrades. Second Floor Interior Noise Mitigation Second floor building surfaces along the I -5 Freeway will be exposed to worst -case traffic noise levels of 69.8 CNEL, and will therefore require a 24.8 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard. The worst -case second floor room will achieve an outdoor to indoor noise reduction of 22.5 dB. This level is less than the required reduction of 24.8 dB. Therefore, building upgrades will be required for second floor rooms. The required building upgrades are listed on the following page in Table S2 and are shown Exhibit S2. TABLE S2 REQUIRED SECOND FLOOR BUILDING UPGRADES Plan Lot(s) Mestre Greve Associates Report #05 -033 Page 4 Required Room(s) Building Upgrade I 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 Master, Bdrm #2, Bdrm #3 A II 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12 Master, Bdrm #2, Bdrm #3 B A — upgrade windows to EWNR =26 or STC =28 (typically 1/4" dual. glazed) B — upgrade windows to EWNR =25 or STC =27 (typically 3/8 "single- glazed or 1/4" dual glazed) Window upgrades listed represent products with glass thicknesses that typically meet the specified EWNR/STC ratings. Glass thickness is only one factor in the overall noise reduction of a window. Other factors include the frame construction and seal type. Noise reduction ratings with a given glass thickness can vary from one manufacturer to another. Consult with the manufacturer to ensure compliance with the noise reduction rating requirements. Adequate Ventilation Requirements With windows open, the outdoor to indoor noise reduction of a building falls to about 12 dB. Therefore, for those homes experiencing a combined noise level greater than 57 CNEL, windows must remain closed to meet the indoor noise standard. In order to assume that windows can remain closed to achieve this required attenuation, adequate ventilation with windows closed must be provided per the applicable Uniform Building Code. All homes (Lots 1 through 12) experience noise levels greater than 57 CNEL, and will need to have windows closed to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard. These homes will need to be provided with adequate ventilation (e.g., a mechanical ventilation system). These homes are shown in Exhibit S2. NOISE ANALYSIS FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 16817 (PICADILLY WAY) CITY OF ANAHEIM Report # 05 -032 March 14, 2005 Prepared for: BROOKFIELD HOMES 3090 Bristol Street, Suite 200 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Prepared By: Fred Greve, P.E. Keith Utsler MESTRE GREVE ASSOCIATES 2781.2 El Lazo Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Phone (949) 349 -0671 Fax (949) .349 -0679 EXTERIOR NOISE MITIGATION SUMMARY NOISE ANALYSIS FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 16817 (PICADILLY WAY) CITY OF ANAHEIM Mestre Greve Associates Report #05 -032 Page 2 The project site is impacted by are traffic noise along the 91 Freeway. For the exterior living areas that are exposed to noise levels greater than 65 CNEL, some form of noise mitigation is required. An effective method of reducing the noise to acceptable levels is with a noise barrier. An existing 14.0 noise barrier is located at the north project property line along the 91 Freeway. On -site noise measurements were conducted in order to determine the existing noise exposure and to calibrate the noise prediction model. The results of the measurements indicate that with the existing 14.0' noise barrier, exterior living areas will be exposed to worst -case noise levels of 67.1 CNEL. Therefore, with the existing 14.0' noise barrier, the project site will not meet the 65 CNEL exterior noise standard. Representative cross - sections along the 91 Freeway -(see Appendix A for analysis data) were analyzed utilizing the FHWA Model in conjunction with the on -site noise measurements, in order to determine the necessary noise barrier location and height. Exterior living areas (with the existing 14.0' noise barrier) will be exposed to worst -case noise levels of 67.1 CNEL. Therefore, in order to meet the 65 CNEL exterior noise standard, a noise barrier will be required for exterior living areas. The required noise barrier height and location is listed in Table S1 and shown in Exhibit S1. The top of wall (TOW) elevation is also shown in Exhibit S 1 and is the critical dimension when constructing the soundwall. TABLE S1 REQUIRED NOISE BARRIER LOCATION AND HEIGHT Location Required Barrier Height * Lots 1 through 5 17.0' to 22.0 * .i. Barrier height is relative to pad elevation with a linear change in height for Lots 1 through .5. The noise barriers may consist of a wall, a berm, or a combination of the two. The noise barriers must have a surface density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. The wall may be constructed of stud and stucco, 3/8 -inch plate glass, 5/8- inch plexiglass, any masonry material, or a combination of these materials. .INTERIOR NOISE MITIGATION The project must comply with the City of Anaheim indoor noise standard of 45 CNEL. To meet this standard, the building must provide sufficient outdoor to Indoor building attenuation to reduce noise to acceptable levels. Representative cross - sections along the 91 Freeway were analyzed to determine building surface noise exposure. Based on the construction details and EWNR values, the exterior to interior noise reduction was calculated (see Appendix B). First Floor Interior Noise Mitigation Mestre Greve Associates Report #05 -032 Page 3 First floor building surfaces along the 91 Freeway will be exposed to worst -case traffic noise levels of 67.1 CNEL, and will therefore require a 22.1 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard. The worst -case first floor room will achieve an outdoor to indoor noise reduction of 23.1 dB. This level is greater than the required reduction of 22.1 dB. Therefore, no first floor interior noise mitigation will be required. Second Floor Interior Noise Mitigation Second floor building surfaces along the 91 Freeway will be exposed to worst -case traffic noise levels of 77.3 CNEL, and will therefore require a 32.3 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard. The worst -case second floor room will achieve an outdoor to indoor noise reduction of 23.2 dB. This level is less than the required reduction of 32.3 dB. Therefore, building upgrades will be required for second floor rooms. The required building upgrades are listed in Table S2 and are shown Exhibit S2. TABLE S2 REQUIRED SECOND FLOOR BUILDING UPGRADES Required Plan Lot(s) Room(s) Building Upgrade 1 1 Master, Bdrm #2, Bdrm #3 A, B 1 3, 5 Master, Bdrm #3 A, B 2 2, 4 Master, Bdrm #3 A, B A — upgrade windows to EWNR =35 or STC =39 (typically 1/2" laminated) Window upgrades listed represent products with glass thicknesses that typically meet the specified EWNR/STC ratings. Glass thickness is only one factor in the overall noise reduction of a window. Other factors include the frame construction and seal type. Noise reduction ratings with a given glass thickness can vary from one manufacturer to another. Consult with the manufacturer to ensure compliance with the noise reduction rating requirements. B — install attic vent baffles (see detail are shown in Exhibit 4) Mestre Greve Associates Report #05 -032 Page 4 Adequate Ventilation Requirements With windows open, the outdoor to indoor noise reduction of a building falls to about 12 dB. Therefore, for those homes experiencing a combined noise level greater than 57 CNEL, windows must remain closed to meet the indoor noise standard. In order to assume that windows can remain closed to achieve this required attenuation, adequate ventilation with windows closed must be provided per the applicable Uniform Building Code. All homes (Lots 1 through 5) experience noise levels greater than 57 CNEL, and will need to have windows closed to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard. These homes will need to be provided with adequate ventilation (e.g., a mechanical ventilation system). These homes are shown in Exhibit S2. Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 1 -D 1 -D. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a. REQUEST FOR POLICY DIRECTION FROM PLANNING COMMISSION PERTAINING TO BUILDING - MOUNTED TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES WITHIN THE SC (SCENIC CORRIDOR) OVERLAY ZONE (Motion) REQUEST: (1) Staff requests Planning Commission provide direction pertaining to building- mounted telecommunication facilities within the SC (Scenic Corridor) Overlay Zone- BACKGROUND (2) In 2003, the Mayor directed the Community Services Department to assess the feasibility of working with telecommunication providers to establish facilities on City -owned parks to generate income to off -set park operating and maintenance costs. In January 2004, the Community Services Department sent out Requests for Proposals to cellular phone service companies for the development of cellular antennas to be placed at various City park facilities. In April of 2004, the Community Services Department prepared a memo to the City Manager's Office requesting permission to begin the negotiation process with the providers. Although the City already had several telecommunication facilities on City - owned properties, there was no policy regarding lease terms, time frames, or monetary compensation, etc., to be included in the lease. In an effort to streamline the process, the Community Services Department in August 2004, initiated the development of a standardized lease agreement that would be used City -wide for any provider proposing to establish a telecommunication facility on a City -owned park or other facility operated by the Community Services Department. In December 2004, the Community Services Department provided a memo to the City Manager/City Council on the status of completing the standardized agreement. In March 2005, the agreement was distributed to all vendors who had expressed an interest in a park location. (3) At the time Community Services staff began discussions with several telecommunication providers to develop facilities at City parks, the Zoning Code allowed telecommunication facilities within the Scenic Corridor Overlay subject to approval of a conditional use permit. The 2004 comprehensive update of the General Plan and Zoning Code included an update specifically addressing telecommunication facilities throughout the City. As a result of this update, the Zoning Code only allows building- mounted telecommunication facilities that are incorporated into the architecture of an existing structure within the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone— prohibiting all other types of facilities. This provision would also apply to City -owned parks that are within the Overlay (Riverdale Park, Toyon Park, Canyon Rim Park, to name a few). Sr Telecom on Parks 050205 JR.doc Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 1 -D (4) In March of this year, the City Council did not act on the renewal of the lease agreement for the telecommunications facility at Riverdale Park, and inquired if staff had identified other potential carriers that could co- locate at this facility prior to finalizing the agreement. Because of the changes to the Municipal Code as a result of last year's update, Planning Services Division staff and Community Services Department staff have been discussing an appropriate mechanism to address the establishment of telecommunication facilities on City -owned parks within the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone, in a manner that would provide enhanced coverage to the community and be aesthetically sensitive to the surrounding land uses. Staff is requesting this policy direction from the Planning Commission pertaining to building- mounted telecommunication facilities within the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone, as an interim measure until a zoning code text amendment is proposed so that Community Services staff can continue to negotiate with wireless providers on telecommunications facilities at Toyon and Canyon Rim Parks- DISCUSSION (5) Code Section 18.38.060 currently prohibits the establishment of stealth, ground mounted telecommunication facilities within the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone, and allows building- mounted facilities in every zone, except single family residential and open space zones, and the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone, subject to approval of a Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit, as indicated in the table (18.38.060.030.040) below: Zones Type of Facility Single Family Multiple Family & Mixed Use Non - Residential Scenic Corridor Overla Stealth - Telecommunications Telecommunications Telecommunications Building- Antenna Review Antenna Review Antenna Review Permit Mounted Not Permitted Permit Required Permit Required Re uired Stealth - Ground- Conditional Use Permit Mounted Not Permitted Not Permitted Required Not Permitted As indicated in Code Section 18.38.060.030 ground- mounted and building- mounted facilities are defined as follows " 0302 Building- mounted. Mounted to the side or roof of a building, to the fapade of a building or to the side of another structure such as a water tank, church steeple, freestanding sign, or similar structure, excluding utilities transmission towers.' ".0305 Ground - mounted. Mounted to a pole, monopole, tower or other freestanding structure specifically constructed for the purpose of supporting an antenna." (6) Code Section 18.90.060, gives authority to the Planning Commission to clarify certain items within the Zoning Code if ambiguity arises concerning the appropriate classification of a particular use within the meaning and intent of the Code. Staff is requesting the Planning Commission determine that telecommunication facilities that are located on Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 1 -D athletic field lights in conjunction with a recreation facility (park or community center) be considered "building- mounted ". (7) Staff believes that telecommunications facilities established on existing athletic field lights in conjunction with a recreation facility (park or community center), or installed in conjunction with the installation of athletic field lights should be considered building - mounted facilities for the purposes of interpretation and application of the Municipal Code- RECOMMENDATION (8) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public meeting, that the Commission (a) By motion, determine that telecommunication facilities proposed to be located on athletic field lights in conjunction with a recreation facility (park or community center) be considered "building- mounted" and that such uses may be allowed in zones where building- mounted facilities are permitted, subject to approval of a Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit. Page 3 ITEM NO. 1 -A TERANIMAR DRIVE -90 -39 10911. L135 7 -36 10 TER/ 2E 36 1 DU 7E RS -2 x x 1 DU EACH Z N Q 0 N Q � W C6 W ° D ° M S-2 M R 1 DU EACH RM-4 RCL 73 -74 -29 VAR 2568 APTS. 1 VAR 3673 RM-0 T RCL 76 -77 -35 LU 1 DU T RCL 69 -70 -04 Z) RCL66 -67 -29 (: Z LU > T Q VACANT Z N V w RM -4 F W RCL 77 -78 -16 a LU VAR 3419 RM-4 �¢ APTS. RCL 84 -85 -32 VAR 3487 C -G RCL 63- 64-139 APTS. m �a RCL 61 -62 -20 a' CUP 3002 Uw I VACANT F 741 L135 7 -36 10 TER/ 2E 36 1 DU 7E RS -2 x x 1 DU EACH Z N Q 0 N Q � W C6 W ° D ° M S-2 M R 1 DU EACH RM-4 RCL 73 -74 -29 VAR 2568 APTS. 1 VAR 3673 RM-0 P N 91 -02 RCL 76 -77 -35 VAR 2867 APTS. RM -4 T RCL 69 -70 -04 1 D RCL66 -67 -29 (: RM -4 RCL 62-63 -109 APTS. RM-2 RCL 87 -8849 I RM -4 RCL 69 -70 -( VAR 2107 APTS. RM -2 RCL 74 -75 -33 RCL 65-66 -116 (/AR 2709 VAR 1797 RM -4 CL 69 -70 -21 VAR 2133 APTS. RM -? GLEN HOLLY DR 41 CUP 2004 -04951 1 DU EACH -ACH N; am op m m wae K� a— 198' BALL ROAD Cn U H ry D O U x U W 0 ° U Cn W Q C7 F- Q W Q W DI ° Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 (READVERTISED) Subject Property Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 Date: April 4, 2005 Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: ODON MARC[ Q.S. No. 10 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004 -00141 - REQUEST RECLASSIFICATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM THE T (TRANSITION) ZONE TO THE RM -3 (RESIDENTIAL, MUTIPLE- FAMILY) ZONE, OR A LESS INTENSE ZONE. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04951 - REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 16 -UNIT, ATTACHED AND DETACHED, SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16833 - TO ESTABLISH A 1 -LOT, 16 -UNIT, ATTACHED AND DETACHED, SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road 1748 T T N 1 DU EACH Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 2 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion for continuance) 2b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004 -00141 2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04951 2d. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16833 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 1.4 -acre property has a frontage of 198 feet on the north side of Ball Road, a maximum depth of 277 feet and is located 741 feet east of the centerline of Western Avenue (3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of the following: Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 — to reclassify this property from the T (Transition) zone to the RM -3 (Residential, Multiple - Family) zone, or less intense zone. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 —to permit a 16 -unit attached and detached single - family residential subdivision. Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 —to establish a 1 -lot, 16 -unit attached and detached single - family residential subdivision- BACKGROUND (3) This item was continued from the February 7, February 23, March 7, and April 4, 2005, Planning Commission meetings to allow the architect to redesign the project to comply with the Corridor Residential Design Guidelines. (4) The applicant, Walter Bowman, has submitted the attached letter dated April 21, 2005, requesting a further continuance to the June 13, 2005, Commission meeting to redesign the project in response to comments received from the neighborhood and staff- RECOMMENDATION (5) That the Commission, by motion, continue this item to the June 13, 2005, Planning Commission meeting to allow the architect additional time to redesign the project. SR RCL2004 -0141 050205 akv.doc Page 1 APR -21 -2005 04:29 PM BOWMAN REAL ESTATE 7149954825 P,01 Bonanni Properties /D.S. Products 5622 Research Drive Huntington Beach, CA 92649 April 21, 2005 City of Anaheim Planning Division Arm; Amy Vazquez, Associate Planner Judy P. Dadant, Senior Planner VIA FAX 714 765 -5280 RE: 3117, 3121, and 3125 West Ball Road CLQA Negative Declaration Reclassification No, 2004 -00141 Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 ! APR 2005 Re PZAervEo r;Y OFPg'V IV IN ry Y Dear Ladies, Pursuant to our discussions on this matter, please be advised that we wish to request a continuance of this item to the June 13, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. Your continued consideration and cooperation is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please call me @ 714 995 -4432 Sincerely, ; g Walter K. Bowman Associate cc ITEM NO. 1 -A f O N PD 00� G J2 N��N _ x 7 N 002 h d U N W 0 Z 0 U�u� Q N Z G "13 mN YZ RCL 7 (ReIl In tent to CL) 1 / *I1I1I1en110 mac' -' RCL 72 -7337 (Res of Intent to CL U GUP1379 2 W � Sep, 0 pUEpDN CNE - m LU RCL 77 (Res of Intent tent to to CL) p� EpGN m 1 1 (D R$ -2 E pGN L UJ _J RCL srr67 -07 / 1 DD G /� 0 _ CUP 2805-04979 SPA \J0 RCL 2/3'6(1) O �TVAR 00 04622 CUP2337 CUP1398 ANCHORANIMAL UJ R2804 -04608 VACANT -� HOI SPITAL I a -�1 � S EpCN RC CU PP 1398 (2() aL 97 SOUTH STREET RCL89 -90 -05 Rs-? pGN D CUP31W 1 = U v o. 0 U) W G 3 m Om V v CUP 1618 NEIGHBORHOOD 2 EpD N SHOPPIN 1 D S 1 dm SOU�N C-G RCL 70 -71 -22 G� RG� CUP 200404863 CUP 1264 6263 .03 9G, 5923564 NEI U HOPPING CENTER \ \ r.4 G�UPgrg Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04979 Subject Property Date: May 2, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: SHAHRAZ DANESH Q.S. No. 113 REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A THIRD TENANT SPACE WITHIN A PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED TWO -UNIT COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER. 676 South State College Boulevard 1788 m x z c� 0 z Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04979 Subject Property Date: May 2, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: SHAHRAZ DANESH Q.S. No. 113 REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A THIRD TENANT SPACE WITHIN A PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED TWO -UNIT COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER. 676 South State College Boulevard 1788 ALDEN AVE LY Lu cNE� J O M F- Lu w RESEDA PLACE 0 F Lu m J Q AVE O o SAVOY U Lu w �t• 1 , U) SOUTH STREET w g W ! r LU 0 Q 1 7 J_ d v� VJ X i f i Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04979 Subject Property Date: May 2, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: SHAHRAZ DANESH Q.S. No. 113 REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A THIRD TENANT SPACE WITHIN A PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED TWO -UNIT COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER. 676 South State College Boulevard 1788 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 3 3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION(PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED) (Motion) 3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04979 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 0.42 -acre property is located at the northeast corner of State College Boulevard and South Street, having frontages of 188 feet on the east side of State College Boulevard and 97 feet on the north side of South Street (676 South State College Boulevard). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit under authority of Code Section No. 18.08.030.040.0402, to construct a third tenant space within a previously - approved two - unit commercial retail building. BACKGROUND: (3) This property is currently vacant and was previously occupied by a gasoline service station. It is zoned C -G (General Commercial) and the Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property and properties to the north for Low - Medium Density Residential land uses. Properties to the east and west (across State College Boulevard) are designated for Low Density Residential land uses and properties to the south (across South Street) are designated for Neighborhood Center Commercial land uses. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) Variance No. 2004 -04608 (to construct a two -unit commercial retail building, with waivers of: a)minimum number of parking spaces [24 required; 23 proposed]; b) minimum setback adjacent to an arterial highway; and, c) minimum setback adjacent to a residential zone boundary) was approved by the Planning Commission on June 2, 2004. Final elevation plans were subsequently approved by the Commission on July 12, 2004. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (5) The applicant proposes to construct a third tenant space within a previously- approved 4,407 square foot commercial building. The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates that the property would be developed with one building containing three tenant spaces, an automated teller machine (ATM) and a double trash enclosure at the northeast corner of the property adjacent to the alley. SRCUP2005 04979jpr.doc Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 3 View of site from State College Boulevard (6) The site plan indicates that the proposed building would be developed with the following setbacks: Direction Proposed Building & Code- Code - Required Landscape Setbacks* Required Landscape Building Setback Setback North (adjacent to single 50 feet to building 20 feet 10 feet family residential) 4 feet landsca ed "* West (adjacent to State 8 feet to building " 15 feet 15 feet College Boulevard) 8 -10 feet landsca ed " South (adjacent to 3 feet to building " 15 feet 15 feet South Street) 3 -5 feet landsca ed " East (adjacent to alley) 49 feet to building 10 feet None 0 feet landscaped "Setbacks are measured from the ultimate right -of -way. "Approved under Variance No. 2004 -04608 (7) The floor plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates that the proposed retail building would consist of one 2,000 square -foot tenant space (with an ATM booth), one 1, 500 square foot tenant space, and one 904 - square foot tenant space,. The plan indicates main entrances to all suites on the east elevation (facing the parking lot). No specific improvements (e.g. restrooms, offices, etc.) have been identified for the tenant spaces. (8) Access to the site would be via two driveways, one each from South Street and State College Boulevard. The plan indicates a total of 23 parking spaces. Code requires a minimum of 24 spaces for this building based on the ratio of 5.5 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area of general retail space (5.5 x 4,407/1000 = 24). Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 3 (9) Elevation drawings (Exhibit No. 2) indicate a one -story commercial building varying in height from18 to 24.5 feet. The design and materials of the building are consistent with the final elevation plans approved in connection with Variance No. 2004 -04608 by the Planning Commission on July 12, 2004, with the exception of two additional wall signs for the proposed third tenant space. (10) The landscape plans (Exhibit No. 3) comply with all provisions of the code pertaining to on site landscaping, with the exception of the minimum required landscape setbacks approved in connection with Variance No. 2004 - 04608. (11) The submitted letter of operation indicates the proposed uses would consist of a check cashing facility, wireless phone store and an unspecified retail business. The commercial uses would operate between 8 a.m. and 10 p.m., daily with approximately five (5) employees total. The walk -up ATM would be fully equipped with security devices, theft proof doors and shielded lighting. No deposits would be accepted at this machine. The property owner will be supervising construction and the on -going operation of the businesses. Surveillance cameras would be operational during operating hours and after-hours- ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (12) Staff has reviewed the request for an additional tenant space for a previously - approved two - unit commercial retail building and the previously- approved Negative Declaration and finds that this request would not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- approved Negative Declaration serve as the required environmental documentation for this request- EVALUATION (13) Commercial retail centers (two or more tenant spaces) are permitted within the C -G zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (14) Staff is supportive of the request to add a third retail tenant space because it would be compatible with the underlying zone and would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area and would not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Because the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the third retail tenant space in a manner not detrimental to the particular area, staff recommends approval of the request as indicated herein- FINDINGS (15) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); (b) That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety; Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 3 (d) That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. RECOMMENDATION: (16) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission approve the applicant's request by adopting the attached resolution including the findings contained therein: Page 4 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 -* A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04979 BE GRANTED WHEREAS, the Anaheim 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, described as: LOTS 8,9 AND 10 OF TRACT NO. 2300, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 68, PAGES 35 AND 36 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on May 2, 2005, at 2:00 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 18.66, 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, 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: 1. That the proposed construction of a third tenant space within a previously - approved two -unit commercial retail center is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.08.030.040.0402. 2. That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located. 3. That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety. 4. That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. 5. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 6. That * ** 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 That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to construct a third tenant space within a previously - approved two - unit commercial retail building and does hereby find that the Negative Declaration previously approved in connection with the originally approved permit is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation in connection with this request. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the health and safety of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: Cr\PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- 1. That no convenience markets and/or retail sales of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted unless a separate conditional use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. 2. That no video, electronic or other amusement devices shall be permitted on the premises. 3. That all public phones shall be located inside the building. 4. That all trash generated from this commercial retail center shall be properly contained in trash bins located within approved trash enclosures. The number of bins shall be adequate and the trash pick -up shall be as frequent as necessary to ensure the sanitary handling and timely removal of refuse from the property. The Community Preservation Division of the Planning Department shall determine the need for additional bins or additional pick -up. All costs for increasing the number of bins or frequency of pick- up shall be paid by the business owner. 5. That any tree or other landscaping planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and /or dead. 6. That no roof - mounted balloons or other inflatable devices shall be permitted on the property. 7. That no outdoor vending machines shall be permitted on the property. 8. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by the provision of regular landscaping maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 9. That the number of tenant spaces for this building shall be limited to three (3). Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 10. That landscape improvements along State College Boulevard shall be consistent with the State College Corridor Master Plan. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 11. That final sign plans for the monument and wall signs shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. Said plans shall incorporate the stone treatment identical to the treatment utilized on the commercial building, an 18 -inch high base including 9 -inch high address letters, and a decorative cornice treatment along the full length of the monument sign. The final sign plans shall reflect the location of any monument sign outside the sight- distance triangle at the intersection of South Street and State College Boulevard. Any decision made by staff regarding said sign plans may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Report and Recommendation" item. 12. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and as conditioned herein. 13. That prior to issuance of a building permit for the first tenant space, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 9, 10, and 11 above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 14. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 12, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 15. 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 ordinance, regulation or requirement- -2- PC2005- BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the property owner /developer is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 7 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of May 2, 2005. 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. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION r_\0Ix.9i SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on May 2, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 1 2005- SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC2005- RESOLUTION NO. PC2004 -62 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 2004 -04608 BE GRANTED, IN PART 676 SOUTH STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Variance for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California described as: LOTS 8,9 AND 10 OF TRACT NO. 2300 IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 68, PAGES 35 AND 36 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 2, 2004, 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 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: the following: That the petitioner proposes to construct a two -unit commercial retail building with waivers of (a) SECTION NOS. 18.04.080.010 and 18.04.080.020 (b) SECTION NOS. 18.05.050.022 and 18.44.066.050 (c) SECTION NO. 1844.063.010 (d) SECTION NO. 1844.063.040 Required dedication and improvement of public right -of -way (DELETED) Minimum number of parking spaces (24 required; 23 proposed and recommended by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager) Minimum setback adjacent to an arterial highway (10 feet required; 33 = 8 feet proposed) Minimum setback adjacent to a residential zone boundary (10 feet fully landscaped required; 4 feet landscaped and 6 feet structural setback proposed.) 2. That the above - mentioned waiver (a), required dedication and improvement of public right - of -way, is hereby denied on the basis that the waiver is not necessary. 3. That the above mentioned waiver (b), minimum number of parking spaces, is hereby granted on the basis of the recommendation of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and the following findings: "(a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. C�I:�11�Y�rIrLSrI:� I�Y��I�LS:�a The parking letter and letter of operation indicates that the project would contain a sufficient supply of parking spaces to accommodate the commercial uses proposed on site. (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The parking survey and the analysis for the project indicate that sufficient off - street parking is provided so that the adjacent public street parking would not be necessary (peak demand would require 15 spaces, and 23 spaces would be provided). (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The parking letter has determined that sufficient off - street parking is provided so that the parking would not be necessary on adjacent private properties (peak demand would require 15 spaces and 23 spaces would be provided). (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use. The project will not cause increased traffic congestion within off - street parking areas of the site because the peak demand is projected to consist of a maximum of 15 vehicles. (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. Sufficient parking would be provided on the project site to accommodate the generated demand from on site commercial uses." 4. That the above - mentioned waivers (c), minimum setback adjacent to an arterial highway and (d) minimum setback adjacent to a residential zone boundary, are hereby granted on basis that the strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity because the subject property is adjacent to two (2) arterial highways on the south and west property lines (increasing the land area dedicated to landscaping and setbacks) and residential zone boundaries to the north and east, thereby limiting the placement of the commercial building (due to height limitations adjacent to single family residential) and that the location of this property adjacent to residential uses and two arterial highways results in a special circumstance that does not apply to other properties in the vicinity. 5. That there are other properties in the vicinity under identical zoning classification that have setbacks similar to this proposal and therefore, the failure to grant waivers (c) and (d) would deprive the petitioner of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity. 6. That the requested variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in question. 7. That the requested variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. 8. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition; one person was present and was not opposed to the proposal provided it was constructed in accordance with submitted exhibits. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to waive the (a) required dedication and improvement of public right- -2- PC2004 -62 of -way, (b) minimum number of parking spaces, (c) minimum setback adjacent to an arterial highway, and (d) minimum setback adjacent to a residential zone boundary to construct a two -unit commercial retail building on a rectangularly- shaped, 0.42 -acre property located at the northeast corner of State College Boulevard and South Street, and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration 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 no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite 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 no convenience markets and /or retail sales of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted unless a separate conditional use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. 2. That no video, electronic or other amusement devices shall be permitted on the premises. 3. That all public phones shall be located inside the building. 4. That all trash generated from this commercial retail center shall be properly contained in trash bins located within approved trash enclosures. The number of bins shall be adequate and the trash pick -up shall be as frequent as necessary to ensure the sanitary handling and timely removal of refuse from the property. The Code Enforcement Division of the Planning Department shall determine the need for additional bins or additional pick -up. All costs for increasing the number of bins or frequency of pick -up shall be paid by the business owner. 5. That any tree or other landscaping planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and /or dead. 6. That no roof - mounted balloons or other inflatable devices shall be permitted on the property. 7. That no outdoor vending machines shall be permitted on the property. 8. That 4- foot -high street address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of the building in a color that contrasts with the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible from the streets or adjacent properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 9. That there shall be no outdoor storage permitted on the premises. 10. That roof - mounted equipment shall be screened from view in accordance with the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 1844.030.120 pertaining to the CL (Commercial, Limited) Zone. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 11. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by the provision of regular landscaping maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 12. That the number of tenant spaces for this building shall be limited to two (2). Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 13. That landscape improvements along State College Boulevard shall be consistent with the State College Corridor Master Plan. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits- -3- PC2004 -62 14. That final sign plans for the monument and wall signs shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval. Said plans shall incorporate the stone treatment identical to the treatment utilized on the commercial building, an 18 -inch high base including 9 -inch high address letters, and a decorative cornice treatment along the full length of the monument sign. The final sign plans shall reflect the location of any monument sign outside the sight- distance triangle at the intersection of South Street and State College Boulevard. Any decision made by staff regarding said sign plans may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendation" item. 15. That plans submitted for building permits shall reflect a decorative smooth pavement treatment at the driveway entrances on South Street and State College Boulevard. 16. That final landscape plans shall be submitted to the Zoning Division of the Planning Department for review and approval including the following: • Plans shall indicate three (3) foot wide triangular planters (a total of eight (8)) along the east property line wall to accommodate small shrubs and vines to effectively screen the proposed block wall. Adequate spacing shall be maintained at the base of the wall to direct vines to grow on the exterior (alley- facing) surface of the wall. • Plans shall reflect clinging vines planted three (3) foot on center adjacent to the trash enclosure. • Plans shall reflect the incorporation of 15- gallon shrubs within the proposed planter area along the north elevation of the building. • All on site landscaping, including trees, shall be consistent with the State College Corridor Master Plan. • A minimum of ten (10) trees adjacent to State College Boulevard and five (5) adjacent to South Street within the required landscape setbacks. All trees shall be a minimum of 24 -inch box in size. Any decision made by staff regarding said final landscape plans may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. 17. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground and outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division in either underground vaults or outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans and approved by Water Engineering and Cross Connection Control Inspector. 18. That since this project has a landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed in compliance with Chapter 10.19 of Anaheim Municipal Code No. 5349 regarding water conservation. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 19. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Service Standards Specifications. Any water service or fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The owner /developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line. 20. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through the Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. 21. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said -4- PC2004 -62 Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum one - gallon size clinging vines planted on maximum three -foot centers or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 22. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. 23. That an on -site trash truck turn - around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 610 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. Said turn - around area shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 24. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval in conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436 and 4601/602 pertaining to parking standards and driveway location. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 25. That no required parking area should be fenced in or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 26. That all driveways shall be constructed to accommodate ten (10) foot radius curb returns in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 137. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 27. That the legal owner of subject property shall provide the City of Anaheim a public utilities easement along /across primary cable underground and around the pad- mounted transformers, switches, capacitors, etc. Said easement shall be submitted to the City of Anaheim prior to connection of electrical service. 28. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities will beat the property owners expense. Landscape and /or hardscape screening of all pad- mounted equipment shall be required and shall be outside the easement area of the equipment. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 29. That prior to the issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that: • Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. • Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. • Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP. • Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMPs. • Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs, and describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. 30. That prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: Demonstrate that all structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non - structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available onsite. -5- PC2004 -62 Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMPs. 31. That the petitioner shall prepare a cost estimate and make a cash payment in an amount determined by the City Engineer in lieu of the street improvements required along State College Boulevard and South Street. The dedication of additional right -of -way shall still be required with building setbacks measured from the ultimate right-of-way- 32. That the property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim an easement 45 feet in width from the centerline of South Street and a corner cut -off at State College Boulevard for street widening purposes. 33. That the City of Anaheim Drainage Impact Mitigation Fee for the Stadium Area shall be paid prior to approval of the grading plan. The fee is currently $ 20,600 /acre. Credit will be applied for the current development. The project architect or engineer must document the existing impervious area and the proposed impervious area. If the impervious area remains the same or decreases, no fee is due. If the impervious area increases, the fee will be proportional to the increase. 34. That a lot line adjustment shall be submitted to merge the existing parcels into one legal lot. The Lot Line Adjustment shall be approved by the City Engineer and recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit. 35. That the storm drains and sanitary sewers for this development shall be privately maintained. 36. That final elevation plans shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval by Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. Said plans shall incorporate the ledge stone treatment along the north, east and south building elevations. 37. That the property owner shall submit a letter requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 868 (to establish an automobile service station within 75' of a residential zone) to the Zoning Division. 38. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City 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. 39. That lighting fixtures in any proposed parking area located adjacent to any residential property shall be down - lighted with a maximum height of twelve (12) feet. Said lighting fixtures shall be directed away from adjacent residential property lines to protect the residential integrity of the area (a) and shall be so- specified on the plans submitted for building permits. 40. That all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be fully screened by architectural devices and /or appropriate building materials; and, further, such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 41. That prior to issuance of a building permit for the first tenant space, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 39 and 40 above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 42. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 30 and 38, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 43. 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 -6- PC2004 -62 regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 2, 2004. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.03, "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. CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior 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 June 2, 2004, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, BUFFA, EASTMAN, FLORES, O'CONNELL, ROMERO, VANDERBILT- LINARES NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 2004. SENIOR SECRETARY. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -7- PC2004 -62 State College Center 676 S State College Anaheim, Ca Check Cashing (National Credit Tenant) 1500 sq. ft Unit 103 8 - 3 PM Total of 1 Employee including working Supervisor 3 - 10 PM Total of 2 Employees including working Supervisor Open 7 Days Wireless Telephone Store (National Credit Tenant) 2000 sq. ft Unit 101 8- 12 PM 12 PM- 10 PM Open 7 Days Retail 950 sq. ft Unit 102 8 AM - 10 PM Total of 1 Employee including working Supervisor Open 7 Days Shawn Danesh Calvada Development, Inc. Letter of Operation Total of 1 Employee including working Supervisor Total of 2 Employees including working Supervisor March 28, 2005 CUP NQ 2005 -04979 5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 5b. VARIANCE NO. 2004 -04608 Sr5096jr SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 0.42 -acre property is located at the northeast corner of State College Boulevard and South Street, having frontages of 188 feet on the east side of State College Boulevard and 97 feet on the north side of South Street (676 South State College Boulevard). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests approval to construct a two -unit commercial retail building with waivers of the following: (a) SECTION NOS. 18.04.080.010 AND 18.04.080.020 (b) SECTION NOS. 18.05.050.022 AND 18.44.066.050 (c) SECTION NO. 18.44.063.010 (d) SECTION NO. 18.44.063.040 BACKGROUND: (3) PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) The following action pertains to this property: Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 2, 2004 Item No. 5 (Motion) (Resolution) Required dedication and improvement of public right-of-way (DELETED) Minimum number of parking spaces. (24 required; 23 proposed and recommended by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager) Minimum setback adlacent to an arterial highway (10 feet required 33 = 8 feet proposed.) Minimum setback adlacent to a residential zone boundary (10 feet fully landscaped required; 4 feet landscaped and 6 feet structural setback proposed.) This property is currently vacant and was previously occupied by a gasoline service station and is zoned CL (Commercial, Limited). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property for General Commercial land uses. Properties to the north, south, and west are designated for General Commercial land uses and properties to the east are designated for Low Density Residential land uses. The land use designation under the General Plan Update for this property and the properties to the north would be Residential, Low - Medium. (a) Conditional Use Permit No. 868 (to establish an automobile service station within 75 feet of a residential zone) was approved by the Planning Commission on August 1, 1966. This permit should be terminated since the service station no longer exists on the property. Page 1 Direction Proposed Building & Landscape Setbacks* Code- Required Building Setback Code - Required Landscape Setback North (adjacent to single family) 51 feet to building 4 feet landscaped 10 feet 10 feet West (adjacent to State College Boulevard) 8 feet to building 8 -10 feet landscaped 10 feet 10 feet South (adjacent to South Street) 3 feet, to building 3 -5 feet landscaped 10 feet 10 feet East (adjacent to alley) 50 feet to building 0 feet landscaped None None DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (5) Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 2, 2004 Item No. 5 The petitioner proposes to construct a new 4,407 square foot commercial building. The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates that the property would be developed with one building with two tenant spaces, an automated teller machine (ATM) booth and a double trash enclosure at the northeast corner of the property adjacent to the alley. (6) (7) View of proposed development site from State College Boulevard The site plan indicates that the proposed building would be developed with the following setbacks: *Setbacks are measured from the ultimate right -of -way. The floor plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates that the proposed retail building would consist of one 3,202 square -foot tenant space (with an ATM booth) and one 1,200- square foot tenant space, (a total of two tenant spaces). The plan indicates main entrances to all suites on the east elevation (facing the parking lot). No specific improvements (e.g. restrooms, offices, etc.) have been identified for either tenant space. Page 2 ( (11) No sign plans have been submitted in connection with this request. Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 2, 2004 Item No. 5 (8) Access to the site would be via two driveways, one each from South Street and State College Boulevard. The plan indicates a total of 24 parking spaces. Code requires a minimum of 24 spaces for this building based on the ratio of 5.5 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area of general retail space (5.5 x 4,407/1000 = 24). Elevation drawings (Exhibit No. 2) indicate a one -story commercial building varying in height from18 to 24.5 feet. Building materials consist of a scored plaster finish (painted ICI # 362 or # 413 Copperbright), painted steel trellises (ICI # 196 Stewart House Brown) on the west and south elevations, decorative wall- mounted light fixtures, and a 40 -inch high ledge stone treatment on each elevation (Coronado Stone — style — Idaho Drystack). A decorative cornice treatment is proposed along the roofline of each elevation. Steel canopy awnings would be located on the north, south, and east elevations (painted ICI # 196 Stewart House Brown) and would match the trellises. The storefront windows and doors would have an antique glass finish (storefront doors located on the east elevation and windows on the north and south elevations). Small accent windows (twelve (12) inch square) would be located on the east, west and south elevations to further enhance the scored plaster finish and color of the building. (10) The landscape and site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates a 4 -foot wide landscape planter along the north property line adjacent to the single family residence, planted with one (1) existing Elm Tree, two (2) 24 -inch box Lemon Bottlebrush trees and two (2) 24 -inch box Siberian Elm trees as well as ground cover and vines (Creeping Fig) along the adjacent block wall. An eight (8) to ten (10) foot wide landscaped setback would be located along State College Boulevard, planted with a total of ten (10) trees (Four (4) Mexican Fan Palm trees, Four (4) Golden Trumpet trees, one (1) Siberian Elm tree, and one (1) Lemon Bottlebrush tree). A sixteen (16) foot wide landscaped setback along South Street (thirteen (13) feet of which is located within the ultimate right -of -way) would be planted with three (3) Lemon Bottle Brush trees and two (2) Siberian Elm trees as well as associated groundcover. The plan also indicates a five (5) foot wide planter along the storefront (north building elevation) to be planted with assorted shrubs and ground cover. The landscape plan further indicates a trellis with clinging vines along both the west and south building elevations. Code requires one tree for every 20 lineal feet of street frontage, (5 trees on South Street and 10 trees on State College Boulevard) and fast growing shrubbery or clinging vines planted on 3 -foot- centers for the trash enclosure. Code further requires that at least one (1) tree per three thousand (3,000) square feet of parking area and /or vehicular accessways be distributed throughout the parking area and an average of forty -eight (48) square feet of planter area provided per required tree, with a minimum planter dimension of five (5) feet, and no more than ten (10) parking spaces shall be adjacent to each other in a row without being separated by landscape area with a minimum width of five (5) feet (12,615 square feet / 3000 square feet = 4 trees with associated planter areas). Code also requires the landscaped setback adjacent to any residential zone boundary be planted with trees twenty (20) feet on center (five (5) trees along the north property line boundary). Clinging vines are required to eliminate graffiti opportunities on any solid wall visible from public view. (12) The submitted letter of operation indicates the proposed uses would consist of a Subway Sandwich Shop (with no more than 10 seats) and an unspecified retail business. The commercial uses would operate between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., daily with approximately four (4) employees total. The walk -up ATM would be fully equipped with security devices and theft proof doors and shielded lighting. No deposits would be accepted at this machine. The property owner will be supervising construction and the on -going operation of both the businesses located on site. Surveillance cameras and security would maintain the premises during operating hours and after - hours. Page 3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 2, 2004 Item No. 5 (13) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact and, therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Planning Commission that the Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed 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 no substantial evidence that the project will have significant effect on the environment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: (14) The proposed project has been reviewed by affected City departments to determine whether it conforms with the City's Growth Management Element adopted by the City Council on March 17, 1992. Based on City staff review of the proposed project, it has been determined that this project does not fit within the scope necessary to require a Growth Management Element analysis, therefore, no analysis has been performed. EVALUATION: (15) Presently, the Code requires a conditional use permit for a commercial retail center which is defined as "any combination of three or more commercial uses or commercial businesses otherwise permitted or conditionally permitted in the zone in which they are located and which the uses or businesses are either (i) located on a single parcel of property, (ii) constructed as a single development project, or (iii) result from a remodeling, partitioning or other division of space in a building, business, or use on a single parcel of property." The new Zoning Code would require a conditional use permit for two or more commercial units. (16) Waiver (a) pertains to the required improvement of the public right -of -way. This waiver has been deleted because the petitioner has agreed to make a payment to the City in lieu of constructing the required improvements in a manner consistent with the Code. (17) Waiver (b) pertains to the required number of parking spaces. Code requires a minimum of 24 parking spaces for the commercial center as described in paragraph no. (8) of this report and plans indicate 23 spaces. The petitioner has prepared and submitted a parking analysis (parking letter), dated April 12, 2004, to substantiate the requested parking waiver. The City Traffic and Transportation Manager has reviewed the parking letter and letter of operation and has determined that the proposed parking areas referenced in the parking study are sufficient for the proposed uses. Based on the letter of operation, the parking supply provided on site is 95.8% of the Code - required parking for the proposed commercial uses. The letter of operation indicates that at peak demand a maximum of fifteen (15) spaces (65.2% of the spaces) on site would be utilized. The City Traffic and Transportation Manager has reviewed this analysis and has determined that the actual supply of 23 spaces on the property is adequate for the proposed uses. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this waiver. (18) Waiver (c) pertains to the required setback adjacent to an arterial highway. Code requires a minimum landscaped setback of ten (10) feet along State College Boulevard (primary arterial) and South Street (secondary arterial). The petitioner is proposing an eight (8) to ten (10) foot wide fully landscaped setback along State College Boulevard and a three (3) foot wide fully landscaped setback (from the ultimate right -of -way) along South Street (a total of Page 4 Site Address Existing Building and Landscape Setbacks 407 South State College Boulevard 5 feet to building; 5 feet landscaped 423 South State College Boulevard 0 feet to building; 5 feet landscaped 501 South State College Boulevard 5 feet to building; 0 feet landscaped 502 South State College Boulevard 0 feet to building; 5 feet landscaped 510 South State College Boulevard 5 feet to building; 5 feet landscaped Site Address Existing Building and Landscape Setbacks 811 South State College Boulevard 3 foot landscaped planter 821 South State College Boulevard 3 foot landscaped planter 843 South State College Boulevard 2 foot landscaped planter 847 South State College Boulevard 3 foot landscaped planter 853 South State College Boulevard 4 foot landscaped planter Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 2, 2004 Item No. 5 sixteen (16) feet including dedicated portion). Staff surveyed nearby and surrounding properties and identified five (5) properties with setbacks similar to those requested herein: Staff believes the strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity as indicated in the table above. Because the subject property is adjacent to two (2) arterial highways on the south and west property lines (increasing the land area dedicated to landscaping and setbacks) and residential zone boundaries to the north and east, thereby limiting the placement of the commercial building (due to height limitations adjacent to single family residential), staff believes that the location of this property results in a special circumstance that does not apply to other properties in the vicinity. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this waiver. (19) Waiver (d) pertains to the required setback adjacent to a residential zone. The Code requires minimum landscaped setback of ten (10) feet planted with trees twenty (20) feet on center adjacent to any residential zone boundary of a commercial property. The applicant is proposing to construct a four (4), foot wide landscaped setback planted with the Code - required number of trees along the north property line directly adjacent to a single family residential use and zone boundary. Staff surveyed nearby and surrounding properties and identified five (5) properties with setbacks similar to those requested herein: Staff believes the strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity as indicated in the table above. Because the subject property is adjacent to two (2) arterial highways on the south and west property lines, the land area dedicated to landscaping and setbacks is relatively larger than other properties in the area (as well as those surveyed). The location of the property at the intersection of two (2) arterial highways, as well as the size and shape of the site results in a special circumstance that does not apply to other properties in the vicinity. Due to these items indicated above, staff recommends approval of this waiver. (20) Staff is concerned regarding the building elevation facing State College Boulevard. Because of site constraints, the building would be placed close to the street with entrances to the units facing the parking lot adjacent to the public alley. This situation poses design issues due to the rear of the building facing the street. Although the petitioner has made progress towards enhancing this elevation, staff remains concerned with the linear, unarticulated building mass facing the street. In addition, because sign plans have not been submitted staff is concerned about future requests for wall signs on this elevation since there appears Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 2, 2004 Item No. 5 to be no design accommodation for such signs. Therefore, staff has included conditions of approval to require final sign and elevation plans. FINDINGS: (21) Section 18.06.080 of the parking ordinance sets forth the following findings, which are required to be made before a parking waiver is approved by the Commission: (a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use; and (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use; and (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use; and (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use; and (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed upon the granting of any waiver pursuant to this Section by the Planning Commission or City Council, the granting of any such waiver shall be deemed contingent upon operation of such use in conformance with the assumptions relating to the operation and intensity of the 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 as contained in the parking demand study shall be deemed a violation of the express conditions imposed upon said waiver which shall subject said waiver to termination or modification pursuant to the provisions of Sections 18.03.091 and 18.03.092 of this Code. (22) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the Zoning Code, a modification may be granted for the purpose of assuring that no property, because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose of any variance is to prevent discrimination and none shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other similar properties. Therefore, before any variance is granted by the Planning Commission, it shall be shown: (a) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity; and (b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. Page 6 RECOMMENDATION: Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 2, 2004 Item No. 5 (23) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission approve the petitioner's request by adopting the attached resolution including the findings contained therein: Page 7 1 -B. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Sr5103jr a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED) (Motion) b. VARIANCE NO. 2004 - 04608- REQUEST FOR FINAL ELEVATION PLAN REVIEW (Motion) (Tracking No. VAR2004 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 0.42 -acre property is located at the northeast corner of State College Boulevard and South Street, having frontages of 188 feet on the east side of State College Boulevard and 97 feet on the north side of South Street (676 South State College Boulevard). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests final elevation plan review for a previously approved 2 -unit commercial retail center. BACKGROUND: (3) This property is currently vacant and was previously occupied by a gasoline service station and is zoned CL (Commercial, Limited). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property for Residential Low - Medium land uses as well as the properties to the north and west (across State College Boulevard). The property to the east is designated Residential Low and to the south (across South Street) for Neighborhood Commercial land uses. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) Variance No. 2004 -04608 (to construct a two -unit commercial retail building, with waivers of: a) required dedication and improvement of public right -of -way [deleted]; b) minimum number of parking spaces; c) minimum setback adjacent to an arterial highway; and, d) minimum setback adjacent to a residential zone boundary) was approved by the Planning Commission on June 2, 2004. Condition No. 36 of Resolution No. PC2004 -62 adopted in conjunction with Variance No. 2004 -04608 requires the following: DISCUSSION: (5) Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 12, 2004 Item No. 1 -B "36. That final elevation plans shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval by Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. Said plans shall incorporate the ledge stone treatment along the north, east and south building elevations." The petitioner requests final elevation plan review by the Commission for the proposed commercial retail center as required by Variance No. 2004 - 04608. Staff's efforts in working with the petitioner have been focused on modifying the design of the retail building to enhance the west elevation facing State College Boulevard. Page 1 (6) Final elevation plans and material board indicate a one -story commercial building varying in height from 18 to 24.5 feet. Building materials consist of a scored plaster finish (painted ICI # 362 or # 413 Copperbright), painted steel trellises (ICI # 196 Stewart House Brown) on the west and south elevations, decorative wall- mounted light fixtures, and a 40 -inch high ledge stone treatment on each elevation (Coronado Stone — style — Idaho Drystack). A decorative cornice treatment is proposed along the roofline of each elevation. Steel canopy awnings would be located on the north, south, and east elevations (painted ICI # 196 Stewart House Brown) and would match the trellises. The storefront windows and doors would have an antique glass finish (storefront doors located on the east elevation and windows on the north and south elevations). Small accent windows (twelve (12) inch square) would be located on the east, west, southwest, and south elevations to further enhance the scored plaster finish and color of the building. (7) Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 12, 2004 Item No. 1 -B Staff has been working with the applicant to achieve a design that is consistent with the goals and standards of the community, and provides an enhanced building design along State College Boulevard (west elevation). The petitioner has submitted two alternative designs for Commission Consideration. The first alternative (Alternate West Elevation) incorporates the use of additional ledge stone into four (4) columns, framing two (2) trellises along this elevation. The ledge stone would extend nine to twelve inches from the building wall, further enhancing the columns. The use of two (2) additional secondary cornice treatments mimicking the roofline would be included to further identify these areas and provide articulation to the building elevation. Staff has included a photograph of an example of this use of ledge stone and cornice element from a recently constructed commercial center at the southwest corner of Brookhurst Street and Lincoln Avenue (101 South Brookhurst Street). The revised elevation drawings reflect the proposed location of tenant signage on the east and west elevations. View of ledge stone treatment at 101 South Brookhurst Street (8) The second alternative (West Elevation) eliminates the use of the ledge stone columns and provides a recessed alcove to frame the two (2) trellises proposed along this elevation. The inset of the alcoves would be painted an accent color (ICI # 466 Golden Gate) to draw attention to these two trellis areas. The petitioner has provided photographs of comparable buildings, which incorporate this alcove treatment to enhance the building elevation along the street. The alcoves would be recessed a minimum of twelve inches. Although the elevation drawings indicate the ledge stone treatment would be utilized within the alcove, the petitioner Page 2 ( has indicated that the ledge stone treatment would stop and only the accent color stucco treatment would be utilized. The petitioner has indicated their preference to apply this second alternative due to costs and the appropriate use of building materials (see attached letter). Example of recessed alcove (second alternative) Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 12, 2004 Item No. 1 -B Based on the information provided to staff by the petitioner and based on the proposed materials and style of the building, staff believes the second alternative would provide an enhanced street elevation that would be consistent with the Commission's direction to propose a design solution that addresses the back side of the building. The combination of color, articulation, stone veneer and trellises work together to enhance the view of the building from State College Boulevard. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (10) Staff has reviewed the request for final elevation and landscape plan approval and the previously- approved Negative Declaration and finds there are no changes to the originally - approved Variance No. 2004 - 04608, and that the request will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- approved Negative Declaration serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. RECOMMENDATION: (11) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing that the Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the previously- approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. (b) By motion, approve the final elevation plans for the second alternative, as recommended by staff. Page 3 ITEM NO. 1 -A Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04975 Subject Property Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 Date May 2, 2005 Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00005 Scale 1"=200' Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 Requested By U.S. SOUTHEAST CORPORATION Q.S. No. 118 CUP2005 -04975 - REQUEST TO MODIFY THE REQUIRED SETBACK ABUTTING STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD. SUBTTM16825 - TO ESTABLISH A 1 -LOT, 265 -UNIT AIRSPACE ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION. DAG2005 -00005 - REQUEST TO ADOPT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND U.S. SOUTHEAST CORPORATION FOR A 265 -UNIT, RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT. 1818 South State College Boulevard - Platinum Centre Condominiums 1789 ------- - - - - -- RCL 66-67 -14 ��\\ RCL 56 -57 -93 PARKING CUP 200404906 ---- _ - - --- —� �` CUP 4141 �� CUP 3957 RCL 99-00.15 �� (Res. of Int. to SE) CUP 2662 � \ CUP 3406 RCL66 -67 -14 CUP 3386 BANK RCL 2004 -00' RCL 55 -5-19 CUP VAR 4429 O- L(PTMU) PARKING \ \ RCL 54 -555 -42 T -CUP 200404939 \ O-L(PTM U) \ OFFICE BLDG. 0- IF (PTMU) CUP 3957 RGL 90.91 - CUP690 1(PTMU) T -CUP 200404939 RCL 666714 , RCL 99 -00 -15 CUP 200404906 RCL5 57 -93 TL a O- L(PTMU) FOOD (Res. of Int. to SE) CUP 2862 C 44141 U t CARL'S JR. COURT RCL66 -67 -14 CUP CUP3957 REST. RCL 55 -5 -19 4-00 CUP Mw RCL 5 456 5-42 RESTAURANT RESTARANT CUP 69B TPM NG_ 97 -155 BENIN YS REST_ (CUP 3356T) KATELLA AVENUE 105' I (PTMU) I (PTMU) 9MG) R n . RCL 99 -00 -15 9 -00 -15 (Res- 0Int 00.15 onm_to SE) u,coorvmns cuP 2 &a (Res. of Int. to SE) L� Int. to SE) RCL 6697 -14 RCL 58-57 -93 CUP 2589 VAR 2408 cuazazs RCL 66-67-14 �c7r z U 3-67 -14 CUP 3836 VAR 1822 cuP 1914 RCL 59 -60 -61 r 3-57 -93 CUP 1370 Q °AR 24°e Res of Intent to ME a z 1652 GOP 447 SS S_ MU) RCL 56 - 57 - 93 — O2 447S I(PTMU) CUP2226 VAR 2466 2616 RCL 9990.15 LLI CUP 1745 )TEL (Res of Int - CUP 1319 J OFF. BLDG. to SE) MOTEL RCL 6697 -14 :D O -L(PTM U) Q TTM 16825 I(PTM-) Lb RCL 99 -00 -15 —KAYCO I (PTMU) RCL 99-00 -15 (Res of Int. to SE) PLAZA RCL 99 -00 -15 (Res of Int to BE) W w RCL 66-67-14 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 5�G5i -14 m RCL 56 -57 -93 RCL 99 -00 -15 RCL 56 -57 -93 CUP 1371 W CUP RCL 36-87-2 9 2005 -04975 (Res. of Int. to SE) CUP 447S IND. FIRM CUP4475 VAR 2561 J J ESP 2005 -00005 RCL 59&061 _________ __ RFTA ILTILE — Q DAG 2005 -00005 (Resoflmentto MI) ------ - ---- ---- C) CUP 2883 CUP 1111 RCL 56 -57 -93 VAR 2466 - - - - - I(PTMU) LL VAC NT I(PTMU) RCL 99 -00 -15 RCL 99 -00.15 (Res of Int. to SE) Q ;es. of RCL66 -67 -14 6- 7- 3 RCL 56 -57 -93 RCL 56 -57 -93 CUP 2003 -04721 U) PARKING CUP 4475 CUP 4475 IND. FIRM SMALL IND_ — 's PR (PTMU) RCL 99 -00 -15 (Res. of Int. to SE) 1 (PTMU) RCL 99- 9-00- 5 (Res. x• ,-- RC ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE (PTMU) (PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE) OVERLAY ZONE. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04975 Subject Property Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 Date May 2, 2005 Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00005 Scale 1"=200' Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 Requested By U.S. SOUTHEAST CORPORATION Q.S. No. 118 CUP2005 -04975 - REQUEST TO MODIFY THE REQUIRED SETBACK ABUTTING STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD. SUBTTM16825 - TO ESTABLISH A 1 -LOT, 265 -UNIT AIRSPACE ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION. DAG2005 -00005 - REQUEST TO ADOPT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND U.S. SOUTHEAST CORPORATION FOR A 265 -UNIT, RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT. 1818 South State College Boulevard - Platinum Centre Condominiums 1789 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 4 4a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 129 (Motion for continuance) 4b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04975 4c. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16825 4d. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00005 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 3.4 acre property is located south and east of the southeast corner of State College Boulevard and Katella Avenue with frontages of 327 feet on the east side of State College Boulevard and 105 feet on the south side of Katella Avenue (1818 South State College Boulevard — Platinum Centre Condominiums). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests approval of the following: Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04975 —to modify the required setback adjacent to State College Boulevard. Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 —to establish a 1 -lot, 265 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision. Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00005- request to recommend City Council adoption of a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and U.S. Southeast Corporation for the Platinum Centre Condominium Project (to construct a 265 -unit condominium complex). The Planning Commission's role is to look at the land use aspects of the Agreement, specifically whether the eligibility criteria has been met, whether the Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and whether the project implemented by the Agreement is compatible with the development of the surrounding area. The City Council will consider whether to approve the Agreement. IeCel:(e1Cle1110 (3) The applicant' s consultant, Geoff Scott, has submitted the attached letter dated April 25, 2005, requesting a continuance to the June 1, 2005, Commission meeting to allow time to advertise the modified request for the additional setback modification- RECOMMENDATION (4) That the Commission, by motion, continue this item to the June 1, 2005, Planning Commission meeting. SR -C U P2005- 04975.doc Page 1 file: / // REPORTS / Planning 0 l.20Commis ion /PC %20May% 202 , %202005 /PC %20Booklltem %20No. %204 /ATT- CUP2005- 04975.htm From: Geoff Scott [Geoff@tbplanning.com] Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 10:15 AM To: Amy Vazquez Subject: RE: Platinum Centre Amy, On behalf of Integral Partners, I would like to request a continuance to the June 1St Planning Commission hearing for the Platinum Centre project. Regards, Geoff Scott Principal T &B Planning Consultants file: / // REPORTS / Planning %2OCor m mion/ PC% 2OMay %2 ... 2005/PC %20Book/Item %20No "/o204 /ATT- CUP2005- 04975.htm4/28/2005 10:40:34 AM ITEM NO. 1 -A 1 VAR 99-01 LIQUOR P GN S.S_ &SHOPS AREA NO. 2 CI (LOCAL BUSINE'. - RCL2005 -00145 RCL 98 -99-11 SMALL COMM. RCL 63- 64-118(3) SHOPS C-G CUP2739 CUP1494 RCL9 &9}11 CUP1847 SM_GOMM. RCL 6364-118(6) CUP 1675 SHOPS III T RCL 596&29 Z1� C) �IU i1w ¢;Q CP 1 J ELM AVE LU LU W IY V. T 11 i VALLE' �W Cbw 1 U NOT 5960.103 I G TLUP 2000 -04512 RCL T-CUP2W1-0 57 RCL 6364 -11118 SMALL COMM_ 'RCL 1113 COP 2034-06512 TLUP 2001 -04457 CUPFU41 _ NQ 1hw (Res of to CL) SHOPS ~ C6 CUP 2000 -04277 SEAFOOD VAR 433 C p PLACE PARKING RCL 98 -99-11 :D CUP 2005 -04974 = U RCL 63- 64118(1) CG CUP 2487 W I RGL 98-99-11 N Q CUP 670 2 Y TLUP 2001 64457 po fD w COMM.SHOPS NN O CUP CUP 200064277 0'� X O 2000 -04512 xQ 0 - 1 p 2 C VAR 2002 -04538 G tt VAR 433 IN RCL 98 -99 -11 CUP 2489 m >RCL 63 -64118(2) CUP 2431 — CUP 3269 CUP 2418 O C -G (BCC) RCL 98 -99-11 CUP 3044 CUP 994 U TILE & RCL 56 -57 -2 W RITZ D ANCING m MARBLE VAR 1140 W VAR 433 _ C) C -G (BCC) Q) Q) RCL 98 -99-11 N RCL 63- 64-118 (5) > C -G (BCC) CUP 3513 ¢ RCL 98 -99-11 _ CUP 3044 ry RCL 56 -57 -2 RESTAURANT j CUP 2001-04419 O VAR 433 U� U� m U BROOKHURST 0 PLAZA v7 a m ( T J�� �u > CUP 3468 o' GG (Bea) VAR 1807 S GG (BGC) &9111 ROT 9 &9¢11 C-G (BCC) CHURCH RCL9& ROT 6465-75 RCL 98 -99-1 SCHOOL RCL 6364118 (4) RCL56 -57 -2 VAR 3610 VAR 2278 S CUP 3770 VAR 2240 VAR 433 VAR 2296 VAR 433 PIZZA MARKET SMALLSHOPS — - — - - ORANGE AVENUE VALLE' �W Cbw F- VI W S Q RCL 9 &99-11 GG(BCC) RCL 9 F- VI } W Q Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04974 Subject Property Date May 2, 2005 Scale 1"=200' Requested By: GOCK W. JUNG Q.S. No. 40 REQUEST TO PERMIT A RESTAURANT AND BANQUET FACILITY WITH ON- PREMISES SALES AND CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES- 420-504 South Brookhurst Street - Seafood Place Restaurant �p 1791 C� (BCC) CUP 1563 RCL 98-99 -11 VAR 433 RCL 59 103 PROF. TLUP 2005-04969 BUILDING CUP20W 85 ALCOM C� RCL 98 -911 RCL 5960 -103 TACO BELL CUP3352 REST_ VAR 433 U RCLW% -11 1 U NOT 5960.103 I G VAR 433 RCL T-CUP2W1-0 57 GG CUP 1731 'RCL 1113 COP 2034-06512 CUP846 CUPFU41 NQ 1hw NQ _C O w I I I F- VI W S Q RCL 9 &99-11 GG(BCC) RCL 9 F- VI } W Q Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04974 Subject Property Date May 2, 2005 Scale 1"=200' Requested By: GOCK W. JUNG Q.S. No. 40 REQUEST TO PERMIT A RESTAURANT AND BANQUET FACILITY WITH ON- PREMISES SALES AND CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES- 420-504 South Brookhurst Street - Seafood Place Restaurant �p 1791 C� (BCC) CUP 1563 RCL 98-99 -11 VAR 433 RCL 59 103 PROF. TLUP 2005-04969 BUILDING CUP20W 85 ALCOM C� RCL 98 -911 RCL 5960 -103 TACO BELL CUP3352 REST_ VAR 433 U RCLW% -11 1 U NOT 5960.103 I G VAR 433 RCL T-CUP2W1-0 57 GG CUP 1731 'RCL 1113 COP 2034-06512 CUP846 CUPFU41 VARTA REST I I I Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04974 Requested By: GOCK W. JUNG Subject Property Date: May 2, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Q.S. No. 40 REQUEST TO PERMIT A RESTAURANT AND BANQUET FACILITY WITH ON- PREMISES SALES AND CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES- 420-504 South Brookhurst Street - Seafood Place Restaurant 1791 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 5 5a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 1 (Motion) 5b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.2005 -04974 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 1.5 -acre property has a frontage of 305 feet on the east side of Brookhurst Street, a maximum depth of 275 feet and is located 492 feet north of the centerline of Orange Avenue (420 -504 South Brookhurst Street — Seafood Place Restaurant). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval under Code Section No.18.080.030.040.0403 to permit on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages and a banquet facility in conjunction with an existing restaurant- BACKGROUND (3) This property is developed with a restaurant currently operating as a banquet facility in the C -G (BCC) (General Commercial; Brookhurst Commercial Corridor Overlay) zone. This property is also located within the West Anaheim Commercial Corridors Project Area of the Merged Anaheim Redevelopment Area. The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property and properties to the north, south and west (across Brookhurst Street) for Corridor Residential land uses; and the property to the east for Low Density Residential land uses. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -04277 (to retain and permit a banquet hall with service, but not sales, of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption) was approved by the Planning Commission on November 6, 2000. A request to modify or delete a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation was denied for the banquet hall by the Commission on June 17, 2002. A subsequent appeal to the City Council approved an extension of time for two years to expire on November 19, 2004. The Commission approved a reinstatement of the banquet hall on September 20, 2004, for a period of three years to expire on November 19, 2007. DISCUSSION (5) De Hua Jr., the restaurant owner, is requesting that the Seafood Place be permitted to sell alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption in conjunction with the restaurant and the banquet hall approved under Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 - 04277. Currently, the applicant is only permitted to serve alcoholic beverages. No expansion of the building is proposed. Sr8876dh.dm Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 5 U West elevation of Seafood Place Restaurant (6) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates that the banquet hall /restaurant is surrounded by parking on three sides and the property also contains a 3,086 square foot medical (chiropractor) office in a separate building (7) The floor plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates a stage, dancing area, dining area, kitchen, storage areas, employee restroom, separate men's and women's restrooms and a mezzanine office area. (8) The site plan indicates a total of 187 parking paces with vehicular access provided by three driveways along Brookhurst Street. No additional parking would be provided in conjunction with this request to sell and serve alcoholic beverages. (9) The applicant submitted the attached letter of operation stating that the facility would still be utilized as a banquet hall for wedding parties however the applicant is proposing to utilize the facility as a Chinese restaurant serving lunch and dinner with on -sale alcoholic beverages. The proposed hours of operation are Monday through Thursday from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., and 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., Friday through Sunday. The applicant has also indicated that when the facility is used as a banquet facility, security services would be provided during the entire event. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (10) The Planning Director's authorized representative has determined that the project is within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 1, Section 15301, (Existing Facilities), as defined in the CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation- EVALUATION (11) The sale of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption in conjunction with the existing banquet facility and restaurant is permitted within the C- G(BCC) zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. Staff intends that this permit, if approved, would Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 5 serve as the entitlement of use for the existing banquet facility and the sales of alcoholic beverages. The restaurant is a permitted use in the C- G(BCC) zone. (12) The Police Department submitted the attached memoranda dated April 7 and April 27, 2005, noting that the reporting district in which the property is located has a crime rate of 29 percent above the Citywide average. A total of 26 calls for service to this location were recorded for the past year (April 2004 to April 2005) consisting of 14 trespassing, 4 disturbing the peace, 4 suspicious activity, 2 drunk in public, and 2 burglary alarm. The Police Department does not oppose the requested modification of the type 47 Alcoholic Beverage Control License to include the sale and on- premises consumption of alcoholic beverages for the restaurant and banquet facility subject to the conditions of approval as outlined in the attached memoranda and recommends a two -year time limitation be included as a condition of approval. (13) Commission may wish to note that the applicant would be required to obtain a Dinner Dance /Entertainment permit for any live entertainment and /or dancing. (14) The Community Preservation Division has inspected the property and has indicated that all conditions of approval from the original conditional use permit are being complied with except that the landscape planters within the parking lot area need to be replanted and an area of the building needs to be repainted. (15) Staff has included applicable conditions from CUP No. 2000 -04227 (the original case for the banquet facility with on- premises consumption but no on -sale of alcoholic beverages), and has also included conditions of approval recommended by the Police Department. Based on the recommended conditions of approval, and because the existing business has not created disturbance to the adjacent single - family neighborhood to the east, staff recommends approval of this request with a time limitation of two (2) years. FINDINGS: (16) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit or a major amendment to an existing conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by this code, or is an unlisted use as defined in subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); (b) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to health and safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 5 RECOMMENDATION: (17) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the hearing, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission approve the applicant's request, by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. Page 4 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 -* A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04974 BE GRANTED (420 -504 SOUTH BROOKHURST STREET) WHEREAS, the Anaheim 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, described as: THE SOUTH 125 FEET OF THE NORTH 205 FEET OF LOT 5 IN BLOCK B OF TRACT NO. 13, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 9, PAGE 12 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY. LOT 4 IN BLOCK B OF TRACT 13, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 9 PAGE 12 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on May 2, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., notice of said 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 conditional use permit; 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: 1. That the proposed restaurant/banquet facility with on- premises sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.08.030.040.0403 2. That the use operating as a banquet and restaurant facility would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is located. 3. That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow full development of the use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety and general welfare. 4. That the traffic generated by the existing banquet facility and proposed restaurant would not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. 5. That granting of this conditional use permit, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 6. That this new conditional use permit will be exercised in substantially the same manner and in conformance with all conditions and stipulations originally approved by the Planning Commission for the banquet facility and also includes new conditions. 7. That * ** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that * ** correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit the on- premises sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages in a restaurant/banquet facility and has determined that the project is within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 1, Section 15301, (Existing Facilities), as defined in the CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation. Cr\PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite 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 the on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages portion of this conditional use permit shall expire on May 2, 2007. 2. That no admission fee or any other type of public entrance fee shall be permitted for this facility. 3. That the activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to surrounding properties. 4. That there shall be no pool tables or coin - operated amusement devices maintained upon the premises at any time. 5. That the hours of operation shall be limited to: Sunday through Friday 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. Saturday 9 a.m. to 11 p.m. 6. That a manager shall be on -site at all times while the banquet facility is in operation. 7. That at all times when the facility is being utilized as a banquet facility, uniformed security shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department to deter unlawful conduct on the part of patrons, and to promote the safe and orderly assembly and movement of persons and vehicles, and to prevent disturbance to the neighborhood by excessive noise generated by patrons entering or leaving the premises. 8. That all doors serving subject restaurant shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and shall be kept closed at all times during the operation of the premises except for ingress /egress, permit deliveries and in cases of emergency. That the door located on the east wall of the building shall be kept closed and inaccessible from the exterior of the building to prevent noise impacts to the adjacent residential properties, except in cases of emergency 9. That at all times when the premises is open for business, the premises shall be maintained as a bona fide restaurant as defined in the Anaheim Municipal Code as an establishment that is engaged primarily in the business of preparing and serving meals for immediate consumption. The term "primarily" shall mean that food and nonalcoholic beverages sales comprise a minimum of sixty percent (60 %) of the gross income from the establishment's business operation. Service of alcoholic beverages is, and shall at all times be, accessory to the primary restaurant use. 10. That there shall be no bar or lounge area upon the licensed premise maintained for the purposes of sales, service, or consumption of alcoholic beverages directly to patrons for consumption. 11. That the gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed 40 percent of the gross sales of all retail sales during any three (3) month period. The applicant shall maintain records on a quarterly basis indicating the separate amounts of sales of alcoholic beverages and other items. These records shall be made available for inspection by any City of Anaheim official when requested. 12. That the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premise shall be prohibited. 13. That there shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. 14. That subject alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a public premise (bar) type license nor shall the establishment be operated as a public premise as defined in Section 23039 of the Business and Professions Code- -2- PC2005- 15. That the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped with lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably illuminate the windows of nearby residences. 16. That the business operator shall comply with Section 24200.5 of the Business and Profession Code so as not to employ or permit any persons to solicit or encourage others, directly or indirectly, to buy them drinks in the licensed premises under any commission, percentage, salary, or other profit- sharing plan, scheme or conspiracy. 17. That there shall be no public telephones on the property that are located outside of the building and within the control of the applicant. 18. That any and all security officers provided shall comply with all State and Local ordinances regulating their services, including, without limitation, Chapter 11.5 of Division 3 of the California Business and Profession Code. 19. That any tree planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged or diseased, and /or dies. 20. That trash storage area(s) shall be maintained in location(s) acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable to adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum one (1) gallon sized clinging vines planted on maximum three (3) foot centers, or tall shrubbery. 21. That the existing parking lot shall be maintained in good condition free of trash and debris. 22. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion through the provision of regular landscaping maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 23. That valet service shall be provided to patrons of the banquet facility to minimize impacts to the adjacent residents. The valet service shall utilize the parking spaces along the east property line as the "last load" area. 24. That this facility shall operate as a bona fide restaurant and banquet hall and shall not operate as a nightclub, bar or cocktail lounge. 25. That this use shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 6.70 "Sound Pressure Levels 26. That no outdoor uses and /or assembly shall occur on subject property. 27. That the owner of the subject property shall submit a letter requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -04277 (to permit a banquet hall with service but no sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption) to the Planning Department. 28. That all existing roof - mounted equipment shall be completely screened from view and all associated roof screening shall be refurbished /repainted to ensure adequate screening of all existing roof mounted equipment. 29. That all existing landscaped areas shall be refurbished and landscaping installed in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Code- -3- PC2005- 30. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City 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. 31. That within ninety (90) days from the date of this resolution, Condition Nos. 27, 29 and 30 above mentioned shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions shall be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 32. 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 ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the property owner /developer is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 7 days of the issuance of the final invoice, prior to the issuance of building permits or commencement of activity for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of May 2, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION r_\1111Ix.9i SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2005- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on May 2, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of , 2005. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -5- PC2005- City of Anaheim POLICE DEPARTMENT Special Operations Division To: Della Herrick Planning Department From: Sergeant Mike Lozeau Vice Detail Date: April 27, 2005 RE: CUP 2005 -04974 Seafood Palace 2 420 S. Brookhurst Street Anaheim, CA 92804 Here are the stats you have requested: 14 Tresspassing 04 Disturbing the Peace 04 Suspicious Activity 02 Drunk in Public 02 Burglary Alarm We have not had any real problems with this business. They have an 11:00 pm stop serve time on there ABC license. We would be fine with a 2 year limit on the CUP. Anaheim Police Dept. 425 S. Harbor Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 TEL 714.765.1401 FAX 714.765.1665 MEMORANDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Community Preservation Division DATE: APRIL 21, 2005 TO: DELLA HERRICK, ASSOCIATE PLANNER FROM: /i� DON YOURSTONE, SENIOR COMMUNIY PRESERVATION OFFICER SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. PC2004 -108, 420 S. BROOKBURST STREET On April 15, 2005, I conducted an inspection at the property located at 420 S. Brookhurst Street and observed that the conditions of Resolution No. PC2004 -108 are being met. I did observe the following violations of the Anaheim Municipal Code: 1. Discarded batteries located on the eastside of the parking lot. 2. The landscaping around the parking lot light standards need to be improved 3. The wood trim on the building has chipped and peeling paint. I will follow up my inspection with a letter to the business and property owners. Community Preservation records revealed there were no citizen complaints regarding the operation of this business. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at ext. 4451. M822dy.dcc City of Anaheim POLICE DEPARTMENT Special Operations Division To: Della Herrick Planning Department From: Sergeant Mike Lozeau' Vice Detail Date: April 7, 2005 RE: CUP 2005 -04974 Seafood Palace 2 420 S. Brookhurst Street Anaheim, CA 92804 The Police Department has received an I.D.C. Route Sheet for CUP 2005- 04974. The applicant is requesting to permit a restaurant and banquet facility with the sale and service of alcoholic beverages. The location is within Reporting District 1720, which has a crime rate of 20 percent above average. It is also within census tract number 871.03, which has a population of 7,631. This population allows for 9 on sale Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses and there are presently 7 licenses in the tract and 1 pending. The Police Department does not oppose this request. The applicant already holds a type 47 Alcoholic Beverage Control License. The Police Department recommends that the following conditions be placed on the CUP: 1) At all times when the premise is open for business, the premise shall be maintained as a bona fide restaurant and shall provide a menu containing an assortment of foods normally offered in such restaurant. 2) There shall be no bar or lounge area upon the licensed premise maintained for the purpose of sales, service, or consumption of alcoholic beverages directly to patrons for consumption. 3) There shall be no pool tables or amusement devices maintained upon the premises at any time unless the proper permits have been obtained from the City of Anaheim. Anaheim Police Dept. 425 S. Harbor Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 TEL: 714.765.1401 FAX: 714.765.1665 Planning Department Della Herrick Seafood Palace 2 4) The gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed 40 percent of the gross sales of all retail sales during any three (3) month period. The applicant shall maintain records on a quarterly basis indicating the separate amounts of sales of alcoholic beverages and other items. These records shall be made available for inspection by any City of Anaheim official when requested. 5) There shall be no live entertainment, amplified music or dancing permitted on the premise without the proper permits from the City of Anaheim. 6) The sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premise shall be prohibited. 7) There shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. 8) The activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to surrounding properties. 9) That subject alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a public premise (bar) type license nor shall the establishment be operated as a public premise as defined in Section 23039 of the Business and Professions Code. 10) There shall be no admission fee, cover charge, nor minimum purchase required. 11) That the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped with lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably illuminated the windows of nearby residences. 12) That the business operator shall comply with Section 24200.5 of the Business and Profession Code so as not to employ or permit any persons to solicit or encourage others, directly or indirectly, to buy them drinks in the licensed premises under any commission, percentage, salary, or other profit- sharing plan, scheme or conspiracy. Page 2 Planning Department Della Herrick Seafood Palace 2 13) That all doors serving subject restaurant shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and shall be kept closed at all times during the operation of the premises except for ingress /egress, permit deliveries and in cases of emergency. 14) There shall be no public telephones on the property that are located outside the building and within the control of the applicant. 15) Any and all security officers provided shall comply with all State and Local ordinances regulating their services, including, without limitation, Chapter 11.5 of Division 3 of the California Business and Profession Code. (Section 4.16.070 Anaheim Municipal Code) Please contact me at extension 1451 if you require further information in regards to this matter. fAhome\rnmiwIn\2005 -04974 Seafood Palace 2.doc Page 3 • MRR -25 -2005 13:10 DEP° 7F ABC HO 916 419 2599 P.02 ' 03.25 -OS CENSUS TRACT INFOMATION BY CENSUS TRACT WITH ADDRESS PAGE:1 12:57 PM WHERE COUNTY IS 30- ORANGE AND CENSUS TRACT IS 0871.03 Census License Licensee Tract Types Status Num Premises 0871.03 41 ACT 63186 CORTINA FOODS INC 2175 W ORANGE, ANAHEIM CA 92804 0871.03 21 ACT 420133 LA PALMA HOLDINGS INC 2174 W BROADWAY, ANAHEIM CA 92804 0871.03 48 ACT 249917 AWWCORPORATION 819 S EUCLID, ANAHEIM CA 92802 0871.03 41 ACT 421544 SOLIS DANIEL 895 S EUCLID ST, ANAHEIM CA 92802 0871.03 21 ACT 233533 YU SHAN HUI 807.809 S EUCLID, ANAHEIM CA 92802 0871.03 20 ACT 413272 GONREYLUC 929 S EUCLID, ANAHEIM CA 92802 0871.03 41 ACT 367760 KASMAEI MOHAMMAD SEOIGHI 100 S BROOKHURST STES D & F, ANAHEIM CA 92804 0871.03 21 ACT 408242 AIAD HOSSAM BAHAABOTROSS 937 S EUCLID AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92802 0871.03 47 ACT 387249 HELGUER0 EUZA13ETH 1750 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92801 0871.03 41 ACT 279863 OSHIROMASANORI 933 -1/2 S EUCLID AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92802 0871.03 20 ACT 404013 NGYUENCHIEMHUU 944 S NUTWOOD, ANAHEIM CA 92805 0871.03 21 ACT 35662 ALBERTSONS INC 275 S EUCLID, ANAHEIM CA 92802 0871.03 41 ACT 380076 BRTO JOSE BULMARO 907 S EUCLID AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92802 MAR -25 -2005 13:10 DEPT OF ABC HC 916 419 2599 P.03 0P -25 -05 CENSUS TRACT INFOMATION BY CENSUS TRACT WITH ADDRESS PAGE: 1 12:58 PM WHERE COUNTY IS 30- ORANGE AND CENSUS TRACT IS 0871.02 Census License Licensee Trac Typ es Status Num Premises 0871,02 48 ACT 86735 BARRTOWN INC 2162 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92801 0871.02 20 ACT 394108 ALL AMERICAN PETROLEUM CORP 530 N BROOKHURST ST, ANAHEIM CA 92801 0871.02 21 PEND 422976 ELIZARRARASJUAN 1841 W LINCOLN AVE STE D & E, ANAHEIM CA 92801 0871.02 21 ACT 207428 WALKER RICHARD GARY 1841 W LINCOLN AVE STE D & E, ANAHEIM CA 92801 0871.02 21 ACT 387962 CHOIJINSUCK 1779 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92801 0871.02 42 ACT 336326 GUERREROJUAN 2171 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92801 0871.02 20 ACT 351363 DAOHUONGSONG 2034 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92801 0871.02 41 ACT 268119 CHAUHOAKIM 1841 W LINCOLN AVE STE B, ANAHEIM CA 92801 0871.02 20 ACT 396035 MATHEW SIMON 318 N BROOKHURST, ANAHEIM CA 92801 0871.02 47 ACT 289570 WILKINSON THOMAS K 1778 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92801 MRR -25 -2005 13:10 DEPT `)F ABC HO 916 419 2599 P.04 03 -25 -05 CENSUS TRACT INFOMA71ON BY CENSUS TRACT WITH ADDRESS PAGE; 1 12;59 PM WHERE COUNTY IS 30-ORANGE AND CENSUS TRACT IS 0877.01 Census License Licensee Tract Types Status Num Premises 0677.01 21 ACT 276004 ALPHA BETA COMPANY 915 S BROOKHURST AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92804 0877.01 21 ACT 355607 STATER BROS MARKETS 610 S BROOKHURST ST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 0877.01 41 ACT 382167 ZEEFOOD ENTERPRISES INC 888 S BROOKHURST ST, ANAHEIM OA 92804. 0877,01 41 ACT 212263 RADOS PANAGIOTA 605 8 BROOKHURST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 0877.01 41 ACT '410844 SARKISSIAN VAHRAM RAFFI 646 S BROOKHURST, ANAHEIM CA 92604 0877.01 48 ACT 260959 DEASEROBERTO 815 S BROOKHURST ST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 0877.01 41 ACT 226686 NGUYEN CUING DUC 656 S BROOKHURST ST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 0877.01 21 ACT 248070 THRIFTY PAYLESS INC 921 S BROOKHURST ST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 0877.01 41 ACT 301623 BAO KENG. - 2222 W ORANGE AVE STE M, ANAHEIM CA 92804 0877.01 41 ACT 336150 LEE KEVIN VAN 2241 W BALL RD, ANAHEIM CA 92804 0077.01 42 ACT 408535 DEDIOS0ON05POON 2230 W COLCHESTER 10 11 & 12, ANAHEIM CA 92804 0877.01 41 ACT 400543 ABUMUHOR ANTON GEORGE 2295 W BALL RD, ANAHEIM.CA 92804 MAR -25 -2005 13:10 DEPT 7F RBC HO 916 419 2599 P.05 03.25 -05 CENSUS TRACT INFOMATION BY CENSUS TRACT WITH ADDRESS PAGE:1 01 :00 PM WHERE COUNTY IS 30- ORANGE AND CENSUS TRACT IS 0871.04 Census License Licensee Tract Types , Status Num Premises 0871.04 42 ACT 381356 CASTANEDA ANTHONY 107 S ADAMS ST, ANAHEIM CA 92802 MPR -25 -2005 13:10 DEPT OF ABC HQ 916 419 2599 P.06 } i 03 -25 -05 CENSUS TRACT INFOMATION BY CENSUS TRACT WITH ADDRESS PAGE:1 01:00 PM WHERE COUNTY IS 30- ORANGE AND CENSUS TRACT IS 0871.D1 Census Tract Types Status License Licensee Num Premises 0871.01 40 ACT 357019 0871.01 42 PEND 423482 0871.01 42 ACT 349559 0871.01 42 ACT 219125 0871.01 41 ACT 405576 0871.01 47 ACT 181974 0871.01 21 ACT 357190 0871.01 41 R65 396130 0871.01 20 ACT 214595 0871.01 47 ACT 369831 0871.01 21 ACT 407305 0871.01 41 ACT 362841 0871.01 47 ACT 369585 0871.01 48 ACT 322107 0871.01 47 ACT 260179 0871.01 41 ACT 273928 0871.01 48 ACT 393034 0871.01 41 ACT 315271 0871.01 41 ACT $90155 THAPAR RANJANA 2220 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92801 NEWMAN JAKE 405 S SROOKHURST ST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 PIECOR LLC 405 S BROOKHURST ST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 CERVANTES MARIA 417 S BROOKHURST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 BOVAHOMTHOUNE MARY 3118 BROOKHURST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 LINBROOK BOWL 201 S BROOKHURST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 ALBERTSONS INC 2360 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92801 ALTARA INC 2350 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92801 7 ELEVEN INC 570 S BROOKHURST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 DEHUONG CORP 420 S BROOKHURST ST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 RALPH$ GROCERY COMPANY 2394 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92801 ZOUNATIOTIS RICA 2383 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92801 PLAZA GARIBALDI INC 500 N BROOKHU FIST ST, ANAHEIM CA 92801 TRAN BERNARD KHAI 413 S BROOKHURST ST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 ASM ENSERPRISES 430N GILBERT, ANAHEIM CA 92801 SOMCHAIPRACHAUP 511 S BROOKHURST ST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 HERNANDEZ MARTIN FERNANDO 501.509 S BROOKHURST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 LEE CHENG CHAI 408 S BROOKHURST ST, ANAHEIM CA 92804 NASSAR FUAD 2235 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92801 MRR -25 -2005 13:10 DEPT OF ABC HQ 916 419 2599 P.07 " 1 t 03.25.05 CENSUS TRACT INFOMATION BY CENSUS TRACT WITH ADDRESS PAGE:1 01:01 PM WHERE COUNTY IS 30-ORANGE AND CENSUS TRACT IS 0872. Census License Licensee Tract Types status Num Premises 0872. 47 ACT 370024 0872. 21 R65 188471 0872, 47 ACT 202419 0872. 20 ACT 271603 0872. 41 ACT 339383 CURIEL VERONICA 1201 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92805 CHOI JIN SUCK 1108 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92805 MARIE CALLENDER PIE SHOPS INC 540 N EUCLID AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92801 KIM KUM HEE 1000 W LINCOLN AVE, ANAHEIM CA 92805 RUBIOS RESTAURANTS INC 520 N EUCLID AVE FOOD CT 5, ANAHEIM CA 92801 Planning Department 200 S. Anaheim Blv. Anaheim, CA 92805 Dear Sir: • • Seafood Place # 2 420 S. Brookhurst St. Anaheim, CA 92804 February 28, 2005 I am applying for a new Conditional Use Permit. Currently Seafood Place # 2 Chinese Restaurant at 420 S. Brookhurst St. is being utilized as a banquet hall for wedding parties. The owner would like to add more services to the business; therefore, the existing 10,203 sq. ft. building will no longer be just a banquet hall, but it will be a typical Chinese restaurant. The services will include selling dim sum, special lunch, dinner, alcohol beverages, cocktails, and continue to have wedding banquets same as current operation. There will be about twenty employees. The operation hours are: 9:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. from Monday to Thursday and 9:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M. from Friday to Sunday. The restaurant will open seven days a week. Under the current banquet hall operation, 199 parking spaces are sufficient with approval. We hope that you understand the transaction we are trying to make, and that your approval will enable us to start a new business venture Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, De Hua Jr., Owner CUP NO. 2005 - 04974 ITEM NO. 1 -A ROL ... SP 94 -1 RCL 84 -85 -04 RCL 70-71 -15 (1) SP 94 -1 RCL 6566 -25 RCL 70 -71 -14 NORTHEAST (RZCf ML) NORTHEAST CUP 2001 -04318 RCL65 -66-17 CUP 2167 RCL 89 -90-48 CUP 2003 -04699 C-G VAR 4271 RCL 87 -88-08 CUP 3881 [ RCL 75 -76 -02 OFFICE BLDG. RCL 86 -87 -29 CUP 3253 RCL RCL 65-66 -25(2) CUP 3514 RCL69 -70 -18 T -CUP 2004 -04889 VAR 4198 CUP 3822 RCL 65 -66-17 VAR 4192 CUP 2077 CUP 2003 -04822 VAR 4156 CUP 1934 CUP 3881 SHOPPING CNTR. CUP 1786 SP 94 -1 CUP 3414 (ARCADE PERMIT CUP 1715 RCL 70 -71 -15 (1) CUP 3240 NO. 1019 VV) VAR 3977 RCL 70 -71 -14 CUP 2905 DA .5 VAR 2733 CUP 2167 CUP 1585 CANYON VILLAGE VAR 4271 VAR 3892 5 P 941 SHOPPING CENTER OFFICE BLDG. RCL 77-78 22 (CUP 33141 RGL65E &25 DA.2 GALAXY CINEMAS (Recd �te�l m M Q RR VAR 4281] vAR428z R MOVIETHEATER VAR 31455 RDA.5 V 3M 5 BANK L D A. 5 R LA PALMA AVENUE 320 SP 94 -1 SP 94 -1 FG RCL 65 -66 -17 RCL 84 -85-07 T 2005 RCL69 -70-64 r RCL69 -]0.18 -CUP -04973 RCL (1) R GUP21 n T -CUP 2003 -04 CUP UP 3 6-0 711 COP2148 viz $p 94 -1 CUP 4644 44 PCN VAR 3854 m2 RCL 7D CUP CUP 3 3985 S.S. MK VAR 2307 RCL 7003 -14) D.A. 5 &CAR AR WASH WASH T -CUP 2003 -04765 -047 w RE T 0 A. 5 Q T -CUP 2001 -04375 C-G CUP 4094 = RCL 69-70-64 CUP 3860 - RCL 69 -70 -18 CUP 2708 SP 941 CUP 3234 1 983 RCL 65-66 -17 CUP 2022 RCL 76 -77 -16 CUP 3233 = CUP 2392 CUP RCL65E6 -25 CUP 1722 CUP 1635 CUP 1747 (Res of Intent tD ML) CUP 1721 T 2005 J Q ANAHEIM HILLS INDUSTRIALPARK -CUP -04973 VAR 4267 T -CUP 2003 -04810 VAR4252 TRAVELODGE SMALL INDUSTRIAL CUP 2002 -04644 VAR 3863 °J FIRMS T -CUP 2002 -04609 (T -CUP 2002- 04504) U-1 DA. 5 CUP 2001 -04465 (CUP 2417) d T -CUP 2000 -04219 (CUP 1654) CUP 4115 (VAR 3061 S) ANAHEIM HILLS VILLAGE . SHOPPING CENTER D.A. 5 SP g 4-1 CE T OPEN RCL 65 -66 -25 (Res (Res of Intent m ML) RCL 6586 -17 OPEN SPACE ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE (SC) (SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) ZONE Conditional Use Permit No. 3985 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04973 Date May 2, 2005 Scale Graphic Q.S. No. 184 Requested By ANAHEIM HILLS VILLAGE CENTER, LP REQUEST TO AMEND PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED EXHIBITS TO RECONFIGURE THE DRIVE -THRU LANE AND PARKING LOT FOR AN EXISTING FAST FOOD RESTAURANT AND ADJACENT COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER- 5624-5646 East La Palma Avenue, In -N -Out Burger and Anaheim Hills Village Center 1790 Date of Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 3985 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04973 Date: May 2, 2005 Scale: Graphic Requested By: ANAHEIM HILLS VILLAGE CENTER, LP Q.S. No. 184 REQUEST TO AMEND PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED EXHIBITS TO RECONFIGURE THE DRIVE -THRU LANE AND PARKING LOT FOR AN EXISTING FAST FOOD RESTAURANT AND ADJACENT COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER. 5624 -5646 East La Palma Avenue, In -N -Out Burger and Anaheim Hills Village Center 1790 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 6 (Motion) (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 32 -acre area consists of two properties, located south and west of the southwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Imperial Highway, with frontages of 320 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue and 388 feet on the west side of Imperial Highway (5624 — 5646 East La Palma Avenue — In -N -Out Burger and Anaheim Hills Village Center). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval to amend previously approved exhibits to reconfigure a drive - through lane and parking lot for an existing fast food restaurant and adjacent commercial retail center under authority of Code Section 18.08.030.010. BACKGROUND: (3) These properties are developed with an existing drive - through fast food restaurant and adjacent commercial retail center and are zoned SP 94 -1, D.A. 5 (SC) (Northeast Area Specific Plan, Development Area 5- Commercial Area; Scenic Corridor Overlay). This property is located within the Merged Anaheim Redevelopment Project Area and the Land Use Element Map of the Anaheim General Plan designates these and surrounding properties for General Commercial land uses. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 3985 (to permit the demolition of a 6,000 square foot building and construct a 2,912 square foot drive - through, fast food restaurant with outdoor seating with waivers of permitted wall signs, minimum number of parking spaces (426 required; 355 proposed), minimum drive - through lane requirements and required improvement of setbacks) was approved, in part, by the Commission on December 22, 1997. PROPOSAL: (5) The applicant proposes to amend previously- approved exhibits to reconfigure a drive - through lane and parking lot for an existing fast food restaurant and adjacent commercial retail center. Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 6 View of existing In -N -Out drive - through lane (6) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates a 2,912 square foot fast food restaurant building (In- N -Out) and a contiguous 63,874 square foot commercial retail center (Anaheim Hills Village Center) with 34 tenant spaces. Vehicular access is provided by two driveways from La Palma Avenue. Parking is located throughout the entire property with the majority centrally located between the retail buildings. Plans indicate a total of 330 existing parking spaces and 386 proposed spaces for the entire integrated center (56 spaces will be added by reconfiguring and restriping the parking lot). Code requires 448 spaces based on the following: Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 6 Address (All located on E. La Palma Avenue Use Total Square Footage Code - Required Parking Ratio (per 1,000 s.f.) Parking Required 5624 Units A &B Urban Dry Cleaner 2,356 5.5 12.9 5624 Unit C Thai Restaurant 1,947 8 15.5 5626 Cold Stone Ice Cream 1,949 5.5 10.7 5630 Teacher Supply 5,200 5.5 28.6 5632 Hands On Wellness 2,300 6 13.8 5634 Smoking Lounge ( Proposed ) 2,900 17 49.3 5636 Units A &B Vacant 1 5.5 9.9 5636 Unit C Visage Laser & Skin 1,260 6 7.5 5636 Unit D Hair Spa 791 5.5 4.3 5636 Units E -G Bo Vang Bistro Rest. 1 8 14 5638 La Ca ilia Rest. 5,040 8 40 5640 Aaron Brothers 7,600 5.5 41.8 5642 Unit 101 Dr. Coy Dentist 896 6 5.3 5642 Unit 102 Internet Cafe 2,393 5.5 16.1 5642 Unit 104 To os Eatery 1,700 16 272 5642 Unit 106 A Florist 824 5.5 4.5 5642 Unit 106 B Boba Loca 890 5.5 4.9 5642 Unit 107 Vacant 907 5.5 4.9 5642 Unit 108 Sign A Rama 1 330 5.5 7.3 5642 Units 109- 110 Jenny Craig 2,109 4 8.4 5642 Unit 111 Dental 1,335 6 7.9 5642 Unit 112 Nail & Spa 444 5.5 2.4 5642 Unit 113 Access Wireless 462 5.5 2.5 5642 Unit 201 CPA 896 4 3.5 5642 Unit 202 First Equitable Finance 1,341 4 5.3 5642 Unit 203 Vacant 1,051 5.5 5.5 5642 Unit 204 Xaos Cards & Games 754 5.5 4.1 5642 Units 205 - 206 Higher Ground Dance Studio 2,219 5.5 12.1 5642 Unit 207 Barber Bros Insurance 1,195 4 4.7 5642 Unit 208 Anaheim Hills Formal Wear 907 5.5 4.9 5642 Unit 209 Vacant 1,198 5.5 6.5 5642 Unit 210 T rannus Consulting 978 4 3.8 5642 Unit 211 Vacant 1,335 5.5 7.3 5642 Unit 212 Diamond Home Cleaner 905 5.5 4.9 5646 In -N -Out Burger 2,912 16 46.4 TOTALS 1 1 63,874 1 1 448 Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 6 (7) Due to the fact that the restaurant is existing, and no expansion is proposed, a parking waiver is not being requested in conjunction with this conditional use permit amendment. As mentioned above in paragraph no. (4), a parking waiver was granted in 1997, in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit No. 3985 (426 spaces required; 355 spaces proposed —83% of parking requirement). Due to a different mix of tenants and more parking being added to the center since 1997, the current proposal includes a total of 386 parking spaces for the entire integrated center and Code requires 448 spaces (86 of the parking requirement). (8) The site plan indicates that the drive - through lane configuration would be modified to replace 12 parking spaces at the northeast corner of the commercial retail center property to allow for additional stacking. However, as mentioned above, a total of 56 spaces would be added to the center by reconfiguring and restriping the parking lot, resulting in a net increase of parking spaces provided in the center. (9) The attached letters of operation indicate that the current hours of operation for the restaurant are 1030 a.m. - 1 a.m., Sunday through Thursday and 10:30 a.m. - 1:30 a.m., Friday and Saturday. The applicant has indicated that no changes to the operating hours are proposed and that the purpose of this request is to improve vehicular circulation problems occurring in and around the drive - through lane and adjacent parking lot. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (10) Staff has reviewed the proposal to amend previouslyapproved exhibits to reconfigure a drive - through lane and parking lot for an existing fast food restaurant and adjacent commercial retail center, and finds no significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from any changes to the existing project. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously - approved Negative Declaration in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3985 serve as the required environmental documentation for this request upon a finding by the Commission that the Negative 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 (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment- EVALUATION (11) As described above, Conditional Use Permit No. 3985 was originally approved in 1997 by the Commission to allow for the construction of a fast food, drive - through restaurant with outdoor seating. In an effort to improve existing circulation problems, the applicant requests amendment to previously- approved exhibits to reconfigure a drive - through lane and parking lot for an existing fast food restaurant and adjacent commercial retail center. Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 6 (12) As depicted in the above photograph, staff visited the site during peak lunch time hours and verified that severe congestion occurred in the rear of the In -N -Out restaurant building. Queuing in the drive - through lane was extremely long and blocked the parking spaces for the tenants in the 5642 East La Palma Avenue building. Staff believes that increasing the length of the drive - through lane and shifting its location along the north property line would improve the circulation pattern and prevent the blockage of parking spaces for adjacent tenants. As part of this request, the applicant is also proposing to increase the number of spaces such that the net result is an overall reduction in the parking waiver approved by the Commission in 1997. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this request- FINDINGS (13) Before the Planning Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); (b) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; Page 5 View of existing drive - through lane congestion problems Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 6 (c) That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim- RECOMMENDATION (14) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission approve the applicants request by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions of approval contained therein. Page 6 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDING CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. PC97 -177 ADOPTED IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3985 (5624 -5646 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did, by Resolution No. PC97 -177 grant Conditional Use Permit No. 3985 to permit the demolition of a 6,000 square foot building and construct a 2,912 square foot drive - through, fast food restaurant with outdoor seating with waivers of permitted wall signs, minimum number of parking spaces, minimum drive - through lane requirements, and required improvement of setbacks. WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition to amend Conditional Use Permit No. 3985 to reconfigure a drive - through lane and parking lot for an existing fast food restaurant and adjacent commercial retail center for certain real properties situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: PARCEL A: PARCELS 1 AND 2, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 100, PAGES 17 AND 18 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. EXCEPT THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 1 IN THE DEED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECORDED MAY 10, 2000 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20000246706, OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL B: PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 13026, PAGE 1493 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS, PARKING AN UTILITIES, AS SET FORTH IN THE DECLARATION OF ESTABLISHMENT OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS AND GRANTS OF EASEMENTS RECORDED SEPTEMBER 16, 1977 IN BOOK 12380, PAGE 316, AND AMENDED BY THOSE CERTAIN AMENDMENTS RECORDED APRIL 7, 1978 IN BOOK 12627, PAGE 491, JANUARY 24, 1979 IN BOOK 13010, PAGE 1680, APRIL 6, 1989 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 89- 181576 AND FEBRUARY 2, 1998 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19980055625 AND RE- RECORDED APRIL 13, 1998 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19980215274, ALL OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. EXCEPT THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF PARCEL 3, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 100, PAGES 17 AND 18 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE NORTH 01 23'00" EAST 40.01 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 3; THENCE SOUTH 82 29'34" WEST 39.18 FEET TO THAT CERTAIN COURSE IN THE BOUNDARY OF PARCEL 4 OF SAID PARCEL MAP THAT HAS A BEARING OF NORTH 01 27' 00" WEST AND A DISTANCE OF 43.44 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01 27'00" EAST 42.46 FEET ALONG SAID CERTAIN COURSE TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4; THENCE NORTH 78 23' 00" EAST 37.57 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 2 IN THE DEED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECORDED MAY 10, 2000 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20000246706 OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL C: NON - EXCLUSIVE EASEMENTS APPURTENANT TO PARCELS A AND B ABOVE FOR THE PARKING OF PASSENGER VEHICLES, PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR INGRESS AND EGRESS, PUBLIC UTILITIES, AND FOR SIGHT ADDITIONAL PURPOSES AS SET FORTH AND DEFINED IN THAT CERTAIN DECLARATION OF ESTABLISHMENT OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS AND GRANTS OF EASEMENTS, RECORDED SEPTEMBER 16, 1977 IN BOOK 12380, PAGE 316 AND AS AMENDED BY INSTRUMENTS RECORDED 7, 1978 IN BOOK 12627, PAGE 491, RECORDED JANUARY 24, 1979 IN BOOK 13010, PAGE 1680 AND RECORDED FEBRUARY 2, 1998 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19980055625, ALL OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL D: PARCEL 3, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 100, PAGES 17 AND 18 OF PARCEL MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, AS ADJUSTED AND SHOWN AS PARCEL 2 ON A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT RECORDED FEBRUARY 6, 1979 IN BOOK 13026, PAGE 1493, OFFICIAL RECORDS. ACCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF DESCRIBED IN DEED TO ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT, RECORDED JANUARY 31, 1980 IN BOOK 13486, PAGE 1453, OFFICIAL RECORDS. WHEREAS, these properties are developed with an existing drive through fast food restaurant and adjacent commercial retail center, are zoned SP 94 -1, D.A. 5 (SC) (Northeast Area Specific Plan, Development Area 5- Commercial Area; Scenic Corridor Overlay), are located within the Merged Redevelopment Project Area, and the Land Use Element Map of the Anaheim General Plan designates these properties for General Commercial land uses WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on May 2, 2005, at 2:00 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 conditional use permit 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: 1. That the fast food drive - through restaurant is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section Nos. 18.120.100.050.0522 and 18.38220.010. 2. That the proposed drive - through lane modification will not aversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is located. 3. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed drive- through lane modification is adequate to allow full development of the use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health and safety; and that said modification will improve internal vehicular circulation and result in a net increase of parking spaces on the property 4. That the traffic generated by the proposed drive - through lane modification will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area and will improve internal circulation on the property. 5. That granting this conditional use permit will not, under the conditions imposed, be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 6. That "* 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 That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to amend previously- approved exhibits to reconfigure a drive - through lane and parking lot for an existing fast food restaurant and adjacent commercial retail center, and does hereby approve the previously approved Negative Declaration upon finding that no significant adverse environmental impacts would result from any changes to the existing project, and that the previously- approved Negative Declaration in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3985 serves as the required environmental documentation for this request upon a finding by the Commission that the Negative 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 (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby amend, in its entirety, the conditions contained in Resolution No. PC97 -177 to read as follows: 1. That the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped and maintained with lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably illuminate the windows of nearby businesses. 2. That compact parking spaces shall not be permitted. 3. That plans for the drive - through lane modification shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and approval.. 4. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion through the provision of regular landscaping maintenance, removal of trash and debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 5. That there shall be no public telephones on the premises located outside the building. 6. That the proposal shall comply with all signing requirements of the SP 94-1; D.A. 5 (SC) (Northeast Area Specific Plan; Commercial Area; Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone. 7. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and approval showing conformance with the current versions of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436 and 470 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said approved plans. 8. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage use. 9. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. 10. That the property owner shall submit a letter requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 4115 (to permit an amusement device arcade with up to 170 amusement devices within a proposed family entertainment center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces at 5634 -5636 East La Palma Avenue) to the Planning Services Division. 11. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit No. 1 (Revision No. 2), 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8a, 8b, 8c, and 8d, and as conditioned herein. 12. That prior to the commencement of the activity authorized by the resolution, or within one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 3, 7, 11 and 12 above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 13. 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 ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicants compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the property owner /developer is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 7 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the commencement of the activity for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of May 2, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, 'Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. r_IIII i CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss CITY OF ANAHEIM 1 1, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on May 2, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VACANT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of ' 2005. SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC97 -177 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3985 BE GRANTED, IN PART 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, described as: PARCEL 2, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 100, PAGES 17 AND 18 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on November 24, 1997 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 that said public hearing was continued to the December 22, 1997 Planning Commission meeting; 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: 1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.110.100.050.0531 and 18.84.062.032 to construct a 2,912 sq. ft. drive- through fast food restaurant with outdoor seating and roof - mounted equipment, and with waivers of the following; (a) Sections 18.05.091.010 Permitted freestanding signs 18.05.091.011 18.05.091.014 and 18.110.100120 (b) Sections 18.05.091.020 Permitted wall signs and 18.110.100.120 one permitted; three proposed) (c) Sections 18.06.050.0233 Minimum number of Parking spaces. and 18.110.100.110.1103 (426 required; 355 proposed) (d) Sections 18.06.070.020 Minimum drive - through lane requirements. and 18.110.100.110 100 feet between ordering device and service window required; 55 feet proposed) (e) Sections 18,84.062.014 Required improvement of setbacks and 18.110.100 (maximum 30 feet of automobile parking permitted in 50 -foot front structural setback; maximum 25 feet of drive - through lane proposed) CR3141 PL.DOC 1- PC97 -177 2. That waiver (a), pertaining to permitted freestanding signs, is hereby denied on the basis that it was deleted following public notification; 3. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property consisting of its location and surroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity; 4. That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; 5. That waiver (b), pertaining to permitted wall signs, is hereby approved because there are other identically zoned properties in the vicinity with more than one wall sign; and that the size and shape of the property, coupled with the location of the existing service station building to the east, restrict visibility of the proposed structure; 6. That the parking waiver (c) is hereby approved on the basis of the findings contained in the parking study prepared for this proposal and approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager; 7. That the parking waiver (c), under the conditions imposed, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use; 8. That waiver (c), under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use; 9. That waiver (c), under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with Section 18.06.010.020 of this Code); 10. That waiver (c), under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use; 11. That waiver (c), under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use; 12. That waiver (d), pertaining to minimum drive - through lane requirements, is approved on the basis that the intent of the Code will be satisfied because the distance between the ordering device and the second service window (pick -up) complies with Code; and that the size and shape of the property prevents strict application of the Code as applied to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity; 13. That waiver (e), pertaining to required improvement of setbacks, is approved because the depth of the property is constrained by the surrounding commercial center to the south and strict compliance with the Code would prohibit a drive- through restaurant use on this site; and that the intent of the Code will be achieved by the required landscape berming and proposed shrubs which will partially screen the drive - through lane; and that the submitted plans indicate 5 to 20 feet of landscaping in excess of Code requirements adjacent to La Palma Avenue; and that special circumstances apply in that Code allow an automobile parking area in the front setback which is more intense (aesthetically) than the proposed drive- through lane which will be screened by landscaping; 14. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code; -2- PC97 -177 15. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; and that the size of the building to be demolished is larger than the proposed building; 16. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare; 17. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; 18. That the granting of the conditional use permit, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim; and 19. That 4 people spoke at said 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 construct a 2,912 sq. ft. drive- through fast food restaurant with outdoor seating and roof - mounted equipment, and with waivers of permitted freestanding signage, permitted wall signs, minimum number of parking spaces, minimum drive - through lane requirements and required improvements of setbacks on a 0.55 -acre parcel having a frontage of 112 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue, a maximum depth of 218 feet, and being located 257 feet west of the centerline of Imperial Highway (5646 East La Palma Avenue); and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgement 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 no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, in part, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite 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 minimum two (2) foot wide landscape planter shall be constructed and maintained adjacent to the building where possible. Said information shall be specifically shown on landscape plans submitted for building permits. 2. That the proposed landscaped earthen berm in the twenty five (25) to forty (40) foot wide landscaped setback adjacent to La Palma Avenue shall be measured from the ultimate right -of- way along La Palma Avenue. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 3. That a security guard shall be provided daily from 8 p.m. to closing, if determined to be necessary by the Anaheim Police Department, to discourage vandalism and /or loitering upon or adjacent to the subject property. 4. That lighting of signage for subject property shall be prohibited after hours of business operation or between midnight and 6:30 a.m., whichever is later as specified by Zoning Code Section 18.05.091.050. 5. That signage for subject facility shall be limited to that shown on the exhibits submitted by the petitioner and approved by the Planning Commission. Any additional signage shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. -3- PC97.177 6. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 7. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, for review and approval. 8. That an on -site trash truck turn - around area shall be provided in compliance with Engineering Standard Detail No. 610 and shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. Said tum- around area shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 9. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and approval showing conformance with the most current versions of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436 and 602 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 10. That minimum sixteen (16) foot inner and twenty six (26) foot outer radii shall be provided for the drive - through lane. Such information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 11. That prior to commencement of the business approved by this conditional use permit, a valid business license shall be obtained from the Business License Division of the City Finance Department. 12. That no freestanding sign(s) shall be permitted. 13. That any roof - mounted equipment shall be subject to Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.84.062.032 pertaining to the "SC' Scenic Corridor Zone Overlay. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 14. That a minimum of five (5) trees shall be planted in the landscaped setback adjacent to La Palma Avenue and a minimum of three (3) trees shall be planted in the parking lot area in compliance with Code requirements. All required trees shall be minimum fifteen (15) gallons in size and shall be irrigated, maintained and replaced in the event any tree dies or becomes diseased. The required trees shall be specified on plans submitted for building permits. 15. That awnings shall not be used for advertising. 16. That a reciprocal access and parking agreement, approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and the City Attorney as to form and content, shall be maintained between this property and the adjacent commercial center. A copy of that agreement shall be submitted to the Zoning Division. 17. That final landscaping plans shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval. 18. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Revision No. 1 of Exhibit No. 1, Exhibit Nos. 2 through 7, and Exhibit Nos. 8a, 8b, 8c and 8d, and as conditioned herein. -4- PC97 -177 19. That prior to issuance of a building permit or within a period of two (2) years from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 6, 7, 8 , 9, 10, 13, 14, 16 and 17, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 20. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 11 and 18, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 21. 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 ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of December 22, 1997. (Original signed by Paul SostwiAl CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: (Original s igned by Margarita Soloriol SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 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 December 22, 1997, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, NAPOLES, PERAZA NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MAYER IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of , 1998. SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -5- PC97 -177 13502 Hamburger Lane Baldwin Park, California 91706 -5885 (626) 813 -8200 March 2, 2005 City of Anaheim 200 South Anaheim Blvd., 1 Floor Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: In -N -Out Burger #138 5646 E. La Palma Avenue Anaheim, CA 92807 To Whom It May Concern: In -N -Out Burger located at 5646 E. La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, California opened its doors for business on August 12, 1999 to serve Quality Fast Food. The Building is 2912 square feet and located on a lot 24,150 square feet with a drive thru lane. Our store currently seats (70) seventy customers inside and (12) twelve outside at the patio tables. There are three grills to help move the customers faster through our drive thru lane. We are opened for business (7) seven days a week. Our hours are Sunday thru Thursday 10:30 A.M. to 1:00 A. M. and Friday and Saturday 10:30 A.M. to 1:30 A.M. If you need any further information pertaining to our store or company please do not hesitate to give.me a call at (626) 813 -8278. Sincerely, ymund ' illanueva Director : f Development • • t i° '"■P INuNuOUT BURGER CUP Na "God Bless America" • The Customer Is Everything To Us The Best Enterprise Is A Free EnterpriseTM -3985 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3985 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 0.55 -acre property has a frontage of 112 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue, a maximum depth of 218 feet, and is located 257 feet west of the centerline of Imperial Highway (5646 East La Palma Avenue - Anaheim Hills Village). REQUEST: (2) Petitioner requests approval of a conditional use permit under the authority of Code Section Nos. 18.110.100.050.0522, 18.84.061 and 18.84.062.032 to demolish an existing 6,000 square foot building to construct a 2,912 square foot drive- through fast food restaurant (In- N -Out), with outdoor seating and roof - mounted equipment with waivers of the following: (3) SR1017JK.DOC (a) SECTIONS 18.05.091.010 Permitted freestanding sians. 18.05.091.011 (Deleted) 18.05.091.014 AND 18.110.100.120 (b) SECTIONS 18.05.091.020 - Permitted wall sions. one sign AND 18.110.100.120 permitted; three signs proposed) (c) SECTIONS 18.06.050.0233 AND 18.110.100.110.1103 (d) SECTIONS 18.06.070 AND 18.110.100.110 (e) SECTIONS 18.84.062.014 AND 18.110.100.090 BACKGROUND: Staff Report to the Planning Commission December 22, 1997 Item No. 2 (Motion) (Motion) (Resolution) Minimum number of oarkino spaces. (426 required* 355 proposed) Minimum drive - through lane requirements. (100 feet from ordering device to service window required; 55 feet proposed) Reauired improvement of setbacks. (20 -foot wide landscaped setback with 30 -foot wide automobile parking area permitted' 25-40 -foot wide landscaped setback with 11 -15 -foot wide drive - through lane and 5 -14 -foot wide entry proposed) This request was continued from the November 24, 1997 Commission meeting at the request of the Commission, for the petitioner to explore altemate designs to improve circulation and to reduce the site of the freestanding sign. Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission December 22, 1997 Item No. 2 (4) This property is developed with a freestanding restaurant/retail building (to be demolished), surrounded by a commercial center and has been zoned SP94 -1, Development Area 5(SC) (Northeast Area Specific Plan, Commercial Area, Scenic Corridor Overlay) since September 12, 1995. The Anaheim General Plan designates this property for General Commercial land uses. (5) Surrounding land uses are as follows: North across La Palma Avenue East South and West Commercial center, Movie theater Service station Commercial center SP94 -1, DA5(SC) SP94 -1, DA5(SC) SP94 -1, DA5(SC) General =Dian Designation General Commercial General Commercial General Commercial PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (6) Variance No. 4267 (waiver of maximum number of wall signs to construct a second wall sign [77 s.f.] for an existing restaurant) was approved by the Commission in 1995 (5638 East La Palma Avenue Suite F). (7) Variance No. 4252 (waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to establish a private tutoring center) was approved by the Zoning Administrator in 1994 (5642 East La Palma Avenue). (8) Conditional Use Permit No. 3234 (to permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces) was approved by the Zoning Administrator in 1990 (5632 E. La Palma Avenue). (9) Conditional Use Permit No. 3233 (to permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption with waiver of minimum number or parking spaces) was approved by the Zoning Administrator in 1990 (5636 East La Palma Avenue). (10) Variance No. 3863 (waiver of permitted shopping center identification and permitted wall signs to construct a 75 s.f. freestanding sign and 3 wall signs) was approved with a 42 square foot freestanding sign by the Commission in 1988. (11) Conditional Use Permit No. 2417 (to permit sales of beer and wine for on- premises consumption in a proposed sandwich shop with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces [denied]) was approved, by the Commission in 1983 (5642 East La Palma Avenue #105). (12) Conditional Use Permit No. 1722 (to permit sales of beer and wine for on- premises consumption in a proposed restaurant) was approved by the Commission in 1977 (5626 East La Palma Avenue). (13) Conditional Use Permit No. 1721 (to permit sales of liquor for on- premises consumption in two proposed restaurants) was approved by the Commission in 1977 (5634 and 5638 East La Palma Avenue). Page 2 PEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: Staff Report to the Planning Commission December 22, 1997 Item No. 2 (14) Petitioner proposes to demolish an existing 6,000 square foot freestanding restaurant and retail pad building to construct a 2,912 square foot drive- through fast food restaurant, with outdoor seating and roof - mounted equipment. (15) Exhibit No. 1, Revision No. 1 (site plan) indicates that the restaurant will be constructed on this property with a portion of the drive- through lane extending across the south property line into the adjacent commercial center. The building is approximately centered on the site with the outdoor seating to the west of the building. Decorative type bollards are proposed along the perimeter of the outdoor seating area. At the request of the Commission, the drive- through lane exit has been modified to increase the distance from 25 feet to 40 feet to the ultimate right -of -way line. At the suggestion of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, a 6- 8-foot wide, 67 foot long landscaped planter is proposed off -site in the commercial center across from the drive- through exit to improve ingress and egress for the commercial center and restaurant. (16) In addition, an 11 -15 -foot wide drive - through lane is proposed, with the entrance south of the building and wrapping around the building on the east and exiting along the north side. Approximately 79 feet is proposed from the entrance of the drive- through to the ordering device and 55 feet is proposed from the ordering device to the first window (cash window), and approximately 100 feet to the second window (pick -up window). Code requires 60 feet from the entrance of the drive- through to the ordering device and ].Q2 feet from the ordering device to the service window. A new trash enclosure is proposed along the south side of the building with landscape areas on the east and west side of the enclosure. (17) Exhibit No. 1, Revision No. 1 further indicates that the proposed building is setback 62 feet from the current property line and 50 feet from the ultimate right -of -way. Code Section 18.04.080 requires setbacks to be measured from the ultimate right -of -way line as shown on the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan. The General Plan requires 85 feet from centerline to property line for the critical intersection on La Palma Avenue (53 feet exists). The proposed setbacks from the ultimate right -of -way lines are as follows: Direction North along La Palma Avenue East South West R equir ed St Setback`' 50 ft. (50 ft. proposed) none none none Required Setback Improvements 20 ft. landscaped 30 ft. parking or accessways none none none Proposed Setback Improvements: 25-40 ft. Landscaped 11 -15 ft. drive- through lane 5 -15-ft. entry 5 ft. Landscaped 0 -2 ft. landscaped none (18) Exhibit No. 2 (floor plan) proposes 1,381 square feet of dining area with 70 seats for patrons, 1,337 square feet of kitchen and storage facilities, and approximately 194 square feet of restrooms (men's and women's restroom). The restaurant is accessed via two doors, one on the north side and one on the west side of the building. A delivery door is located on the south side of the building and two drive - through service windows are proposed on the east side of the building. Page 3 Sign Type Dimensions Proposed Size A menu board* 5.2 ft. high, 4.25 ft. wide 14 s.f. B directional sign' 3 ft. high, 2 ft. wide 3 s.f. C wall (north elevation)** 3.9 ft. high, 10.6 ft. wide 50 s.f. D wall (east elevation)** 3.9 ft. high, 10.6 ft. wide 50 s.f. E (DELETED) monument 8 ft. high, 11 ft. wide 50 s.f. F wall (west elevation)** 3.9 ft. high, 10.6 ft. wide 50 s.f. ( Complies with code requirement " Code allows one wall sign Staff Report to the Planning Commission December 22, 1997 Item No. 2 (19) Exhibit Nos. 3 and 4 (elevations) indicate an 18- to 21.5 -foot high stucco finish building with red awnings (with white palm trees) and a mission -style tile roof. Aluminum frame windows and doors are proposed with red neon accents just below the roof, and red tile banding approximately 2.5 feet above the finished floor. (20) Exhibit Nos. 5 and 6 (roof plans) show a maximum height of 4.5 feet for the proposed roof- mounted equipment. A 5 -foot high parapet wall is proposed around the entire building and the roof - mounted equipment will be painted to match the building. Address numbers (1.5- foot wide by 4 -foot high) are also proposed on the roof of the building for police helicopter identification. (21) Exhibit Nos. 1, Revision No. 1 and 7 (landscape plans) indicate a landscaped setback of 37 to 52 feet from the current property line, and 25 to 40 feet from the ultimate right -of -way line. A 3 -foot high, bermed setback is proposed along La Palma Avenue and a 4 -foot high hedge is proposed adjacent to the east side of the drive - through lane for screening purposes. The hedge continues along the east property line to the ordering device. Plans indicate 3 trees are proposed in the front setback, Code requires 5, minimum 15- gallon size trees. In addition, 2 trees are proposed in the parking areas and Code requires 3, minimum 15 gallon size parking lot trees based on 1 tree per 3,000 square feet (9,296 square feet) of parking area and accessways. Exhibit No. 8 (sign plans) proposes three wall signs, one directional sign and a menu board as follows: Page 4 Address = Use Square tootage Ratio Spates . Required Spaces Provided 5624 -A Cleaners 1,294 5.5/1000 7.1 (existing building to be demolished requires 64 spaces) 355 (83 %) 5624 -B Donuts 1,000 16/1000 16 5624 -C Restaurant 1,250 8/1000 10 5626 Retail 2,730 5.5/1000 15 5630 Retail 5,200 5.5/1000 28.6 5632 -A Retail 1,300 5.5/1000 7.2 5634 Restaurant 3,960 8/1000 31.7 5634 -D -F Restaurant 1,750 8/1000 14 5636 -A -B Retail 1,744 5.5/1000 9.6 5636 -C Retail 1,260 5.5/1000 6.9 5636 -D Retail 760 5.5/1000 4.2 5638 Restaurant 5,040 8/1000 40.3 5640 Retail 7,600 5.5/1000 41.8 5642 -101 Dental 890 6/1000 5.3 5642 -102 Office 2,393 4/1000 9.6 5642 -104 Restaurant 2,393 16/1000 38.3 5642 -106 Service 880 5.5/1000 4.8 5642 -107 Retail 880 5.5/1000 4.8 5642 -108 Retail 1,343 5.5/1000 7.4 5642 -109 Service 2,100 5.5/1000 11.6 5842 -111 Medical 1,343 6/1000 8.1 5642 -112 Service 430 5.5/1000 2.4 5642 -113 Retail 460 5.5/1000 2.5 5642 -201 Office 890 4/1000 3.6 5642 -202 Office 1,343 4/1000 5.4 5642 -203 Office 1,050 4/1000 4.2 5642 -204 Office 751 4/1000 3 5642 -205 Office 1,343 4/1000 5.4 5642 -206 Office 880 4/1000 3.5 5642 -207 Office 1,343 4/1000 5.4 5642 -208 Office 880 4/1000 3.5 5642 -209 Office 1,050 4/1000 4.2 5642 -210 Office 1,349 4/100 5.4 5642 -211 Office 1,343 4/1000 5.4 5642 -212 Office 890 4/1000 3.6 5646 Restaurant 2,912 16/1000 46.6 Total 426 Staff Report to the Planning Commission December 22, 1997 Item No. 2 (23) Vehicular access is provided to the property and surrounding commercial center via a common driveway from La Palma Avenue. Petitioner proposes 155 parking spaces for the site and commercial center (1§ spaces on -site 342 spaces in the center) and Code requires 4a parking spaces based on the following: Page 5 (24) The petitioner has indicated in the attached letter of operation that the restaurant operates with approximately 12 -15 employees per shift with the following hours of operation: Sunday - Thursday: 10:30 a.m. - 1:00 a.m. Friday - Saturday: 10:30 a.m. - 1:30 a.m. (25) The existing shopping center identification monument sign on this property may be relocated 130 feet to the west, as approved by the Commission under Variance No. 3863. (26) The petitioner has submitted the attached letter detailing the drive- through service and the anticipated timing of the construction on this property. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (27) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact, and therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Commission that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed 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 no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: Staff Report to the Planning Commission December 22, 1997 Item No. 2 (28) The proposed project has been reviewed by affected City departments to determine whether it conforms with the City's Growth Management Element adopted by the City Council on March 17, 1992. Based on City staff review of the proposed project, it has been determined that this project does not fit within the scope necessary to require a Growth Management Element analysis, therefore, no analysis has been performed. EVALUATION: (29) This property is located within the Alpha Northeast Redevelopment Area. The Community Development Department has reviewed this proposal and has concurred with the Planning Department staff recommendation. (30) Waiver (a) pertains to permitted freestanding signs. At the request of staff, the petitioner has deleted this request and has proposed an additional wall sign on the west elevation in its place. (31) Waiver (b) pertains to permitted wall signs. Code permits one wall sign per main entrance with a maximum area not to exceed 10% of the building elevation. Petitioner has proposed three wall signs for the property as identified in paragraph (22) of this report. The proposed wall signs do not exceed 10% of each building elevation. The petitioner has indicated in the attached Justification of Waiver form, that the second wall sign on the east elevation is necessary because the building is setback 62 feet from the current property line, and the adjacent service station to the east prohibits good visibility from both Imperial Highway and La Palma Avenue. In addition, other properties in the vicinity have more than one building sign to provide quick identification to passing vehicles. The third wall sign on the west elevation was suggested by staff to replace the proposed monument sign. Page 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission December 22, 1997 Item No. 2 (32) Waiver (c) pertains to minimum number of parking spaces. Based on the proposed restaurant, and uses in the commercial center as outlined in paragraph (23) above, Code requires 4 parking spaces. Plans indicate that 355 spaces (83 %) are provided on the site and in the commercial center. (33) The petitioner has submitted a revised parking study prepared by WPA Traffic Engineering, Inc. for the proposed fast food restaurant. The revised parking study takes into account the four fewer parkins spaces Provided as a result of the drive - through lane modifications The City Traffic and Transportation Manager has reviewed this study and has determined that the parking supply would be adequate for the existing and proposed uses. The study identifies the following findings to substantiate the requested waiver. (34) (a) The off- street parking supply of 355 parking spaces exceeds the expected demand of 193 parking spaces, providing a surplus of AZ parking spaces. These findings are based on field counts of the existing operations and the consideration of projects proposed to occupy the site. (b) The field studies of the shopping center operations and the consideration of the vacant suites, as well as the proposed project, showed that the parking demand can be accommodated on the project site. (c) The orientation of the project site, in combination with the on -site parking layout and supply, would serve to contain the project related parking on -site. Barriers and separate access would serve to mitigate the potential for parking impacts on adjacent private property. No significant impacts on adjacent private property are expected. (d) The parking variance is not expected to create any parking shortages, which could cause inadequate traffic operations. Increased on -site traffic congestion is not anticipated as a result of the variance. It is assumed that related noise or air pollution would not be significantly increased. (e) The variance is not expected to increase traffic congestion or impede ingress/egress to adjacent properties as all parking related to the project can be adequately accommodated on -site. Waiver (d) pertains to minimum drive- through lane requirements. Code requires a minimum of 100 feet from the ordering device to the service window. Plans indicate 51 feet from the ordering device to the first service window and 100 feet to the second service window. The petitioner has indicated in the attached Justification of Waiver form that the size of the property would prohibit the construction of a drive - through restaurant without this waiver. In addition, the distance from the ordering device to the pick -up window is 100 feet and the petitioner indicates that the delay usually occurs at the pick -up window, where the customer is waiting for the food and not at the cash window, where only the exchange of money is occurring. Page 7 FINDINGS: Staff Report to the Planning Commission December 22, 1997 Item No. 2 (35) Waiver (e) pertains to required improvement of setbacks. Code requires a 50 -foot structural setback from the ultimate right -of -way. This setback must be either fully landscaped or the landscaped area may be reduced to 20 feet with the remainder used for parkins or accessways. Plans indicate a 25-40 -foot landscaped setback with the remainder 11 -15 feet used for the drive - throuah lane and 5 -14 feet for the entry. The petitioner indicates in the attached Justification of Waiver that the visual impact of a drive- through lane will be less than that of a parking lot because vehicles only pass through occasionally, and also because it will be screened by both a 3 -foot high berm and a 3 -foot high hedge. The petitioner further states that proper circulation of a drive - through can not be obtained without the waiver, and that the small size of this property and layout of the Village Center and the adjacent service station are beyond the owner's control. (36) The intersection of La Palma Avenue and Imperial Highway is designated as a Critical Intersection in the Circulation Element. The intersection will be widened as part of the Imperial Smart Street program. Construction is currently estimated to begin January 1999. (37) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the Zoning Code, a modification may be granted for the purpose of assuring that no property, because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose of any code waiver is to prevent discrimination and none shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other similar properties. Therefore, before any code waiver is granted by the Commission, it shall be shown: (a) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity; and (b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. (38) Section 18.06.080 of the parking ordinance sets forth the following findings which are required to be made before the parking waivers are approved by the Commission: (a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed if any, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use; and (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use and (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with Section 18.06.010.020 of this Code); and Page 8 (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use; and (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use Staff Report to the Planning Commission December 22, 1997 Item No. 2 Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed upon the granting of any waiver pursuant to this Section by the Commission, the granting of any such waiver shall be deemed contingent upon operation of such use in conformance with the assumptions relating to the operation and intensity of the 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 as contained in the parking demand study shall be deemed a violation of the express conditions imposed upon said termination or modification pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.03.091 and 18.03.092 of this Code. (39) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or that said use is not listed therein as being a permitted use; (b) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare; (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. RECOMMENDATION: (40) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received at the public hearing, that Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion approve a CEQA Negative Declaration. (b) By motion deny waiver (a) pertaining to permitted freestanding signs because the request has been deleted. (c) By motion, approve waiver (b) pertaining to permitted wall signs because there are other identically zoned properties in the same vicinity with more than one wall sign. The property is surrounded by other retail uses in the vicinity that enjoy the privilege of more than one wall sign. Further, the size and shape of the property, coupled with Page 9 Staff Report to the Planning Commission December 22, 1997 Item No. 2 the location of the existing service station building to the east, restrict visibility of the proposed structure. (d) By motion approve waiver (c) pertaining to minimum number of parking spaces based on the findings from the approved parking study as identified in paragraph nos. (33) and (38) of this report. (e) By motion, approve waiver (d) pertaining to minimum drive - through lane requirements based on the recommendation of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and because the intent of the Code will be satisfied in that the distance from the ordering device to the second service window (pick -up) complies with Code. The size and shape of the property prevent the strict application of the Code as applied to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity. (f) By motion, approve waiver (e) pertaining to required improvement of setbacks because the depth of the property is constrained by the surrounding commercial center to the south and strict compliance with the Code would prohibit a drive- through restaurant use on this site. The intent of the Code will be achieved by the required landscape berming and proposed shrubs to partially screen the drive- through lane. The submitted plans indicate 5 to 20 feet of landscaping in excess of Code requirements adjacent to La Palma Avenue. Special circumstances apply in that Code would allow a paved surface for parking which is more intense (aesthetically) than the proposed drive- through lane which will be screened by landscaping. (g) By resolution approve Conditional Use Permit No. 3985 based on the following: (i) That a drive - through restaurant is an authorized use in the CL(SC) Zone, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (ii) That the proposed drive- through restaurant, as conditioned, will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses nor be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of Anaheim. (iii) That the size of the building to be demolished is larger, and that the site is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare. (iv) That based on the approved parking study, the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden on the streets and highways. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SUBMITTED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS. ACTING AS AN INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE AND ARE RECOMMENDED FOR ADOPTION BY THE COMMISSION IN THE EVENT THAT THIS PERMIT IS APPROVED. 1. That a minimum 2 -foot wide landscape planter shall be constructed and maintained adjacent to the building where possible. Said information shall be specifically shown on landscape plans submitted for building permits. Page 10 Staff Report to the Planning Commission December 22, 1997 Item No. 2 2. That the proposed berming of the 25 -40 -foot wide landscape setback adjacent to La Palma Avenue shall begin from the ultimate right -of -way line. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 3. That a security guard shall be provided from 8 p.m. to closing, if determined to be necessary by the Anaheim Police Department, to discourage vandalism and /or loitering upon or adjacent to the subject property. 4. That lighting of signage for subject property shall be prohibited after hours of operation or between midnight and 6:30 a.m., whichever is later as specified by Zoning Code Section 18.05.091.050. 5. That signage for subject facility shall be limited to that shown on the exhibits submitted by the petitioner. Any additional signage shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. 6. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 7. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. 8. That an on -site trash truck tum- around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 610 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. Said tum- around area shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 9. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval showing conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436, 601 and 602 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 10. That a minimum 16 foot inner and 26 foot outer radius is required for the drive - through lane. Such information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted. 11. That prior to the operation of this business, a valid business license shall be obtained from the City of Anaheim, Business License Division of the Finance Department. 12. That no freestanding sign shall be permitted. 13. That any roof - mounted equipment shall be subject to Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.84.062.032 pertaining to the "SC" Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 14. That a minimum of five (5) trees shall be planted in the landscape setback adjacent to La Palma Avenue and a minimum of three (3) trees shall be planted in the parking lot area in compliance with Code requirements. All required trees shall be minimum 15- gallon size and shall be irrigated, maintained and replaced in the event any tree becomes dead or diseased. The required trees shall be specifically indicated on plans submitted for building permits. 15. That the proposed awnings shall not be used for advertising, except for the proposed palm trees. 16. That a reciprocal access and parking agreement shall be maintained between this property and the adjacent commercial center. 17. That final landscape plans shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. Page 11 Staff Report to the Planning Commission December 22, 1997 Item No. 2 18. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1, Revision No. 1, 2 through 7 and 8a, 8b, 8c, and 8d, and as conditioned herein. 19. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of two (2) years from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 8, 7, 8 , 9, 10, 13, and 17, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 20. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 11, 14 and 18, above- mentioned, shall be complied with. 21. 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 ordinance, regulation or requirement. Page 12 6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion) 6b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion) 6c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3985 (Resolution) SR1003.1K SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION_ (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 0.55 -acre property has a frontage of 112 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue, a maximum depth of 218 feet, and is located 257 feet west of the centerline of Imperial Highway (5646 East La Palma Avenue - Anaheim Hills Village). REQUEST: (2) Petitioner requests approval of a conditional use permit under the authority of Code Section Nos. 18.110.100.050.0522, 18.84.061 and 18.84.062.032 to demolish an existing 6,000 square foot building and construct a 2,912 square foot drive - through fast food restaurant (In -N -Out), with outdoor seating and roof - mounted equipment with waivers of the following: (3) (a) SECTIONS 18.05.091.010 18.05.091.011 AND 18.05.091.014 (b) SECTION 18.05.091.020 Permitted wall signs. (one sign permitted' two signs proposed.) (c) SECTIONS 18.06.050.0233 Minimum number of parking spaces. AND 18.110.100.110.1103 (426 required; 352 proposed.) (d) SECTION 18.06.070 (e) SECTION 18.84.062.014 BACKGROUND: Staff Report to the Planning Commission November 24, 1997 Item No. 6 Permitted freestanding signs. (one 26 square foot, 1 -foot high, single -faced sign permitted; one 50 square foot, 1-foot high double - facet( sign proposed.) Minimum drive- throuah lane requirements. (100 feet from ordering device to service window required; 55 feet proposed.) Required improvement of setbacks. (a-foot wide landscaped setback with 30 -foot wide automobile parking area permitted; 55 -foot wide landscaped setback with 11 -foot wide drive - through lane and 15 -foot wide outdoor seating proposed.) This property is developed with a freestanding restaurant and retail building (to be demolished), surrounded by a commercial center and has been zoned SP94 -1, Development Area 5(SC) (Northeast Area Specific Plan, Commercial Area, Scenic Corridor Overlay) since September 12, 1995. The Anaheim General Plan designates this property for General Commercial land uses. Page 1 SR1003JK (4) Surrounding land uses are as follows: Staff Report to the Planning Commission November 24, 1997 Item No. 6 North across La Palma Avenue East South and West Commercial center, Movie theater Service station Commercial center SP94 -1, DA5(SC) SP94 -1, DA5(SC) SP94 -1, DA5(SC) ....... ............................... General Plan ....... ............................... ...... ............................... ....... ............................... Designation General Commercial General Commercial General Commercial PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (5) Variance No. 4267 (waiver of maximum number of wall signs to construct a second wall sign [77 s.f.] for an existing restaurant) was approved by the Commission in 1995 (5638 East La Palma Avenue Suite F7. (6) Variance No. 4252 (waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to establish a private tutoring center) was approved by the Zoning Administrator in 1994 (5642 East La Palma Avenue). (7) Conditional Use Permit No. 3234 (to permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces) was approved by the Zoning Administrator in 1990 (5632 E. La Palma Avenue). (8) Conditional Use Permit No. 3233 (to permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption with waiver of minimum number or parking spaces) was approved by the Zoning Administrator in 1990 (5636 East La Palma Avenue). (9) Variance No. 3863 (waiver of permitted shopping center identification and permitted wall signs to construct a 75 s.f. freestanding sign and 3 wall signs) was approved with a 42 square foot freestanding sign by the Commission in 1988. (10) Conditional Use Permit No. 2417 (to permit sales of beer and wine for on- premises consumption in a proposed sandwich shop with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces [denied]) was approved, by the Commission in 1983 (5642 East La Palma Avenue #105). (11) Conditional Use Permit No. 1722 (to permit sales of beer and wine for on- premises consumption in a proposed restaurant) was approved by the Commission in 1977 (5626 East La Palma Avenue). Page 2 SRI003JK Staff Report to the Planning Commission November 24, 1997 Item No. 6 (12) Conditional Use Permit No. 1721 (to permit sales of liquor for on- premises consumption in two proposed restaurants) was approved by the Commission in 1977 (5634 and 5638 East La Palma Avenue). DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (13) Petitioner proposes to demolish an existing 6,000 square foot freestanding restaurant and retail pad building to construct a 2,912 square foot drive - through fast food restaurant, with outdoor seating and roof - mounted equipment. (14) Exhibit No. 1 (site plan) indicates that the restaurant will be constructed on thls property with a portion of the drive- through lane extending across the south property line into the adjacent commercial center. The building is approximately centered on the site with the outdoor seating to the north and west of the building. Decorative type bollards are proposed along the perimeter of the outdoor seating area. (15) In addition, a 11 -foot wide drive- through lane is proposed, with the entrance south of the building and wrapping around the building on the east and exiting along the north side. Approximately 79 feet is proposed from the entrance of the drive- through to the ordering device and 55 feet is proposed from the ordering device to the first window (cash window), and approximately 100 feet to the second window (pick -up window). Code requires 60 feet from the entrance of the drive- through to the ordering device and 100 feet from the ordering device to the service window. A new trash enclosure is proposed along the south side of the building with landscape areas on the east and west side of the enclosure. (16) Exhibit No. 1 further indicates that the proposed building is setback 62 feet from the current property line and 50 feet from the ultimate right -of -way. Code Section 18.04.080 requires setbacks to be measured from the ultimate right -of -way line as shown on the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan. The General Plan requires feet from centerline to property line on La Palma Avenue (53 feet exists). The proposed setbacks from the ultimate right -of -way lines are as follows: (17) Direction North along La Palma Avenue East South West Required Structural Setback 50 ft. (50 ft. proposed) none none none Required Setback Improvements 20 ft. landscaped 30 ft. parking or accessways none none none Proposed Setback Improvements 25 ft. landscaped 11 ft: drive-through lane 14-15-ft. outdoor seating 5 ft. landscaped 0 -2 ft. landscaped none Exhibit No. 2 (floor plan) proposes 1,381 square feet of dining area with 70 seats for patrons, 1,337 square feet of kitchen and storage facilities, and approximately 194 square feet of restrooms (men's and women's restroom). The restaurant is accessed via two doors, one on the north side and one on the west side of the building. A delivery door is located on the south side of the building and two drive- through service windows are proposed on the east side of the building. Page 3 Sign Type Dimensions Proposed Size A menu board* 5.2 ft. high, 4.25 ft. wide 14 s.f. B directional sign* 3 ft. high, 2 ft. wide 3 s.f. C wall (north elevation)** 3.9 ft. high, 10.6 ft. wide 50 s.f. D wall (east elevation) ** 3.9 ft. high, 10.6 ft. wide 50 s.f. E monument 8 � 6'ft. high, ft. wide 50 s.f. SR10031K * Complies with code requirement ** Code allows one wall sign Staff Report to the Planning Commission November 24, 1997 Item No. 6 (18) Exhibit Nos. 3 and 4 (elevations) indicate a 18- to 21.5 -foot high stucco finish building with red awnings (with white palm trees) and a mission -style tile roof. Aluminum frame windows and doors are proposed with red neon accents just below the roof, and red tile banding approximately 2.5 feet above the finished floor. (19) Exhibit Nos. 5 and 6 (roof plans) show a maximum height of 4.5 feet for the proposed roof - mounted equipment. A 5 -foot high parapet wall is proposed around the entire building and the roof - mounted equipment will be painted to match the building. Address numbers (1.5- foot wide by 4 -foot high) are also proposed on the roof of the building for police helicopter identification. (20) Exhibit Nos. 1 and 7 (landscape plans) indicate a landscaped setback of 37 feet from the current property line, and 25 feet from the ultimate right -of -way line. A 3 -foot high, bermed setback is proposed along La Palma Avenue and a 3 -foot high hedge is proposed adjacent to the east side of the drive- through lane for screening purposes. The hedge continues along the east property line to the ordering device. Plans indicate 3 trees are proposed in the front setback, Code requires 5, minimum 15- gallon size trees. In addition, 2 trees are proposed in the parking areas and Code requires 3, minimum 15 gallon size parking lot trees based on 9,296 square feet of parking area and accessways. (21) Exhibit No. 8 (sign plans) proposes two wall signs, one monument sign, one directional sign and a menu board as follows: Page 4 Address " Use Square footage Ratio Spaces Required Spaces Provided 5624 -A Cleaners 1,294 5.5/1000 7.1 359 5624 -B Donuts 1,000 16/1000 16 5624 -C Restaurant 1,250 8/1000 10 5626 Retail 2,730 5.5/1000 15 5630 Retail 5,200 5.5/1000 28.6 5632 -A Retail 1,300 5.5/1000 7.2 5634 Restaurant 3,960 8/1000 31.7 5634 -D-F Restaurant 1,750 8/1000 14 5636 -A -B Retail 1,744 5.5/1000 9.6 5636 -C Retail 1,260 5.5/1000 6.9 5636 -D Retail 760 5.5/1000 4.2 5638 Restaurant 5,040 8/1000 40.3 5640 Retail 7,600 5.5/1000 41.8 5642 -101 Dental 890 6/1000 5.3 5642 -102 Office 2,393 4/1000 9.6 5642 -104 Restaurant 2,393 16/1000 38.3 5642 -106 Service 880 5.5/1000 4.8 5642 -107 Retail 880 5.5/1000 4.8 5642 -108 Retail 1,343 5.5/1000 7.4 5642 -109 Service 2,100 5.5/1000 11.6 5642 -111 Medical 1,343 6/1000 8.1 5642 -112 Service 430 5.5/1000 2.4 5642 -113 Retail 460 5.5/1000 2.5 5642 -201 Office 890 4/1000 3.6 5642 -202 Office 1,343 4/1000 5.4 5642 -203 Office 1,050 4/1000 4.2 5642 -204 Office 751 4/1000 3 5642 -205 Office 1,343 4/1000 5.4 5642 -206 Office 880 4/1000 3.5 5642 -207 Office 1,343 4/1000 5.4 5642 -208 Office 880 4/1000 3.5 5642 -209 Office 1,050 4/1000 4.2 5642 -210 Office 1,349 4/100 5.4 5642 -211 Office 1,343 4/1000 5.4 5642 -212 Office 890 4/1000 3.6 5646 Restaurant 2,912 16/1000 46.6 Total 426 SR10031K Staff Report to the Planning Commission November24, 1997 Item No. 6 (22) Vehicular access is provided to the property and surrounding commercial center via a common driveway from La Palma Avenue. Petitioner proposes 359 parking spaces for the site and commercial center L spaces on -site 342 spaces in the center) and Code requires qgt; parking spaces based on the following: Page 5 SR1003JK. (23) The petitioner has indicated in the attached letter of operation that the restaurant operates with approximately 12 -15 employees per shift with the following hours of operation: Sunday - Thursday: 10:30 a.m. - 1:00 a.m. Friday - Saturday: 10:30 a.m. - 1:30 a.m. (24) The existing shopping center identification monument sign on this property will be relocated 130 feet to the west, subject to Commission review and approval of Variance No. 3863. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (25) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact, and therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Commission that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed 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 no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: Staff Report to the Planning Commission November 24, 1997 Item No. 6 (26) The proposed project has been reviewed by affected City departments to determine whether it conforms with the City's Growth Management Element adopted by the City Council on March 17, 1992. Based on City staff review of the proposed project, it has been determined that this project does not fit within the scope necessary to require a Growth Management Element analysis, therefore, no analysis has been performed. EVALUATION: (27) This property is located within the Alpha Northeast Redevelopment Area. The Community Development Department has reviewed this proposal and has concurred with the Planning Department staff recommendation. (28) Waiver (a) pertains to permitted freestanding signs. Code permits one, 26 square foot, single -faced sign as a part of a 36 -inch high decorative wall. Plans indicate one, 50 square foot$jfoot high, double -sided monument sign in the front setback adjacent to La Palma Avenue. The petitioner has indicated in the attached Justification of Waiver that other properties in the vicinity, including the existing monument sign for the Anaheim Hills Village center is double- faced. In addition, the petitioner feels that a double -faced sign is necessary for identification to both the east -bound and west -bound traffic on La Palma Avenue. Staff recommends replacing the proposed monument sign with a wall sign on the west elevation to serve the east bound traffic on La Palma Avenue. Page 6 SRloa3JK (a) Staff Report to the Planning Commission November24, 1997 Item No. 6 (29) Waiver (b) pertains to permitted wall signs. Code permits one wall sign per main entrance with a maximum area not to exceed 10% of the building elevation. Petitioner has proposed two wall signs for the property as identified in paragraph 21 of this report. The proposed wall signs do not exceed 10% of each building elevation. The petitioner has indicated in the attached Justification of Waiver form, that the second wall sign on the east elevation is necessary because the building is setback 62 feet from the current property line, and the adjacent service station to the east prohibits good visibility from both Imperial Highway and La Palma Avenue. In addition, other properties in the vicinity have more than one building sign to provide quick identification to passing vehicles. (30) Waiver (c) pertains to minimum number of parking spaces. Based on the proposed restaurant, and uses in the commercial center as outlined in paragraph (22) above, Code requires 426 parking spaces. Plans indicate that 359 spaces are provided on the site and in the commercial center. (31) The petitioner has submitted a parking study prepared by WPA Traffic Engineering, Inc. for the proposed fast food restaurant. The City Traffic and Transportation Manager has reviewed this study and has determined that the parking supply would be adequate for the existing and proposed uses. The study identifies the following findings to substantiate the requested waiver. The off - street parking supply of 359 parking spaces exceeds the expected demand of 193 parking spaces, providing a surplus of 166 parking spaces. These findings are based on field counts of the existing operations and the consideration of projects proposed to occupy the site. (b) The field studies of the shopping center operations and the consideration of the vacant suites, as well as the proposed project, showed that the parking demand can be accommodated on the project site. (c) The orientation of the project site, in combination with the on - site parking layout and supply, would serve to contain the project related parking on -site. Barriers and separate access would serve to mitigate the potential for parking impacts on adjacent private property. (d) The parking variance is not expected to create any parking shortages, which could cause inadequate traffic operations. Increased on -site traffic congestion is not anticipated as a result of the variance. It is assumed that related noise or air pollution would not be significantly increased. (e) The variance is not expected to increase traffic congestion or impede ingress/egress to adjacent properties as all parking related to the project can be adequately accommodated on -site. Page 7 SR1003JK (32) Waiver (d) pertains to minimum drive - through lane requirements. Code requires a minimum of x.00 feet from the ordering device to the service window. Plans indicate 55 feet from the ordering device to the first service window and QO feet to the second service window. The petitioner has indicated in the attached Justification of Waiver form that the size of the property would prohibit the construction of a drive - through restaurant without thls waiver. In addition, the distance from the ordering device to the pick -up window is 100 feet and the petitioner indicates that the delay usually occurs at the pick -up window, where the customer is waiting for the food and not at the cash window, where only the exchange of money is occurring. (33) Waiver (e) pertains to required improvement of setbacks. Code requires a 50 -foot structural setback from the ultimate right -of -way. This setback must be either fully landscaped or the landscaped area may be reduced to 20 feet with the remainder used for parking or accessways. Plans indicate a 25 -foot landscaped setback with the remainder 11 feet used for the drive- through lane and 14 feet for outdoor seating. The petitioner indicates in the attached Justification of Waiver that the visual impact of a drive- through lane will be less than that of a parking lot because vehicles only pass through occasionally, and also because it will be screened by both a 3 -foot high berm and a 3 -foot high hedge. The petitioner further states that proper circulation of a drive- through can not be obtained without the waiver, and that the small size of this property and layout of the Village center and surrounding service station are beyond the owner's control. (34) The intersection of La Palma Avenue and Imperial Highway is designated as a Critical Intersection in the Circulation Element. The intersection will be widened as part of the Imperial Smart Street program. Construction is currently estimated to begin January 1999. FINDINGS: (35) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the Zoning Code, a modification may be granted for the purpose of assuring that no property, because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose of any code waiver is to prevent discrimination and none shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other similar properties. Therefore, before any code waiver is granted by the Commission, it shall be shown: (a) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity; and (b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. (38) Section 18.06.080 of the parking ordinance sets forth the following findings which are required to be made before the parking waivers are approved by the Commission: (a) Staff Report to the Planning Commission November24, 1997 Item No. 6 That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use and Page 8 SR1003JK Staff Report to the Planning Commission November 24, 1997 Item No. 6 (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use; and (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with Section 18.08.010.020 of this Code); and (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use; and (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed upon the granting of any waiver pursuant to this Section by the Commission, the granting of any such waiver shall be deemed contingent upon operation of such use in conformance with the assumptions relating to the operation and intensity of the 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 as contained in the parking demand study shall be deemed a violation of the express conditions imposed upon said termination or modification pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.03.091 and 18.03.092 of this Code. (37) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning. Code, or that said use is not listed therein as being a permitted use; (b) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare; (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Page 9 SR10037K RECOMMENDATION: Staff Report to the Planning Commission November 24, 1997 Item No. 6 (38) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received at the public hearing, that Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion approve a CEQA Negative Declaration. (b) By motion deny waiver (a) pertaining to permitted freestanding signs because waivers for a sign of this size have not been approved for surrounding properties other than for commercial centers with multiple tenants, with the same zoning. In addition, there are no special circumstances applicable to this property, that can be identified, to substantiate a freestanding sign as proposed. (c) By motion, approve waiver (b) pertaining to permitted wall signs because there are other identically zoned properties in the same vicinity with more than one wall sign. The property is surrounded by other retail uses in the vicinity that enjoy the privilege of more than one wall sign. Further, the size and shape of the property, coupled with the location of the existing service station building to the east, restrict visibility of the proposed structure. (d) By motion approve waiver (c) pertaining to minimum number of parking spaces based on the findings from the approved parking study as identified in paragraph nos. (31) and (36) of this report. (e) By motion approve waiver (d) pertaining to minimum drive- through lane requirements based on the recommendation of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and because the intent of the Code will be satisfied in that the distance from the ordering device to the second service window (pick -up) complies with Code. The size and shape of the property prevent the strict application of the Code as applied to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity. (f) By motion approve waiver (e) pertaining to required improvement of setbacks because the depth of the property is constrained by the surrounding commercial center to the south and strict compliance with the Code would prohibit a drive- through restaurant use on this site. The intent of the Code will be achieved by the required landscape berming and proposed shrubs to partially screen the outdoor seating and drive - through lane. The submitted plans indicate 5 more feet of landscaping than Code requires adjacent to La Palma Avenue. Special circumstances apply in that Code would allow a paved surface for parking which is more intense (aesthetically) than the proposed drive- through lane which will be screened by landscaping. (g) By resolution approve Conditional Use Permit No. 3985 based on the following: (i) That a drive - through restaurant is an authorized use in the CL(SC) Zone, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (ii) That the proposed drive - through restaurant, as conditioned, will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses nor be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of Anaheim. Page 10 Staff Report to the Planning Commission November 24, 1997 Item No. 6 (iv) That based on the approved parking study, the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden on the streets and highways. 1. That a 3 -foot wide landscape planter be constructed and maintained adjacent to the building where outdoor seating is proposed. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 2. That the proposed berming of the 25 -foot wide landscape setback adjacent to La Palma Avenue shall begin from the ultimate right - of - way line. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 3. That a security guard shall be provided from 8 p.m. to closing, if determined to be necessary by the Anaheim Police Department, to discourage vandalism and /or loitering upon or adjacent to the subject property. 4. That the proposed 3 -foot high shrub adjacent to the car wash portion of the service station at the west property line be increased to 4 -foot high to limit overspray of water onto the drive- through lane. This information shall be provided on plans submitted for building permits. 5. That lighting of signage for subject property shall be prohibited after hours of operation or between midnight and 6:30 a.m., whichever is later as specified by Zoning Code Section 18.05.091.050. 6. That signage for subject facility shall be limited to that shown on the exhibits submitted by the petitioner, except the proposed monument sign may be replaced with a 50 square foot wall sign similar to Sign C identified in Exhibit No. 8c. Any additional signage shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. 7. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 8. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. (iii) That the size of the building to be demolished is larger, and that the site is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SUBMITTED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS. ACTING AS AN INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE AND ARE RECOMMENDED FOR ADOPTION BY THE COMMISSION IN THE EVENT THAT THIS PERMIT IS APPROVED. SR1003JIC Page 11 Staff Report to the Planning Commission November 24, 1997 Item No. 6 9. That an on -site trash truck tum -around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 610 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. Said tum -around area shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 10. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval showing conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436, 601 and 602 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 11. That a minimum 16 foot inner and 26 foot outer radius is required for the drive- through lane. Such information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted. 12. That prior to the operation of this business, a valid business license shall be obtained from the City of Anaheim, Business License Division of the Finance Department. 13. That no freestanding sign shall be permitted 14. That any roof - mounted equipment shall be subject to Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.84.062.032 pertaining to the "SC" Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 15. That a minimum of five (5) trees shall be planted in the landscape setback adjacent to La Palma Avenue and a minimum of three (3) trees shall be planted in the parking lot area in compliance with Code requirements. All required trees shall be minimum 15- gallon size and shall be irrigated, maintained and replaced in the event any tree becomes dead or diseased. The required trees shall be specifically indicated on plans submitted for building permits. 16. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 7 and 8a, 8b, 8c, and 8d, and as conditioned herein. 17. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 4, 7, 8 , 9, 10, 11 and 14, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 18. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 12 and 17, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 19. 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 ordinance, regulation or requirement. SR1003.1K Page 12 ITEM NO. 1 -A RCL 70 -71 -27 STADIUM PLAZA BUSINESS PARK 9 -00-15 Int. to SE) i6 -67 -14 i9 -60-23 302 -04578 301 -04446 01 -04441 '1424 '1301 3791 779S / / N T EL F O -L RCL 99 -00 -15 (Res of Int. to SE) RCL 83 -84-19 RCL 70 -71 -28 RCL 70 -71 -27 VAR 3390 VAR 2152 METROPLEX OFFICE COMPLEX I C -G (PiM U) RCL 99 -00 -15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 87 -88 -26 RCL 83 -84-24 RCL 59 -60 -23 CUP 2005 -04966 CUP 3369 CUP 3165 CUP 2651 VAR 4206 (RCL 70- 71 -34) (CUP 2550) (CUP 2534) (CUP 1482) (VAR 2807 S) PARKING N$ o T -CUP 2003 -04774 REST. O -L (PTMU) RCL 99 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 90 -91 -11 RCL 83 -84 -24 RCL 59 -60-23 CUP 3369 CUP 3326 CUP 3165 CUP 2651 VAR 3608 OFF. BLDG. RCL RCL ) 57 -93 �/( 3j gFFRq /(kt, CUP 2400 At /O CUP 750 RCL 66 -67 -14 ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE (PTMU) (PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE) OVERLAY ZONE. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04966 Requested By: MIKE SANFORD REQUEST TO PERMIT A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER. 2430 East Katella Avenue - Stadium Towers Plaza 0 a z G7 M - n .17 M a Z3 13 v, D 1792 © Subject Property Date: May 2, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Q.S. No. 117 P G`4'yh�0'gh � J� P O -L ( PTMU) RCL 99 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 90 -91 -11 RCL 82 -83 -33 RCL 59 -60-23 CUP 3369 CUP 2433 CUP 2257 STADIUM TOWER PLAZA I C -G (PiM U) RCL 99 -00 -15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 87 -88 -26 RCL 83 -84-24 RCL 59 -60 -23 CUP 2005 -04966 CUP 3369 CUP 3165 CUP 2651 VAR 4206 (RCL 70- 71 -34) (CUP 2550) (CUP 2534) (CUP 1482) (VAR 2807 S) PARKING N$ o T -CUP 2003 -04774 REST. O -L (PTMU) RCL 99 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 90 -91 -11 RCL 83 -84 -24 RCL 59 -60-23 CUP 3369 CUP 3326 CUP 3165 CUP 2651 VAR 3608 OFF. BLDG. RCL RCL ) 57 -93 �/( 3j gFFRq /(kt, CUP 2400 At /O CUP 750 RCL 66 -67 -14 ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE (PTMU) (PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE) OVERLAY ZONE. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04966 Requested By: MIKE SANFORD REQUEST TO PERMIT A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER. 2430 East Katella Avenue - Stadium Towers Plaza 0 a z G7 M - n .17 M a Z3 13 v, D 1792 © Subject Property Date: May 2, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Q.S. No. 117 I z rn m A m m a A �n I I , Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04966 Requested By: MIKE SANFORD REQUEST TO PERMIT A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER. 2430 East Katella Avenue - Stadium Towers Plaza Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Subject Property Date: May 2, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Q.S. No. 117 1792 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 7 7a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion) 7b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04966 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 2.4 -acre property has a frontage of 600 feet on the south side of Katella Avenue, a maximum depth of 480 feet and is located 37 feet east of the centerline of Howell Avenue (2430 East Katella Avenue - Stadium Towers Plaza). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit under authority of Code Section 18.08.030.040.0402 to construct a commercial retail center. BACKGROUND: (3) This property is located in the Platinum Triangle in the Mixed Use Overlay Zone, is currently developed with a 12- story?? office building and a freestanding restaurant and is zoned C -G (General Commercial). The Land Use Element Map of the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Mixed Use land uses. Surrounding properties to the east, west and south are also designated for Mixed Use land uses, and to the north (across Katella Avenue) for Office High land uses. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) The following zoning actions pertain to this property: (a) Conditional Use Permit No. 2257 (to permit a commercial office building) was approved by the Planning Commission on September 9, 1981. (b) Conditional Use Permit No. 2433 (to permit a 4 -story office building with waiver of minimum structural setback) was approved by the Planning Commission on April 18, 1983. (c) Conditional Use Permit No. 2651 (to permit an 11 -story hotel with on -sale of alcoholic beverages and accessory uses and a 12 and 15 -story high office complex) was approved by the Planning Commission on January 7, 1985. (d) Conditional Use Permit No. 3165 (to permit a commercial retail center and two (2) freestanding restaurants with the on -sale of alcoholic beverages and waiver of required site screening) was approved by the Planning Commission on June 5, 1989. (e) Conditional Use Permit No. 3369 (to permit two (2) freestanding monument signs) was approved by the Planning Commission on December 3, 1990. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (5) The applicant proposes to construct an eight (8) unit, 14,185 square foot commercial retail center. The proposed tenants have not yet been determined. (6) The site plan (Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2) indicate the following proposed setbacks: sr- CUP2005- 04966av Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 7 (7) Access to the site would be provided by an existing driveway from Katella Avenue. The site plan also indicates 1 097 total parking spaces available for this commercial retail center and office building. Code requires 892 spaces based on the following chart. The entitlement for a previously approved second office building has expired and therefore the parking that would have been required for that second office building has not been included in the total required number of parking spaces: Code Code Direction Required /Proposed Required /Proposed PARKING RATIO Building Setback Landscape Setback North, adjacent to (per 1,000 sq. ft.) Office building 20 feet/20 feet 20 feet/20 feet Katella Avenue Retail 14,185 South 0 feet/170 feet 0 feet/0 feet West T 0 feet/11feet 0 feet/11feet (7) Access to the site would be provided by an existing driveway from Katella Avenue. The site plan also indicates 1 097 total parking spaces available for this commercial retail center and office building. Code requires 892 spaces based on the following chart. The entitlement for a previously approved second office building has expired and therefore the parking that would have been required for that second office building has not been included in the total required number of parking spaces: (8) The floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 3 and 4) indicate that the proposed retail buildings would consist of eight (8) tenant spaces ranging in size from 1,500 to 4,500 square feet. The plan indicates main entrances to all suites would face the interior of the property. (9) The elevation plans (Exhibit Nos. 5 through 8) indicate a contemporary building design incorporating features such as a metal awning, varied building walls, sandstone, textured plaster veneer with horizontal patterning, and enhanced lighting. The elevations facing Katella Avenue and the entrance to the office complex would have a sandstone screen wall and a landscape berm designed to shield the service doors located at the back of each tenant space. The colors and material proposed for the retail center buildings would be compatible to the existing office tower. Page 2 CODE - REQUIRED PARKING USE SQUARE FEET PARKING RATIO REQUIRED (per 1,000 sq. ft.) Office building 253,012 3 spaces 759 Retail 14,185 5.5 spaces 78 Restaurant 6,828 8 spaces 54.6 TOTAL 892 (8) The floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 3 and 4) indicate that the proposed retail buildings would consist of eight (8) tenant spaces ranging in size from 1,500 to 4,500 square feet. The plan indicates main entrances to all suites would face the interior of the property. (9) The elevation plans (Exhibit Nos. 5 through 8) indicate a contemporary building design incorporating features such as a metal awning, varied building walls, sandstone, textured plaster veneer with horizontal patterning, and enhanced lighting. The elevations facing Katella Avenue and the entrance to the office complex would have a sandstone screen wall and a landscape berm designed to shield the service doors located at the back of each tenant space. The colors and material proposed for the retail center buildings would be compatible to the existing office tower. Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 7 rj �. IM 1 LON&6 6�3 ,6 Photograph of existing office building (10) The elevation drawings and signage plans (Exhibit Nos. 5 through 8 and 10) show the general location and size of the proposed wall signs for the commercial center. The applicant has indicated that specific tenants have not yet been identified. The plans indicate that wall signs are proposed on all elevations. Code allows walls signs for advertising, provided that the total area of any such sign shall not exceed (10 %) of the area of the face of the building to which such sign is attached the maximum number of signs is based on building frontage of the unit. The Code further provides that the letter height shall not exceed 24- inches for a 1 to 3 story building. Plans also indicate an 8 -foot high, 12 -foot, wide monument sign located along the Katella Avenue frontage. As a recommended condition of approval, the applicant will be required to submit a final detailed sign program for staff review once the specific sign design and the tenants have been determined for the center. (11) The landscape plan (Exhibit No. 9) indicates a 20 -foot wide landscape planter along Katella Avenue and an 11 -foot wide landscape planter along the driveway entering the site. The landscaping along Katella Avenue and the entrance drive is designed to provide a grade differential of approximately 7 feet from the finished floor of the retail building in order to enhance the rear elevation of the shopping center building and to screen the rear access doors. The plan also indicates landscaped fingers within the parking area planted with trees, shrubs and groundcover. Code requires one tree for every 20 lineal feet of street frontage (29 trees on Katella Avenue) and fast growing shrubbery of clinging vines planted on 3 -foot centers for the trash enclosure. Code further requires that at least one (1) tree per 3,000 square feet of parking area and/or vehicular accessways be distributed throughout the Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 7 parking area with an average of forty -eight (48) square feet of planter area provided per required tree, with a minimum planter dimension of five (5) feet. The landscape plans comply with Code. (12) An outdoor seating area is shown on the landscape plan between the proposed retail buildings. This outdoor area is designed with enhanced paving, potted plants, tables and chairs and is shielded from the street with a sandstone block wall. The plan also displays enhanced paving and light fixtures designed to guide the pedestrian between the office building and the proposed retail center. (13) The hours of operation, employee information and tenant mix are unknown for this project at this time. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (14) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact and, therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Commission that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed 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 no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment- EVALUATION (15) Commercial retail centers (two or more tenant spaces) are permitted in the C -G zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (16) Staff has been working with the applicant on a conceptual pedestrian linkage from Katella Avenue, through the subject property and connecting to the existing Metro Link station to the south across the railroad track. This connection is an important element to promote transit - oriented development within the Platinum Triangle. Staff has included a recommended condition of approval in the attached resolution requiring the developer to obtain approval of a pedestrian linkage plan from the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and install the necessary improvements. (17) Goal 6.1 of the Community Design Element of the General Plan reads as follows: `Focus activity centers at the intersections of selected major corridors to provide convenient and attractive concentration of retail and office uses.' Several policies are indicated in order to implement this goal. In summary, the design policies include the following: • Locate buildings close to the street with shielded parking • Encourage pedestrian -scale features such as public art and awnings • Incorporate architectural interest through varied rooflines, colors, materials and lighting • Link newly developed retail centers to residential and /or office uses through clear safe pedestrian and bicycle connections • Provide layered landscaping • Provide people gathering spaces such as outdoor eating areas, water features, courtyards, etc. Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission May 2, 2005 Item No. 7 • Use parking structures located away from the street • Encourage internal access • Screen utilities (18) Several of the design features indicated in the Design Element have been incorporated into the proposed project. Examples include an outdoor seating area, awnings, varied building facades and rooflines, quality materials, pedestrian linkages to the office building and Metro Link station, layered landscaping along Katella Avenue, screened utility equipment and the utilization of a parking structure located away from the street. (19) Staff is supportive of this request to construct an 8 -unit commercial retail center. Although the applicant is not implementing the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay, careful consideration has been made to the design and functionality of the proposed retail center. The architect has worked closely with staff to provide a quality design that is consistent with the Community Design Element of the General Plan. Based upon the project's compliance with recommended conditions and the quality project design, staff recommends approval of the project- FINDINGS (20) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the use as modified is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); (b) That the use as modified will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the modified use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the modified use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim- RECOMMENDATION (21) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission approve this request by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. Page 5 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 -' A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04966 BE GRANTED (2430 EAST KATELLAAVENUE) WHEREAS, the Anaheim 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, described as: PARCEL A: PARCELS 1, 2,3 AND 4 OF PARCEL MAP 90 -232, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN DEED BOOK 278, PAGES 7, 8, AND 9 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL B: AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 1, AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT NO. 139 RECORDED NOVEMBER 1, 1985 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 85- 423458 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, INCLUDED WITHIN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND: BEGINNING AT THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL 3, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 196, PAGES 8 AND 9 OF PARCEL MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 34 23'42" EAST ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 3 AND ITS SOUTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION, 309.49 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 3; THENCE SOUTH 00 00' 11" EAST 106.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 59'49" WEST 67.60 FEET TO A POINT IN A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 51 FEET EASTERLY FROM THE LINE COMMON TO PARCELS 1 AND 2 OF SAID PARCEL MAP HAVING A BEARING AND DISTANCE OF NORTH 00 00'11" WEST 371.55 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 00' 11" WEST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE 89.68 FEET TO A POINT IN A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT SOUTHWESTERLY 32.50 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE LINE COMMON TO SAID PARCELS 1 AND 2 HAVING A BEARING AND DISTANCE OF NORTH 34 23'42" WEST 147.57 FEET; THENCE NORTH 34 23'42" WEST, ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE 284.77 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF KATELLA AVENUE AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP, SAID POINT BEING IN THE ARC OF A CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 940.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY 65.01 FEET ALONG THE AREA OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3 57' 46" TO THE POINT OF BEGINNINGS, AS CREATED BY THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT FOR MUTUAL INGRESS AND EGRESS EXECUTED BY L.C. SMULL RECORDED OCTOBER 7, 1985 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 85- 382822, OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL C: NON - EXCLUSIVE EASEMENTS FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR TRAFFIC, UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES AS DEFINED AND OVER THOSE AREAS AS DESCRIBED IN ARTICLE 2 OF THE DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS RECORDED JULY 2, 1986 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 86284304, OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL D: NON - EXCLUSIVE EASEMENTS FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS, PARKING UTILITIES AND CONSTRUCTION PURPOSE AS DEFINED AND OVER THOSE AREAS AS DESCRIBED IN ARTICLE 2 OF THE DECLARATION ESTABLISHING EASEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS (STADIUM TOWERS PLAZA) RECORDED DECEMBER 19, 1994 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 94- 0722696, OFFICIAL RECORDS. Cr\PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on May 2, 2005, at 2:00 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 18.66.040.030, 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, 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: 1. That the proposed commercial retail center is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.08.030.040.0402. 2. That the proposed commercial retail center has been designed so that it will not aversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is located. 3. That the size and shape of the site for the commercial retail center is adequate to allow full development of the use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health and safety. 4. That the traffic generated by the proposed commercial retail center will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the site contains adequate circulation and parking for customer vehicles entirely on the property. 5. That granting this conditional use permit will not, under the conditions imposed, be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 6. That * ** 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 That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a commercial retail center; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration 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 no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite 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 the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped with lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably illuminate the windows of nearby businesses. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 2. That no convenience markets and /or retail sales of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted unless a separate conditional use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. 3. That no video, electronic or other amusement devices shall be permitted on the premises- -2- PC2005- 4. That all trash generated from this commercial retail center shall be properly contained in trash bins located within approved trash enclosures. The number of bins shall be adequate and the trash pick- up shall be as frequent as necessary to ensure the sanitary handling and timely removal of refuse from the property. The Community Preservation Division of the Planning Department shall determine the need for additional bins or additional pick -up. All costs for increasing the number of bins or frequency of pick -up shall be paid by the business owner. 5. That any tree or other landscaping planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and /or dead. 6. That no roof - mounted balloons or other inflatable devices shall be permitted on the property. 7. That no outdoor vending machines shall be permitted on the property. 8. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by the provision of regular landscaping maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 9. That compact parking spaces shall not be permitted. 10. That a pedestrian linkage plan and on -site improvements for a pedestrian path from Katella Avenue, crossing the retail center property and leading to the Metro Link station (along all three properties) shall be reviewed and approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. The improvements needed to implement the connection on the subject property shall be installed by the developer. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 11. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion through the provision of regular landscaping maintenance, removal of trash and debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 12. That there shall be no public telephones on the premises located outside the building. 13. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and approval showing conformance with the current versions of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436 and 470 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said approved plans. 14. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage use. 15. That any loading and unloading of products associated with the commercial center shall occur on- site only, and shall not take place in any required parking area or within the public right -of -way. A plan shall be submitted to the Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and approval of any proposed loading areas. 16. That all employee access /service entrance areas visible from Katella Avenue shall be properly maintained and adequately screened from view with the use of layered landscaping, including the use of shrubs, ground cover, and evergreen trees. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 17. That an unsubordinated reciprocal access and parking agreement between the subject property and all and the contiguous property to the south (Stadium Towers), shall be submitted and approved by the City Attorney's Office and recorded with the Clerk's Office of the County of Orange. The agreement shall be maintained to serve the parking needs of the property unless approval of a parking waiver is granted- -3- PC2005- 18. That the developer shall submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying the post construction best management practices that will be used on -site to control predictable pollutants from stormwater runoff. The WQMP shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division for review and approval. 19. That the applicant shall demonstrate that coverage has been obtained under California's General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NO[) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number. The applicant shall prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP). A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City review on request. 20. That a Lot Line Adjustment application shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer for the relocation of an existing property line to maintain compliance with the Subdivision Map Act, and recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. 21. That the existing curb ramp within the public right -of -way shall be removed and reconstructed per Engineering Standard Plan No. 111 -2. 22. That trash storage area(s) shall be provided and maintained in location(s) acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable to adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum one (1) gallon sized clinging vines planted on maximum three (3) foot centers, or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 23. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. 24. That an on -site trash truck turn - around area shall be maintained in compliance with Engineering Standard Detail No. 610 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Streets and Sanitation Division. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 25. That any new roof - mounted equipment shall be completely screened from view from all directions, in compliance with Section 18.38.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 26. That the parking lot shall be maintained in good condition free of trash and debris. 27. That the water backflow equipment shall be above ground and located outside the required street setback area, and fully screened from all public streets. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division in either underground vaults or outside the required street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted to the Water Engineering and Cross Connection Inspector for review and approval. 28. That the developer /owner shall submit a set of improvement plans to the Public Utilities Water Engineering Division for review and approval to determine the conditions necessary for providing water service to the project. 29. That the locations for future above - ground utility devices including, but not limited to, electrical transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications and cable devices, etc., shall be shown on the plans submitted for building permits. Such plans shall also identify the specific screening treatment of each device (i.e., landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.) and shall be subject to review and approval by the appropriate City departments- 4- PC2005- 30. That prior to submittal of the water improvement plans, the developer /owner shall submit a water system master plan, including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, to the Public Utilities Water Engineering Division for review and approval. The master plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on -site water system to meet the project's water demands and fire protection requirements. 31. That prior to application for water meters or fire lines or submitting the water improvement plans for approval, the developer /owner shall submit an estimate of the maximum fire flow rate and the average day, maximum day and peak hour water demands for this project to the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division. This information will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide for the estimated water demands. Any off -site water system improvements required to serve the project shall be installed in accordance with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules, and Regulations. 32. That the legal property owner shall provide the City of Anaheim with an easement for electrical service lines to be determined as electrical design is completed. Said easement shall be submitted to the City of Anaheim prior to connection of electrical service. 33. That four (4) foot high street address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of the main building in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible to adjacent streets or properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted to the Police Department, Community Services Division, for review and approval. 34. That because this project has landscaping areas exceeding two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed in compliance with Chapter 10.19 (Landscape Water Efficiency) of Anaheim Municipal Code and Ordinance No. 5349. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 35. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. Landscape and /or hardscape screening of all pad- mounted equipment shall be required and shall be shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 36. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 8, and as conditioned herein. 37. That prior to the issuance of a grading permit, or within one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 18 and 19, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.40.040.040 and 18.42.040.010 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 38. That prior to the issuance of building permits, or within one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 10, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, and 35, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.40.040.040 and 18.42.040.010 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 39. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 36, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 40. 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 ordinance, regulation or requirement- -5- PC2005- BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that the property owner /developer shall be responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 7 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of May 2, 2005. 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. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION r_\nIx.9i SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on May 2, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 1 2005- SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -6- PC2005-