The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 2005/06/01• � i /V D ED Council Chamber, City Hall 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California • Call To Order Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda Wednesday, June 1, 2005 Chairman: Gail Eastman Chairman Pro- Tempore: Cecilia Flores Commissioners: Kelly Buffa, Joseph Karaki, Ed Perez, Pat Velasquez, (One Vacant Seat) 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 June 1, 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(Wanaheirnmet H: \tools /planninc comm. Admin /pc agendas \060105.doc (06/01/05) Page 1 Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 2:00 P.M. 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. Planning Commission Appointments: 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 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. 1A. CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously- Approved) Conditional Use Permit No. 3235 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04984) Owner: Hardin Honda, 1381 South Auto Center Drive, Anaheim, CA 92806 Agent: Walter Cadman, Hardin Honda, 1381 South Auto Center Drive, Anaheim, CA 92806 Location: 1381 East Auto Center Drive. Project Planner: Kimberly Wong Request for determination of substantial conformance pertaining to (kwong2 @anaheim.net) signage to retain two unpermitted wall signs in conjunction with an existing automotive sales and repair facility. Q.S. 126 1B. Conditional Use Permit No. 4097 -Request for Termination (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04986) Owner: Westport & State College LLC, 1517 South Sepulveda Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90025 Location: 420 South State College Boulevard Project Planner: Jessica Nixon Request to terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 4097 (to retain an Qnixon @anaheim.net) automotive repair facility). Q.S. 126 Termination Resolution No. H: \tools /planninc comm. Admin /pc agendas \060105.doc (06/01/05) Page 2 1C. Variance Nos. 1711 and 2416 - Request for Termination (Tracking No. VAR2005- 04651) Agent: Theodoros Daskalakis, M.D., 300 North Wilshire Avenue, #6, P.O. Box 3880, Anaheim, CA 92803 -3880 Location: 2792 W. Ball Road Request to terminate Variance No. 1711 (waivers of sign maximum height limit and minimum distance between two roof signs) and Variance No. 2416 (waivers of minimum distance between freestanding signs, maximum number of freestanding signs, permitted location of freestanding signs and minimum height of freestanding signs to construct two lighter box signs and two canopy signs in conjunction with an existing freestanding sign). Termination Resolution No. 1 D. Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 96 -01 - Request for Termination (Tracking No. PCN2005- 00020) Owner: Daniel Rosenberg, 255 South Euclid Street, Anaheim, CA, 92802 Location: 255 South Euclid Street Request to terminate Public Convenience or Necessity No. 96 -01 (to permit the sale of beer, wine, and general liquor for off - premises consumption in conjunction with a supermarket). Termination Resolution No. 1E. General Plan Amendment 2005 -00433 City Initiated Location: Citywide To initiate an amendment to the Circulation Element of the General Plan to re- establish the Exceptions List to Arterial Highway Rights -of -Way. Minutes 1 F. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of April 18, 2005 (Motion) Continued from the May 2, 2005 Planning Commission meeting H: \tools /planninc comm. Admin /pc agendas \060105.doc Project Planner: Kimberly Wong (kwong @anaheim.net) Q.S. 22 Project Planner: Kimberly Wong (kwong2 @anaheim. net) Q.S. 47 Project Planner: Elaine Thienprasiddhi (ethien @anaheim.net) (06/01/05) Page 3 1G. Receiving and approving supplemental detailed Minutes for Item No. 3 from the Planning Commission Meeting of April 18, 2005, scheduled to be heard as a public hearing item before City Council on Tuesday, June 7, 2005 (Motion) ITEM NO. 3 CEQA EIR No. 329 and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 132 General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -00416 Reclassification No. 2004 -00114 Variance No. 2004 -04597 Tentative Tract Map No. 16440) 1H. Receiving and approving supplemental detailed Minutes for Item No. 4 from the Planning Commission Meeting of April 18, 2005. (Motion) ITEM NO. 4 CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 128* Tentative Tract Map No. 16831 Development Agreement No. 2005 -00001 Development Agreement No. 2005 -00002 Development Agreement No. 2005 -00003 11. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of May 2, 2005 (Motion) H: \tools /planninc comm. Admin /pc agendas \060105.doc (06/01/05) Page 4 Public Hearing Items: 2a. CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 129 21b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04975 2c. Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 2d. Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 (Readvertised) Owner: US Southeast Corporation, 1818 South State College Boulevard, Suite 200, Anaheim, CA 92806 Agent: John Stanek, Integral Partners, 160 Newport Center Drive, Suite 240, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Location: 1818 South State College Boulevard. Property is approximately 3.1 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 and the proposed private street 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. Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 - Request to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and U.S. Southeast Corporation for a 265 -unit residential condominium project. Continued from the May 2, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Development Agreement Resolution No. H: \tools /planninc comm. Admin /pc agendas \060105.doc Project Planner Amy Vazquez ( avazguezCcDanaheim.net ) Q.S. 117 (06/01/05) Page 5 3a. CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously- Approved 3b. Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04982) Owner: Sidney E. Bickel, 5585 Via Dicha, # B, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Agent: Phillip Schwartz, PRS Group, 31682 El Camino Real, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Location: 633 South East Street. Property is approximately 1.9- acre, having a frontage of 240 feet on the west side of East Street and is located 182 feet north of the centerline of South Street (Quartz Dealer Direct). Request for reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved on July 28, 2003 to expire March 1, 2005) to retain an automotive wholesale and retail auction facility. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 4a. CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously- Approved) 4b. Conditional Use Permit No. 4142 (Tracking No. Cup2005- 04980) Owner: Karl T. Sator, 900 East Katella Avenue, # J, Orange, CA 92867 Agent: Aspen Associates Telecom, 1223 Federal Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90025 Location: 3150 - 3164 East La Palma Avenue. Property is approximately 6.4 acres located south and east of the southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Kraemer Boulevard. Request for reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved on October 11, 1999 to expire October 11, 2004) to retain a 60 -foot high telecommunications monopalm. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. H: \tools /planninc comm. Admin /pc agendas \060105.doc Project Planner: Amy Vazquez (avazq u ez @a n a he i m. n et) Q.S.94 Project Planner: Della Herrick (dherrick @anaheim.net) Q.S. 140 (06/01/05) Page 6 5a. CEQA Categorical Exemption Section 15061(b)(3) 5b. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00039 Owner: Sandy D. Sigal, Newmark Merill, 5850 Canoga Avenue, Suite 650, Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Location: Citywide. Request to modify the sign code to permit marquee or electric reader board signs in conjunction with a commercial retail center with a minimum of twenty -five (25) acres in area subject to a conditional use permit. 6a. CEQA Negative Declaration 6b. Waiver of Code Requirement 6c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04983 Owner: Cris DiRuggiero, P.O. Box 304, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Agent: Iglesia Evangelica, Ministero Impacto Nuevo, P.O. Box 3536, Anaheim, CA 92803 Location: 2230 West Colchester Drive, Suite Nos. 13 -16. Property is approximately 0.87 -acre located at the southeast corner of Colchester Drive and Colony Street ( Iglesia Evangelica Impacto Nuevo). Request to permit and retain a church in conjunction within an existing non - conforming commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. H: \tools /planninc comm. Admin /pc agendas \060105.doc Project Planner: Della Herrick (dherrick @anaheim.net) Project Planner: John Ramirez Qramirez @anaheim.net) Q. S. 34 (06/01/05) Page 7 7a. CEQA Negative Declaration 7b. Waiver of Code Requirement 7c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04981 Owner: Anaheim Business Campus, LLC, 394 West Cerritos Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805 Agent: El Gallardo, 11932 Gary Street, Garden Grove, CA 92840 Location: 167 and 175 West Cerritos Avenue - Building No. 2. Property is approximately 12.3 acres located at the southwest corner of Cerritos Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard (The Place). Request to permit a banquet hall with on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages with wavier of minimum number of parking spaces. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 8a. CEQA Negative Declaration 8b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04971 Owner: INC Hidco, 5395 East Hunter Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807 Agent: Laura North, 2828 North Danbury Street, Orange, CA 92867 Location: 5395 East Hunter Avenue. Property is approximately 2.1 acres, having a frontage of 320 feet on the north side of Hunter Avenue, and is located 110 feet north of the centerline of Brasher Street (Pump It Up). Request to permit a children's indoor private recreation facility Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. H: \tools /planninc comm. Admin /pc agendas \060105.doc Project Planner: Amy Vazquez (avazquez @anaheim.net) Q.S.87 Project Planner: Kimberly Wong (kwong2 @anaheim.net) Q.S. 177 (06/01/05) Page 8 9a. CEQA Neqative Declaration Request for withdrawal 9b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04985 Owner: Robert J. Ricci, 21680 Dunrobin Way, Yorba Linda, CA 92887 Agent: Randy Edwards, 4070 Live Oak Lane, Yorba Linda, CA 92886 Location: 4771 East Hunter Avenue. Property is approximately 0.63 -acre, having a frontage of 16 feet on the curvilinear Project Planner: portion of Hunter Avenue, and is located approximately 113 Jessica Nixon feet north of the centerline of Hancock Street (House of Qnixon2 @anaheim.net) Bounce). Project Planner: Q.S. 165 Request to permit a children's indoor private recreation facility. (kwong2 @anaheim.net) Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 10a. CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously- Approved) Request for withdrawal 10b. Conditional Use Permit No. 3235 (Tracking No. Cup2005- 04984) Owner: Hardin Honda, 1381 South Auto Center Drive, Anaheim CA 92806 Agent: Walter Cadman, Hardin Honda, 1381 South Auto Center Drive, Anaheim, CA 92806 Location: 1381 East Auto Center Drive. Property is approximately 2.3 acres, having a frontage of 350 feet on the north side of Auto Center Drive and is located 1,400 feet west of the centerline of Phoenix Club Drive — Hardin Honda).. Project Planner: Kimberly Wong Request to amend or delete a condition of approval pertaining to signage (kwong2 @anaheim.net) to add three additional wall signs in conjunction with an existing automotive sales and repair facility. Q.S. 140 Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Adjourn To Monday, June 13, 2005 at 1:00 P.M. for Preliminary Plan Review. H: \tools /planninc comm. Admin /pc agendas \060105.doc (06/01/05) Page 9 CERTIFICATION OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: 3:00 p.m. May 26, 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 /planninc comm. Admin /pc agendas \060105.doc (06/01/05) Page 10 SCHEDULE 2005 Ju 13 June 27 July 11 July 25 August 8 August 22 September 7 (Wed) September 19 October 3 October 17 October 31 November 14 November 28 December 12 December 28 (Wed) HAtools /planninc comm. Admin /pc agendas \060105.doc (06/01/05) Page 11 ITEM NO, 1 -A �GAs RCL S LP RCLE O S RCL'. CUI LINCOLN AUTO r'sa n" MIMI k RCL RCL 96 -97 -11 RCL 84 -85 -12 RCL 75 -76 -13 C> RCL 96 -97 -11 E CUP 2636 ;i RCL 74 -75 -21 (1) M T -VAR 2002 -04511 T 2005-04984Z" -CUP VAR 2001 -04461 S RCL 74-75-20 �1�� ANAHEIM MAZDA T -CUP 2004 -04880 mgt HYUNDAI CUP 3235 VAR 4053 S �iw sGi (CUP 2762) (CUP 2448) RS -3y +E HARDIN HON a 1 DU EACH /1 350 ' � 1,400'to the centerline -„ of Phoenix Club Dnve AUTO CENTER DRIVE Q C -G C -G RCL 91 -92 -19 RCL 91 -92 -19 40 RCL 74 -75 -21 (5) CUP 3625 RCL 74 -75 -20 (2) RCL 74 -75 -21 (5) RCL 91- 2 -19 CUP P 3625 CUP 2001 -04448 RCL 74 -75 -20 (2) MITSUBISHI SATURN AUTO DEALER CUP 3625 HARDIN HONDA AUTO DEALER Q 0 � SANDERSON AVENUE Conditional Use Permit No. 32359��a Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04984 Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: I"= 200' Requested By: HARDIN HONDA Q.S. No. 126 REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE PERTAINING TO SIGNAGE TO RETAIN TWO UNPERMITTED WALL SIGNS IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING AUTOMOTIVE SALES AND REPAIR FACILITY. 1381 East Auto Center Drive - Hardin Honda 1820 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 1 -A 1 -A. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED) (Motion) b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3235 (Motion) (TRACKING NO. CUP2005- 04984) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 2.34 acre property is located north of the westerly terminus of Auto Center Drive, has a frontage of 350 feet on the north side of Auto Center Drive, a maximum depth of 463 feet, and is located 670 feet west of the centerline of Phoenix Club Drive (1381 East Auto Center Drive —Hardin Honda). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests a determination of substantial conformance to amend previously - approved sign plans in order to retain two (2) additional wall signs for a total of eight (8) wall signs in conjunction with an existing automotive sales and repair facility under authority of Code Section No. 18.60.190.020. BACKGROUND: (3) The site is developed with an automobile sales and repair facility and is zoned C -G (General Commercial). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this site and surrounding sites for General Commercial land uses. (4) Variance No. 4053 (waiver of business signs permitted, maximum sign height, and signs in parking /landscaping areas to construct one 2 -sided (780 s.f. each side) electronic readerboard freestanding sign) was approved by the Planning Commission on June 4, 1990. A subsequent request to add a thirty -nine (39) square foot addition to an existing 923 square foot freestanding sign with waiver of maximum sign area was granted by the Commission for two (2) years on November 1, 1993. On February 5, 1996, the Commission granted an amendment to conditions of approval deleting the time limitation. (5) Conditional Use Permit No. 3235 (to permit an automobile sale and service center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces, minimum structural setback and required improvement of parking areas) was approved by the Planning Commission on January 29, 1990. On September 8, 2004, the Commission approved an amendment to previously - approved exhibits to construct a new display canopy and enclose an existing canopy. (6) Resolution No. PC2004 -99, adopted in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3235, included the following condition of approval: "8. That signage shall be limited to existing and approved signs. That temporary signs and other advertising devices shall not be permitted except when in connection with an approved Special Event Permit." Srcup2005- 04984rrkw.doc Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 1 -A DISCUSSION: (7) In 1999, the Planning Commission approved six (6) signs for the automotive sales and service center facility. The approved plans (describe the signs as follows: Hardin Honda, Service Center and Honda emblem in addition to two (2) directional signs for Service Reception and Express Change. The applicant proposes to retain two (2) additional wall - mounted directional signs (Revision No. 1 to Exhibit No. 8) for "Parts" and "Exit" along the front elevation below the existing Service Center sign. The new signs are each sixteen (16) square feet blue ovals. The two (2) new signs match previously- approved signs on the same elevation. The size, shape, colors, and wording on each lighted color sign is designed to build brand character and create an integrated look to the overall design of the building, landscape, and layout of the business. The proposed signs provide customer convenience and promote standard recognition for the Honda dealership. Front elevation of Hardin Honda Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 1 -A Unpermitted Sign (8) Staff inspections indicate the two (2) new signs currently exist on the proposed front elevation as shown in the above photograph. permitted n (9) Staff believes the unpermitted signage does not effectively expand the onsite signage. These signs function as on -site directional signage as opposed to advertising; therefore, staff does not consider these signs a duplication of signage. Additionally, the unpermitted signage is coordinated with other on -site signage. Staff believes the two (2) oval directional signs, "Exit" and "Parts ", are in substantial conformance with previously- approved exhibits. Staff is supportive of this request and recommends the Planning Commission determine that the amended sign plans are in substantial conformance with the previously- approved exhibits. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (10) Staff has reviewed the request for determination of substantial conformance to modify previously- approved exhibits and finds no significant adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- approved Negative Declaration in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3235 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 Page 3 Existing Service Center signs with the two (2) unpermitted signs Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 1 -A 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. RECOMMENDATION: (11) 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 take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the previously- approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the appropriate documentation for this request. (b) By motion, approve the request for determination of substantial conformance to amend sign plans in order to retain two (2) additional wall- mounted directional signs on a previously- approved automotive sales and service center based on the finding that the unpermitted signage matches previously- approved wall signs on the same elevation and the two signs are wall- mounted directional signs for on -site traffic which are not intended for view from the public right -of -way. Page 4 [DRAFT] June 1, 2005 Walter Cadman Hardin Honda 1321 South Auto Center Drive Anaheim, CA 92806 Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of June 1, 2005. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A (a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED) (b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3235 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04984) Agent: Walter Cadman Hardin Honda 1321 South Auto Center Drive Anaheim, CA 92806 Location: 1321 South Auto Center Drive (Hardin Honda) Requests a determination of substantial conformance to amend previously- approved sign plans in order to retain two additional wall signs for a total of eight wall signs in conjunction with an existing automotive sales and repair facility. ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commission XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby determine that the previously- approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve the request for substantial conformance for Conditional Use Permit No. 3235 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04984) to retain two (2) additional wall signs for a previously- approved automotive sales and repair facility, based on the finding that the retain signage matches previously- approved wall signs on the same elevation and the two signs are wall- mounted directional signs for on -site traffic which are not intended for view from the public right -of -way. Sincerely, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary Anaheim Planning Commission crcup2005- 04984.doc 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. PC2004 -99 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDING CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. PC 90 -24 ADOPTED IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3235 (1381 EAST AUTO CENTER DRIVE) WHEREAS, on January 29, 1990, Resolution No. PC90 -24 was adopted by the Anaheim City Planning Commission to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 3235 and permit an auto sales and service center with waivers of minimum number of parking spaces, minimum structural setback and required improvement of parking areas on property located at 1381 East Auto Center Drive. WHEREAS, Resolution No. PC 90 -24, adopted in connection with subject use permit, includes the following condition of 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 Exhibit Nos. 1 through 4, provided, however that landscaping consisting of minimum fifteen (15) gallon sized trees shall be scattered across the roof parking area." WHEREAS, the petitioner has requested to amend said condition of approval to expand the existing auto sales and repair facility by enclosing an existing canopy cover and constructing a trellis canopy for outdoor display. WHEREAS, this property is developed with an automobile sales and repair facility (Hardin Honda) in the C -G (Commercial General) zone; and the Anaheim General Plan designates the property for General Commercial land uses; and is situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE CENTERLINE OF EATON WAY 40.00 FEET WIDE, AS DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 352, PAGE 82 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DISTANT ALONG SAID CENTERLINE SOUTH 00 28'07" WEST 420.59 FEET FROM THE CENTERLINE OF BALL ROAD 60.00 FEET WIDE, AS DESCRIBED IN SAID DEED, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHEASTERLY TERMINUS OR THAT CERTAIN COURSE DESCRIBED AS A CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1000.00 FEET, IN PARCEL 3A OF THE FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION, SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 145654, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH WAS RECORDED MARCH 23, 1967 IN BOOK 4206, PAGE 507 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE FROM A TANGENT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 56" 39' 23" WEST, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 35° 53' 58" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 626.56 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF TAFT AVENUE, 40.00 FEET WIDE, AS DESCRIBED IN SAID DEED; THENCE EASTERLY AND NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF TAFT AVENUE AND EATON WAY 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 September 8, 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 18.66.040.030, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed amendment and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and CRIPC2004 -099 -11- PC2004 -99 • 1 • 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: I . That the proposed expansion is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 1 8.08.030.040.0402. 2. That the expansion would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is located based on the fact that the proposed expansion is accessory to the existing automotive sales and repair business. 3. That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow full operation of the proposed expansion in a manner not detrimental to the area nor to the health and safety. 4. That the traffic generated by the use would not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry traffic in the area since there is adequate on -site circulation for an automotive sales agency at this location. 5. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 6. That no one 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 City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to amend previously- approved exhibits to construct a new display canopy and enclose an existing canopy within an existing automotive sales and repair facility and does hereby find that the Negative Declaration previously approved in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3235 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation in connection with this request 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 amend, in its entirety, the conditions contained in Resolution No. PC90 -24 to read as follows: 1. That the landscape planters shall be permanently maintained with live and healthy plant materials. 2. That any tree planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead. 3. That the on -site landscaping and irrigation system shall be maintained in compliance with City standards. 4. That any proposed roof - mounted equipment shall be completely screened from view in all directions by properly designed and maintained design elements of the building. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 5. 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. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Police Department, Community Services Division approval. 6. 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, 470, 479, 472, 473 and 475 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. -2- PC2004 -99 E 0 7. That there shall be no public telephones on the premises located outside the building. 8. That signage shall be limited to existing and approved signs. That temporary signs and other advertising devices shall not be permitted except when in connection with an approved Special Event Permit. 9. That no advertising or identification of any type shall be permitted on any outdoor furniture or equipment including umbrellas, by illustration, text or any other means of visual communication. 10. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 11. That minimum five (5) gallon size shrubs shall be planted and maintained around the existing above- ground utility device along Auto Center Drive to screen it from public view said information shall be 'specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 12. That no vehicles may be displayed in any landscaped areas. Any such existing display shall be removed. 13. That roof - mounted inflatable devices shall not be permitted. 14. That four (4) foot high address numbers shall be displayed on the flat area of the roof in a contrasting color to the roof material, provided the numbers shall not be visible from the street or adjacent properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 15. That trash storage areas shall be refurbished to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division to comply with approved plans on file with said Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 16. That if required to serve the new construction, the property owner shall provide the City of Anaheim Electrical Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department with a public utilities easement to be determined as electrical design is completed. 17. That any necessary relocation of existing electrical facilities or streetlights shall be at the expense of the developer. 18. That no video, electronic or other amusement devices or games shall be permitted anywhere on subject property. 19. That no vehicular body work, painting or other business - related activities, or storage of vehicles, vehicle parts or materials shall be allowed in the front or rear yard areas, or on the roof of the buildings. 20. That customer parking spaces shall be striped and clearly marked for "customer parking only', and at no time shall customer vehicles be stacked, double parked, or left standing in tandem in front of, or adjacent to the buildings. 21. 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. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 22. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 23. That a landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval for the reconfigured area and incorporating a 24 -inch box sized trees planted at a ratio of one tree for every 20 feet of street frontage. Any decision by staff regarding said plan may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendation Item. -3- PC2004 -99 24. That the 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 Nos. 1 and 2, and Exhibit Nos, 3, 4, 5 and 6, as conditioned herein. 25. 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. 4, 5, 6, 12, 14, 15, 18, 21 and 23 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. 26. That prior to final building and zoning Inspection, Condition Nos. 11 and 24, above mentioned, shall be complied with. 27. 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. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 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 September 8, 2004. 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. ORIGINAL SIGNED BY GAIL EASTMAN CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: !ORIGINAL SIGNED BY PAT CHANDLERI SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE } ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Pat Chandler, 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 September 8, 2004, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: EASTMAN, FLORES, O'CONNELL, ROMERO, VANDERBILT- LINARES, VELASQUEZ NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: BUFFA IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of , 2004. ORIGINAL SIGNED BY PAT CHANDLER SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2004 -99 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 8, 2004 Item No. 8 8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED) (Motion) 8b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3235 (Resolution) (TRACKING NO. CUP2004 04880) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 2.34 acre property is located north of the westerly terminus of Auto Center Drive, has a frontage of 350 feet on the north side of Auto Center Drive, a maximum depth of 463 feet, and is located 1,400 feet west of the centerline of Phoenix Club Drive (1381 East Auto Center Drive - Hardin Honda). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests to amend previously- approved exhibits to construct a new display canopy and enclose an existing canopy within an existing automotive sales and repair facility under authority of Code Sections 18.08.030.040.0402, 18.60.190.030 and 18.60.190.040. BACKGROUND: (3) sr8779av This site is developed with an automobile sales and repair facility and is zoned C -G (General Commercial). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this site for General Commercial land uses. The General Plan Land Use designation for surrounding properties is also General Commercial. (4) Variance No. 4053 (waiver of business signs permitted, maximum sign height, and signs in parking /landscape areas to construct one 2 -sided (780 s.f. each side) electronic readerboard freestanding sign) was approved by the Commission on June 4, 1990. A subsequent request to add a 39 square foot addition to an existing 923 s.f. freestanding sign with waiver of maximum sign area was granted by the Commission for 2 years on November 1, 1993. On February 5, 1996, the Commission granted an amendment to conditions of approval deleting the time limitation. (5) Conditional Use Permit No. 3235 (to permit an auto sales and service center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces, minimum structural setback and required improvement of parking areas) was approved by the Commission on January 29. 1990. Condition No. 18 of Resolution PC 90 -24 states the following: "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 through 4, provided, however that landscaping consisting of minimum fifteen (15) gallon sized trees shall be scattered across the roof parking area." - DISCUSSION: (6) The petitioner proposes to expand the existing auto sales and repair facility by enclosing an existing canopy cover and constructing a trellis canopy for outdoor display. This modification was previously- approved by the Planning Commission in 1999, but the construction never took place and the entitlement has expired. Page 1 April 25, 2005 Planning Department ATTN: Kimberly Wong 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Dear Kimberly Wong, This letter is intended to satisfy your request for an explanation regarding our application for a variance for the limited number of signs already approved in our 1999 conditional use permit pertaining to signage. Enclosed with this package is an elevation rendering showing the signage requirements of American Honda Motor Corporation of its authorized dealers. The wall mounted signs help direct customers to the specific area of the dealership that they are looking for IE; Parts, Service Sales, Cashier, and Express Lube. These 3 additional signs are required design elements of American Honda. The size, shape, colors, and wording on each lighted color matched sign is designed to build brand character and create an integrated look to the overall design concept of the building, landscape and layout of the whole business. These signs are installed at all Honda Dealers across the United States as part of Brand building, customer convenience and an approach to an integrated standard appearance to all Honda Dealerships. Sincerely, Walter Cadman Fixed Operation Director Cc/ file, Dennis Hardin, Roberta Hardin Jared Hardin we 1381 Auto Center Drive, Anaheim Ca, 92806 ITEr4 N0. 1 -B y . N C - G A VHK "S AN SQUARE ) Z Mph SHOPS IP A 6 � 2 8 C -G RCS �p RCL 55 -56 -27 RS�L C - G ANAHEIM TOWN T -CUP 2002 -04514 SQUARE T -CUP 2001 -04442 P� CUP 2001 -04425 Opp�N CUP 2001 -04352 8R T -CUP 2000 -04239 GG RCL 62 -63-29 CUP 3381 ANSWERING CUP 2959 SERVICE CG CUP 2909 63-29 RCL 65-66-110 RCL 62 CUP 2656 RCL RCL 58 -59 -6 CUP 2637 INCOME TA INCOME TAX RCL 56 -57 -1 CUP 2601 CH R C L 6 6 63-29 2 - T -CUP 2005 -04986 CUP 2555 (Res.of Intent toG1) T -CUP 2005 -04970 CUP 2404 1 DU c-G CUP 2004 -04938 VAR 2002 -04486 Rc,g2 T -CUP 2004 -04841 VAR 2000 -04403 S VAR 3905 A REA TORS T -CUP 2002 -04630 VAR 3740 G\� C-G T- CUP2001 -04463 VAR 3412 S = RCL 88 -89 -21 CUP 4097 VAR 3351 RCL C] M ST CUP 3725 VAR 2401 S Q PARKING < (CUP 836) ANAHEIM TOWN (VAR 795) SQUARE W AUTO REPAIR G C -G CUP 3153 CUP 1528 O SIZZLER m I _Z REST - RM -4 RCL 5 CN w � `— RCL 56 -57 -1 1 PART c -G C7 APARTMENTS 8 DU S� VAR 1011 J 8 DU EACH \L LOw VAR 890 W CDRIVEIN OJ 156' WESTPORT DRIVE RS -2 DAI RY U �P N X10 w RCL 56 -57 -1 LU RM -4 T �- Q VAR 4396 AMERICAN LWLI APTS RM -4 —� I EP�N BAND I M 6 DU F APTS APTS 4 DU EACH /1� U NTS Q g DU 12 DU S �FtEE� P PNP = ❑ Sp,N� C -G RCL 65 -66 -10 co N° a N r-M o o U w N Q CO 2 U CAR WASH R CUP 834 Cm �a� fn m 000 >� ,�► ANGELOS = Cn o RCL 61 -62 -44 Cn� VPRg3 CUP 2881 R$ -2 U U J N < N Q d U N¢ N Q CUP 2260 1 DU — z �' cb w - cn - w w CUP 174 Cn G 0 O r SMALL SHOPS Conditional Use Permit No. 4097 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04986 Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: TW LAYMAN ASSOCIATES Q.S. No. 113 REQUEST TO TERMINATE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4097 (TO RETAIN AN AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR FACILITY). 420 South State College Boulevard 1862 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 1 -B 1 -B. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4097 - REQUEST FOR TERMINATION (Resolution) (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04986) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 0.41 -acre property is located at the northeast corner of State College Boulevard and Westport Drive, with a frontage of 110 feet on the east side of State College Boulevard and 131 feet on the north side of Westport Drive (420 South State College Boulevard, C & M Automotive) REQUEST (2) The manager, Laurie Michele Cole, has submitted the attached letter dated March 30, 2005, on behalf of the property owner requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No.4097. BACKGROUND (3) The property is currently in the process of being developed with a commercial retail center and is zoned C -G (General Commercial). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property for Regional Commercial land uses. (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 4097 (to permit an automotive repair facility) was approved by the Planning Commission on February 1, 1999. Three reinstatements were granted by the Commission with the last one to expire on December 31, 2006. (5) Condition of approval No. 10 of Resolution No. PC2005 -26 for Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04938 (to construct a 4 -unit commercial center) requires the termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 4097. The auto repair facility will be demolished with the construction of the new 4 -unit commercial center, therefore, the entitlement is no longer necessary. RECOMMENDATION: (6) 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 Commission, by resolution, terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 4097. srCUP2005- 04986jn.doc Page 1 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4097 (TRACKING NO. CUP2005- 04986) (420 SOUTH STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD) WHEREAS, on February 1, 1999, the Anaheim Planning Commission did, by its Resolution No. PC99 -24, grant Conditional Use Permit No. 4097 to permit an automotive repair facility in the General Commercial Zone; and WHEREAS, Laurie Michele Cole property manager, has submitted a letter on behalf of the property owner requesting termination of this permit to comply with condition of approval of no. 10 of Resolution No. PC2005 -26 for Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04938 (to construct a 4 -unit commercial center) approved by the Planning Commission on February 7, 2005, since this entitlement is no longer needed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 4097 on the basis of the foregoing findings. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 1, 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 ATTEST: 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 June 1, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 2005. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION Cr \PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- Attachment - R &R 1 -B & STATE C ®LLECT, LLC 1517 S. SEPULVEDA BLVD. LOS ANGELES, CA 90025 (310) 312 -6698 FAX (310) 312 -0090 March 30, 2005 City of Anaheim Planning Services Division 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 RE: 420 S. State College Termination of CUP #4097 Westport & State College, LLC requests that conditional use permit No. 4097, be terminated. This request is being made pursuant to Condition #10, of the Conditions of Approval for our new development. Sincerely, Westport St e College, LLC ITEM NO. 1 -C 0 nD �n T p DALE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL T ELMLAWN DR T -CUP 2003 -04824 CUP 3796 WEST ANAHEIM COMMMERCIAL CORRIDORS CUP 2067 CUP 380 CHURCH RM -4 ~ 87 -88 -12 rn 04 o RCL 86 -87 -20 �o �- �o VAR 3697 d .o ° oH N z C -G VAR 3627 N ° o ° o0 •61 - 76 RCL 5 VAR 40 st 4o oN¢ - oo °� SUNSET PLAZA �, 00 U) soo S. AP 106 U RCL 74 -75 -06 2419 C -G �U APARTMENTS CVN o> �U � °m~ z 1U 12 DU �n� CUP RCL 76 -77 -12 �jcdu CUP 1957 106 DU Q � o o CUP 2055 CUP 195 m�u QUO >� ��QQ� SHOPPING CENTER REST. 0 > n Q BALL ROAD -147'-N- WEST ANAHEIM COMMMERCIAL CORRIDORS C -G (, - G R r"ui11 Fr Ia � CL C -G RCL 60.61 66 T -CUP 2004 -04904 RCL 60.61 CUP 3157 7 CUP 3033 RCL 6 s4 65-02 65 -02 -CUP 2005- o 4s551 CUP 2003 -04813 RCL 6465 -118 RCL 6465 - 02 M-4 CUP 2003 -04777 CUP 288 iT -VAR 2005 -04651 CUP 2457 5 -66 -82 CUP 980 CUP 420 VAR 896 S VAR 2411 S s VAR 1711 S CUP 2255 VAR 1700 - 63 - 125 PCN 99- S.S. & MINI -MART (VAR 2819) VACANT SHOPS REST. RM -4 805 (CUP 315 (CUP 202 ; - 61-66 _ -� U RCL 82 - -34 433 COMM. CENTER RCL VAAWEIS W� RCL 64 - 118 R CL Z 22 DU DU P37342 CUP 3668 RM -4 RCL 77 -78 -27 RS -2 RS -2 Z VAR 1700 RCL 6465 -118 Q 1 DU EACH UJ UQUCRST.RE R RM -4 RCL 63 -64 -16 (j) RM -4 CUP 458 RCL 62 -63 -120 Q RM -4 52 DU CUP 426 0 A 0110 W RCL 77 -78 -27 53 DU w Q APARTMENTS 2 U U) RAVENSWOOD DR RM -4 RCL 86 -87 -21 VAR 3634 APARTMENTS RS -2 ANAHEIM CITY LIMITS STANTON CITY LIMITS Variance No. 1711, Variance No. 2416 4 Subject Property TRACKING NO. VAR2005 -04651 Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: THEODOROS DASKALAKIS Q.S. No. 22 REQUEST TO TERMINATE VARIANCE NO. 1711 (WAIVERS OF SIGN MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT AND MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN TWO ROOF SIGNS) AND VARIANCE NO. 2416 (WAIVERS OF MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN FREESTANDING SIGNS, MAXIMUM NUMBER OF FREESTANDING SIGNS, PERMITTED LOCATION OF FREESTANDING SIGNS AND MINIMUM HEIGHT OF FREESTANDING SIGNS TO CONSTRUCT TWO LIGHTER BOX SIGNS AND TWO CANOPY SIGNS IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING FREESTANDING SIGN. 2792 West Ball Road 1855 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 1 -C 1 -C. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a. VARIANCE NOS. 1711 AND 2416 — REQUEST FOR TERMINATION (Resolution) (Tracking No. VAR2005- 04651) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 0.5 -acre property is located on the southeast corner of Ball Road and Dale Avenue, with frontages of 147 feet on the south side of Ball Road and 146 feet on the east side of Dale Avenue (2792 West Ball Road). REQUEST: (2) The applicant's attorney, Theodoros Daskalakis, has submitted the attached letter dated April 20, 2005, requesting termination of Variances Nos. 1711 and 2416. BACKGROUND (3) The property is currently undeveloped and is zoned C -G (General Commercial). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property for Neighborhood Center land uses. Surrounding General Plan designations are residential. (4) Variance No. 1711 (waivers of sign maximum height limitation and minimum distance between two roof signs) was approved by the Planning Commission on June 7, 1965. (5) Variance No. 2416 (waiver of (a) minimum distance between freestanding signs, (b) maximum number of freestanding signs, (c) permitted location of freestanding signs and (d) minimum height of freestanding signs to construct two lighter box signs and two canopy signs in conjunction with an existing freestanding sign) was denied by the Planning Commission on August 21, 1972. The entitlement was subsequently approved by the City Council on October 3, 1972. (6) Condition of approval no. 35 of Resolution No. PC2004 -5 for Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -04813 (to construct a four -unit commercial retail center) requires the termination of Variance Nos. 1711 and 2416. (7) The attorney for the applicant is requesting termination of these variances on behalf of the property owner since the property is currently vacant and the entitlement is no longer needed. 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 meeting that the Commission, by resolution, terminate Variance Nos. 1711 and 2416, as requested by the applicant. Srvar2005 -04651 kw Page 1 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH VARIANCE NOS. 1711 AND 2416 (TRACKING NO. VAR2005- 04651) (2792 WEST BALL ROAD) WHEREAS, on June 7, 1965, the Anaheim Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. 1659 grant Variance No. 1711 to permit waivers of sign maximum height limitation and minimum distance between two roof signs; and WHEREAS, on August 21, 1972, the Anaheim Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. PC72 -202 denied Variance No. 2416. The entitlement was subsequently approved on October 3, 1972, by the Anaheim City Council, by its Resolution No. 72R -444, granting Variance No. 2416 for waiver of (a) minimum distance between freestanding signs, (b) maximum number of freestanding signs, (c) permitted location of freestanding signs and (d) minimum height of freestanding signs to construct two lighter box signs and two canopy signs in conjunction with an existing freestanding sign; and WHEREAS, T. Daskalakis has submitted a letter requesting termination of Variance Nos. 1711 and 2416 to comply with condition of approval No. 35 of Resolution No. PC2004 -5, Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -04813 (to construct a four -unit commercial retail center) approved by the Planning Commission on January 12, 2004, requiring the property owner to submit a letter to the Planning Services Division requesting termination of Variance Nos. 1411 and 2416 since these entitlements are no longer needed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Variance Nos. 1711 and 2416 on the basis of the foregoing findings. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 1, 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. ATTEST: CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION 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 June 1, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 2005. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION Cr \PC2005- -1- PC2005- MICHAEL K. DASKALAKIS M.D., F.A.C.S. 300 N. WILSHIRE AVE: #6 ` P.O. BOX 3880 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92803 -3880 � '' AM 2-005 TEL /FAX (714) 635 -3931 PL /ANNT1 N a �it'tl:i�PJ� April 20, 2005 RE: 2792 W. Ball Rd Elaine Yambao City of Anaheim Planning Department 200 South Anaheim Blvd. PO Box 3222 Anaheim, CA 92803 Dear Elaine Yambao: We would like to request the termination of Variances No. 1711 and No. 2416 in order to comply with CUP2003- 04813/CUP2005- 04955. Sincerely, Theodoros Daskalakis, MD ITEM NO. 1 -D T SHOPS & REST. VAR 819 RM -4 MOTEL APTS. O R I ' C -G RM -4 W C G RCL 56 -57 -27 RCL 62 -63 -75 RCL 56 -57 -39 CUP 1357 CUP 373 VAR 2578 S VAR 819 C AUTO 7 CAR WASH APARTMENTS j DEALER 43 DU W 1 ° w PAMPAS LANE o: C -G RS -2 RCL 59-60 -113 VAR 2155 S 1 DU EACH CL SMALLSHOPS U Ma {�M RCL 59-60-113 R ggg � BRENTWOOD PL'' I ' VAR2155S —� AF 'ass 1r,'1� ADJ 0025 O CHIROPRACTIC CLINIC I— RS -2 � 1 h, C -G RCL 58 5 �( z � � 4 '°. � -7-39 y � � 7 +� � C -G W ,R 1320 1 DU EACH ADJ 0101 an� ' �� :z ,ask T -CUP 2004 -04931 RCL 59-60 -113 " CUP 2004 -04866 er ) LLI CUP 3958 PCN 2005 -00020 W W RS - i' o PCN 96-02 i of 43,000 F , �� PCN 96 - 01 F- C - G W CUP 3273' (�� SCW 2004 -000 25 c RCL CUP 145113 W CUP 350 ", CUP 1060 i(�r ¢�¢ GIRL (CUP 829) R MURG PLAZA e� 1 � J COMM. SHOPS N SCOUTS m (VAR 2656) T (VAR 1883) " Y T -CUP 2004 -04894 (VAR 1803) T C LLI o CUP 542 SHOPPING g� �� RCL 94-95-08 C -G (RCL 59 -60 -4) b q� CENTER 4 � � F � T ' (Res. of Int. RCL 59-60 -11 CHURCH �,d, c G to cy CUP 3082 CUP 3041 RCL 59 -60 -113 CHURCH T � � � I CUP 2815 � CUP 3780 609' 1 1 BROADWAY 1 mmm C -G RCL 64-65-115 RCL 90 -91 -24 RCL 64 -65 -56 55-5 -5 C -G RCL 55 -56 -2 VAR 2353 Z Z RS -2 CUP 691 CUP 3358 RCL 55 -56 -2 T N ¢ I Q 1 DU EACH S.S. CUP 2575 0 s OFFICE VAR AR700S BUILDING SRV. STN. CHAPARRAL 0_ VAR 1081 C -G C-G PARK RCL 61-62-56 62 -56 C 55 - 56 - VAR 2 S 55 -56 -2 RCL 55-56 - VAR 2353 VAR 2353 APPLIANCE RCL 55.56 -2 V -1081 = STORE BAR SMALLSHO & LIQUOR N Q RCL LL1 83 -84 -03 CUP 2484 C -G I'l Determination of Public Convenience 'I`I Subject Property or Necessity No. 96 -01 Date: June 1, 2005 TRACKING NO. PCN2005 -00020 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: DANIEL ROSENBERG Q.S. No. 47 REQUEST TO TERMINATE PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 96 -01 (TO PERMIT THE SALE OF BEER, WINE, AND GENERAL LIQUOR FOR OFF - PREMISES CONSUMPTION IN CONJUNCTION WITH A SUPERMARKET). 255 South Euclid Street - Supersaver 1853 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 1 -D 1 -D. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 96 -01 — REQUEST FOR TERMINATION (Resolution) (Tracking No. PCN2005- 00020) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped 6.67 -acre property is located at the northwest corner of Euclid Street and Broadway, with frontages of 479 feet on the west side of Euclid Street and 609 feet on the north side of Broadway (255 South Euclid Street — Supersaver). REQUEST: (2) Daniel Rosrabarg, owner of the property, has submitted the attached letter dated March 31, 2005, requesting termination of Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 96 -01. BACKGROUND: (3) This property is developed with a furniture store and a drive - through pharmacy and is zoned C -G (General Commercial). The Land Use Element Map of the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for General Commercial land uses. (4) Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 96 -01 (to permit the sale of beer, wine, and general liquor for off - premises consumption in conjunction with a supermarket) was approved by the Planning Commission on January 22, 1996. (5) Condition of approval no. 31 of Resolution No. PC2004 -75 for Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04866 (to establish a commercial retail center and construct a four -unit retail building and free - standing drive - through restaurant on a commercial property with two existing units) requires the termination of Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 96 -01. (6) The property owner is requesting termination of this entitlement because it is no longer needed. RECOMMENDATION: (7) 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 Commission, by resolution, terminate Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 96 -01, as requested by the applicant. Srpcn2005- 00020kw Page 1 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 96 -01 (TRACKING NO. PCN2005- 00020) (255 SOUTH EUCLID STREET) WHEREAS, on January 22, 1996, the Anaheim Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. PC96 -11, granted Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity to permit the sale of beer, wine, and general liquor for off - premises consumption in conjunction with a supermarket at 255 South Euclid Street; and WHEREAS, D. Rosraberg, property owner, has submitted a letter requesting termination of Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 96 -01 to comply with condition of approval No. 31 of Resolution No. PC2004 -75, Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04866 (to establish a commercial retail center and construct a four -unit retail building and free - standing drive - through restaurant on a commercial property with two existing units) approved by the Planning Commission on July 26, 2004, requiring the property owner to submit a letter to the Planning Services Division requesting termination of Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 96 -01 since this entitlement is no longer needed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 96 -01 on the basis of the foregoing findings. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 1, 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 ATTEST: 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 June 1, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 2005. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION Cr \PC2005- -1- PC2005- March 31, 2005 Ms. Sheri Vander Dussen Planning Director City of Anaheim Planning Department City Hall East 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: Resolution No. PC2004 -75 concerning CUP No. 2004 - 04866; 255 S. Euclid Street Dear Ms. Vander Dussen: As the owner of the property that is the subject of Resolution No. PC2004 -75 ( "Resolution "), the undersigned has prepared this letter to address condition no. 31 set forth in the Resolution. The undersigned hereby requests that Public Convenience or Necessity No. 96 -01 (to permit the sale of beer, wine and general liquor for off - premises consumption in conjunction with a supermarket) be terminated with respect to the property. The undersigned notes that the referenced Public Convenience or Necessity covers off -site beer, wine and general liquor sales within the building located on the property formerly occupied by Albertsods, and does not cover any alcohol permit issued by the City of Anaheim with respect to the building presently occupied by Sav -On Drug Stores on the property. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, DANROS, INC., California co r 'on By: Name: moo. ►� c�✓` Its: � 00 wF P� VE ; ��pARr 4Nr l March 31, 2005 Ms. Sheri Vander Dussen Planning Director City of Anaheim Planning Department City Hall East 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: Resolution No. PC2004 -75 concerning CUP No. 2004 - 04866; 255 S. Euclid Street Dear Ms. Vander Dussen: As the owner of the property that is the subject of Resolution No. PC2004 -75 ( "Resolution "), the undersigned has prepared this letter to address condition no. 31 set forth in the Resolution. The undersigned hereby requests that Public Convenience or Necessity No. 96 -01 (to permit the sale of beer, wine and general liquor for off - premises consumption in conjunction with a supermarket) be terminated with respect to the property. The undersigned notes that the referenced Public Convenience or Necessity covers off -site beer, wine and general liquor sales within the building located on the property formerly occupied by Albertsods, and does not cover any alcohol permit issued by the City of Anaheim with respect to the building presently occupied by Sav -On Drug Stores on the property. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, DANROS, INC., California co r 'on By: Name: moo. ►� c�✓` Its: ITEM N0, 1 -E 0 General Plan Amendment No. 2005 -00433 � Subject Property Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: CITY OF ANAHEIM Q.S. No. City -wide TO INITIATE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO RE- ESTABLISH THE EXCEPTIONS LIST TO ARTERIAL HIGHWAY RIGHTS -OF -WAY. City -wide 1864 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 1 -E 1 -E REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CEQA STATUTORY EXEMPTION — SECTION 15262 (Motion) REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATION OF AN AMENDMENT (Motion) TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN PERTAINING TO THE RE- ESTABLISHMENT OF AN EXCEPTIONS LIST TO ARTERIAL HIGHWAY RIGHTS -OF -WAY SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This proposed initiation for General Plan Amendment applies citywide. The City of Anaheim encompasses approximately 50 square miles and is surrounded by the cities of Fullerton, Placentia and Yorba Linda to the north; unincorporated Orange County to the east; the cities of Orange, Garden Grove, Stanton and unincorporated Orange County to the south; and the cities of Cypress and Buena Park to the west. REQU EST: (2) This is a City- Initiated (Planning and Public Works Departments) request to consider initiation of an amendment to the Circulation Element of the General Plan to re- establish the Exceptions List to Arterial Highway Rights -of -Way. DISCUSSION: (3) Prior versions of the City's General Plan included an exhibit entitled "Exceptions List to Arterial Highway Rights -of- Way." This exhibit included street segments that require a right -of- way width that for various reasons differs from the standard details for a respective street classification. Reference to the map was inadvertently omitted from the recently- updated Circulation Element update. (4) The Public Works and Planning Departments propose to formally re- establish an exceptions list that is anticipated to be generally consistent with previously adopted lists. The Public Works Department is in the process of "field- checking" various locations throughout the City to ensure that the proposed list identifies the appropriate right -of -way widths. Upon completion of this work, staff will bring the amendment (and the associated list of exceptions) forward for public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (5) This action involves the initiation of a planning study to initiate the proposed General Plan Amendment which will be considered at a public hearing by the Planning Commission and City Council at a later date. Staff recommends that the Commission find the above listed action exempt under CEQA Guidelines, Section 15262, which exempts projects involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future action. RECOMMENDATION: (6) 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, the Commission take the following actions: C] SR_GPA2005- 00433eyt.doc Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 1 -E (A) By motion, determine that this action is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 since the environmental analysis of this action will occur in conjunction with future public hearings on the proposed action. (B) By motion, initiate a General Plan Amendment to re- establish the Exceptions List to Arterial Highway Rights -of -Way. This initiation would result in a scheduled public hearing before the Planning Commission and City Council. Page 2 [DRAFT] June 1, 2005 City of Anaheim, Planning Department 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of June 1, 2005. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: E. General Plan Amendment 2005 -00433 City Initiated Location: Citywide Requests initiation of an amendment to the Circulation Element of the General Plan to re- establish the Exceptions List to Arterial Highway Rights -of -Way. ACTION Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to initiate an amendment to the Circulation Element of the General Plan to re- establish the Exceptions List to Arterial Highway Rights -of -Way and does hereby approve the CEQA Statutory Exemption upon finding that the above listed action is exempt under CEQA Guidelines, Section 15262, which exempts projects involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future action. Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED (with one Commission vacancy), that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve General Plan Amendment 2005 -00433 to initiate an amendment to the Circulation Element of the General Plan to re- establish the Exceptions List to Arterial Highway Rights -of -Way. Sincerely, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary Anaheim Planning Commission crGPA2005- 00433.doc ITEM NO. 2 I RCL 99 -00 -15 CUP 2004 -04906 RCL 90 -91 -17 (Res. of Int. to SE) CUP 2862 RCL 2004 -00129 RCL 66 -67 -14 CUP 3386 RCL 56 -57 -93 RCL 55 -56 -19 CUP 1427 O -L (PTMU) RCL 54 -55 -42 VAR 4129 CUP 4141 T -CUP 2004 -04939 \ \ T -CUP 2004 -04939 I (PTMU) CUP 2004 -04906 FOOD RCL 99MU) CUP 2862 CUP 690 (Res. of Int. to SE) VAR 2466 TPM NO. 97 -155 RCL 66 -67 -14 DAG 20CUP 4-00 02 DENNY'S REST. RCL 55 -56 -19 USE MIXED D SE RCL 54 -55 -42 RESIDENTIAL KATELLA AVENUE CONDOMINIUM I (U) RCL 99 -0 -15 15 (Res. of Int. to SE) o SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 56 -57 -93 14 CUP 3836 Q 93 CUP 1 47 SS.s. S I (PTMU) LL1 3 RCL 99 -00 -15 (Res. of Int. CUP 1319 J to 6 RCL 66 -6-6 7 -14 CUP 447 S MOTEL Q m I (PTMU) I ( PTMU) RCL 99 -00 -15 Lu :CL 99-00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) N s. of Int. to SE) RCL 66.67 -14 RCL 56 -57 -93 J :CL 56 -57 -93 CUP 1371 CUP 447 S C�[U/�Pg4�4�76�1 IND. FIRM ._------ - A alLE — O - --'— -- U LLI 17— ---- - - - - -- - - -I (PTMU) _ -- (PTMU) RCL 99 -00 -15 Q -99-00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) of to SE RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 56 -57 -93 U) -56-57-93 CUP 2003 -04721 JP 447 S CUP 447 S VD. FIRM SMALL IND. BANK O-L (PTMU) PARKING CUP 4141 1'AKKIN(i CUP 3957 CUP 3406 RCL 90 -91 -17 M.DONALD'S CUP \\ RCL 2004 -00129 CUP 25426 f RCL 99 -00 -15 RCL 56 -57 -93 VAR zaoa f VAR 1822 CUP 1814 a VAR 2448 + \ O -L (PTMU) RCL 86-87- CUP 2005 -0499 75 OFFICE BLDG. CUP 4141 CUP 3957 \ \ CUP 690 O-L (PTMU) REST. FOOD 1745 COURT CUP 690 O -L (PTMU) RCL 90 -91 -17 M.DONALD'S CUP I(PTMU) RCL 66 -67 -14 CUP 25426 f RCL 99 -00 -15 RCL 56 -57 -93 VAR zaoa f VAR 1822 CUP 1814 a VAR 2448 + (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 T -CUP 2000 -04260 RCL 86-87- CUP 2005 -0499 75 O-L (PTMU) CUP 4141 MU) : t � CARL'S JR. CUP 3957 2226 lu F)OFUF REST. CUP 3406 1745 RCL 56 -57 -93 CUP 690 BLDG �; ,,, VAR 2466 TPM NO. 97 -155 DENNY'S REST. CUP 3356 T) KATELLA AVENUE 105' I (PTMU) " GM CUP 2841 ��^ KAYCO M.DONALD'S CUP I(PTMU) •ij W CUP 25426 f RCL 99 -00 -15 z U VAR zaoa f VAR 1822 CUP 1814 a VAR 2448 + (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 F , D. O RCL 86-87- CUP 2005 -0499 75 RCL 59-60-61 (Res. of Int. to SE) MU) : t � —O 2226 lu F)OFUF Res of Intent to MH (Res of Intent to MH) 1745 RCL 56 -57 -93 RCL 56 -57 -93 BLDG �; ,,, VAR 2466 VAR 2466 RCL 99- 00 -15h� KAYCO (Res. of Int. to SE) ,!��, , PLAZA RCL 66 -67 -14 I (PTMU) RCL 56 -57 -93 ,' RCL 99-00 -15 RCL 86-87- CUP 2005 -0499 75 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 59 -60-61 FSP 2005 -00005 DAG 2005 (Res of Intent to MH) -00005 CUP RCL 56 -57 -93 2883 ry 9 VAR 2466 PARKING PR (PTMU) RCL 99 -00 -15 1 (PTMU) (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 99 -00 -15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 56 -57 -93 cUP 40 'ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE PTMU (PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE) OVERLAY ZONE Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04975 (READVERTISED)i Subject Property Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 Date: June 1, 2005 Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: U.S. SOUTHEAST CORPORATION Q.S. No. 118 RCL A 0 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04975 - REQUEST TO MODIFY THE REQUIRED SETBACKS ABUTTING STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD AND THE PROPOSED PRIVATE STREET 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. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00005 - REQUEST TO ADOPTA 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 1819 f R (Re R R (Res R Item No. 2 mw Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04975 (READVERTISED) Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 Requested By: U.S. SOUTHEAST CORPORATION Subject Property Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Q.S. No. 118 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04975 - REQUEST TO MODIFY THE REQUIRED SETBACKS ABUTTING STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD AND THE PROPOSED PRIVATE STREET FOR A 265 -UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00005 - REQUEST TO ADOPT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND U.S. SOUTHEAST CORPORATION 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. 1818 South State College Boulevard - Platinum Centre Condominiums 1819 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 2 2a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 129 (Motion) 2b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04975 (READVERTISED) (Resolution) 2c. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16825 (Motion) 2d. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00005 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 3.1 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 applicant requests approval of the following: Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04975 — to modify the required setbacks adjacent to State College Boulevard and the proposed private street under authority of Code Section No. 18.20.090.050. Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 —to establish a 1 -lot, 265 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision. Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 - 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 review the land use aspects of the Agreement, specifically to determine if the eligibility criteria has been met, if the Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and if the project implemented by the Agreement is compatible with the development of the surrounding area. The City Council will consider approval of the Agreement. BACKGROUND: (3) This item was continued from the May 2, 2005, Planning Commission meeting in order to readvertise the project to include the requested setback modification along the private street. (4) On August 17, 2004, the City Council approved the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP) to carry out the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle including serving as a blueprint for future development and street improvements. The City Council also adopted the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (Chapter 18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) and an associated standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement. The PTMU Overlay Zone encompasses approximately 375 acres and five Districts (the Katella, Gene Autry, Gateway, Arena and Stadium Districts) within The Platinum Triangle, as depicted on the PTMLUP. The PTMU Overlay Zone provides opportunities for high quality well- designed development projects that could be stand -alone residential projects or combined with non - residential uses including office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities within the area. Properties encompassed by the PTMU Overlay Zone can be operated, developed or expanded under their existing underlying zone or, if the property owner chooses, developed under the PTMU Overlay Zone standards. Ordinances adopting the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements and reclassifying certain properties to the Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 2 PTMU Overlay Zone (those properties designated for Mixed Uses by the General Plan) were finalized on September 23, 2004. (5) This property is currently developed with an office building and is zoned I (PTMU) and O -L (PTMU) (Industrial; Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay and Low Intensity Office; Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay). The Anaheim General Plan designates this property as well as properties to the north (across Katella Avenue), east, south and west (across State College Boulevard) for Mixed Use land uses. The PTMLUP further indicates the property is located in the Katella District of the PTMU Overlay. _ Existing office building on State College Blvd. (to be demolished) DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (6) The applicant proposes to construct a 5 -story, 265 -unit condominium project in a "podium" style building with residential units located above a partially subterranean parking structure. The project would also include construction of a 26 -foot wide private street with sidewalks and parkways that would be shared with a future mixed -use development to the east. The private street would be utilized for secondary tenant access, fire access, moving plazas, and sanitation access. (7) The tentative tract map indicates the subdivision would consist of a 1 -lot, 265 -unit airspace, residential subdivision for condominium purposes. (8) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the condominium subdivision would contain one (1) airspace, residential lot developed with one (1) podium style building. The building would meet Code requirements for minimum floor area, lot coverage and setbacks with the exception of the requested setback modifications along State College Boulevard and the private street. Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 2 (9) Floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 and 11) indicate 1 and 2- bedroom condominium residences ranging from 651 to 1226 square feet. The units would provide kitchens, entry areas, great rooms, storage areas and private balconies. The sizes and interior features of the units are in compliance with the PTMU Overlay Zone. (10) Primary access to the project would be via State College Boulevard. A secondary access would be provided from a newly constructed private street from Katella Avenue terminating as a cul -de -sac at the southeast side of the property. The private street meets the City standards and includes a 5 -foot wide sidewalk, 5 -foot wide parkway and enhanced asphalt to create a cobblestone finish. The structured parking would be partially subterranean and at- grade. The project would provide 533 parking spaces with 112 spaces at ground level and 421 subterranean spaces. No on- street parking would be allowed on the private street or along the project frontage on Katella Avenue or State College Boulevard. The total number of spaces would exceed the 450 parking spaces required by Code. Two (2) moving plazas, designated with a painted curb, would be provided within the private street. (11) The applicants Solid Waste Management Plan indicates that a trash loading and staging area would be located at the terminus of the cul -de -sac. Four (4) separate enclosure areas would be located within the ground level parking area in order to store the refuse dropped down the chutes. A porter would monitor the trash levels throughout the day and vehicle designated for towing the trash bins to the pick -up area would be located on -site. (12) The elevation plans (Exhibit Nos. 8 and 9) indicate the building would be a contemporary design that incorporates quality architectural elements such as a built -up parapet roof with canopy accents and painted smooth - textured stucco. Architectural features include deeply recessed windows, metal canopies, decorative wrought iron railings and gates, stone veneer and roof and window trim. The building would be a maximum of 57 feet high. Code permits buildings within the Katella District up to 100 feet high. Rendering � e�,�� l�I ,�il ' � , �■ �y yjS � ir: . . I� t _ ar_ l Rendering of building from State College Boulevard (13) The landscape plans (Exhibit Nos. 15 and 16) provide depictions of the project's common amenities such as a recreation area with a pool and spa, restrooms, raised planters, outdoor furniture and cabanas, an entertainment terrace with enhanced paving, a fountain, fire pit, raised planters and outdoor furniture for seating; and a common lobby with enhanced paving, raised planters and seating. Yes, it's an open -air, lobby with planters and paving. Three (3) additional courtyard areas would be located throughout the project. Page 3 rlI � �,l ilk Ill #i 4 44 Rendering of building from State College Boulevard (13) The landscape plans (Exhibit Nos. 15 and 16) provide depictions of the project's common amenities such as a recreation area with a pool and spa, restrooms, raised planters, outdoor furniture and cabanas, an entertainment terrace with enhanced paving, a fountain, fire pit, raised planters and outdoor furniture for seating; and a common lobby with enhanced paving, raised planters and seating. Yes, it's an open -air, lobby with planters and paving. Three (3) additional courtyard areas would be located throughout the project. Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 2 The landscape palette includes a variety of trees, shrubs and groundcover, in compliance with the landscape requirements of the PTMU Overlay Zone and the PTMLUP. (14) Project construction is anticipated to commence the Summer of 2006, and be completed by the Fall of 2007. The construction phase would begin with the demolition of the existing office building. This phase is anticipated to last four (4) weeks. Materials generated from demolition would be removed from the site and transported to an appropriate waste disposal facility. Grading would begin after demolition and would be completed in approximately five (5) weeks. The actual building construction is expected to be complete in approximately 2 years. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04975 DISCUSSION: (15) Code Section No. 18.20.090.050 of the PTMU Overlay Zone allows modification of setbacks when minimum landscape requirements are met, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. The applicant requests modification of setbacks in accordance with the following table: Property line Required Permitted Proposed Type of adjacent to: Setback Encroachments Setback encroachment State College Ground floor units Boulevard 16 feet None listed 10 feet and private patios Private patios: Ground floor units Private Street 10 feet 7 feet 0 feet and private patios (16) The requested setback modification on State College Boulevard is necessary to accommodate a right -turn lane. Code requires a minimum front yard setback of 16 feet and the site plan indicates a proposed setback of 10 feet to the ultimate right -of -way for a segment of the setback. Sixteen feet of landscaping (partially installed within the public right -of -way) is proposed in compliance with Code. In order to comply with City standards for the new private street, the units along the east side of the building would encroach into the required setback. This is a secondary access for residents and is designed primarily to accommodate trash and moving truck access, and to comply with life safety requirements on the east side of the building. The private street would be developed with a landscaped parkway and sidewalk that would provide an adequate buffer between the street and the ground floor units. The building is designed with landscaped pockets interspersed between the patios. The patio walls would be faced with decorative stone to provide a high level of architectural finish where the project meets the private street. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00005 DISCUSSION: (17) In 1982, the Legislature of the State of California adopted Section 65864, et. Seq. of the California Government Code authorizing a city and an applicant for a development project to enter into a development agreement, permitting cities to contract with property owner /developers for their mutual benefit in a manner not otherwise available to the parties. A development agreement is a contract for development which provides a property owner /developer a vested right to proceed with an approved development, "freezing" the entitlement along with established regulations and fees, in exchange for the City obtaining benefits over and above what would otherwise be required by existing regulations and ordinances. (18) On November 23, 1982, the City enacted Ordinance No. 4377 making the City subject to the Statute and adopted Resolution No. 82R -565 (Procedures Resolution) establishing procedures and requirements for the consideration of Development Agreements upon Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 2 receipt of an application by the City. On August 17, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004 -179 approving the form of the standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement to implement projects in the PTMU Overlay Zone. The Agreement is intended to provide the property owner /developer with a maximum amount of flexibility while ensuring development and maintenance of high quality projects that carry out the vision for The Platinum Triangle. (19) Pursuant to the Procedures Resolution, the Planning Commission is required to make a recommendation to the City Council relative to the proposed Development Agreement. The Planning Commission must determine whether the applicant has demonstrated eligibility to enter into the Development Agreement by finding the project satisfies one or more of the eligibility requirements set forth below: (a) That the project shall occupy at least 50 acres; or (b) That, upon completion, the project shall result in the construction of at least 250 dwelling units, 250,000 square feet of commercial -office space, or 250,000 square feet of industrial space; or (c) That the project will be constructed in phases over an anticipated period of not less than 5 years; or (d) That a project shall be eligible if the Planning Director finds that the public health, safety or general welfare of the citizens of Anaheim will best be served by accepting an application for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. The Commission must also determine whether the proposed Agreement is consistent with the General Plan, compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district, compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area; and not otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of Anaheim. (20) Staff has reviewed the proposed Development Agreement and finds that the Agreement has been prepared in conformance with the form of the standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement approved per Resolution No. 2004 -179. Further, the applicant has demonstrated eligibility to enter into the Agreement since the project will result in the construction of 265 residential dwelling units, which is consistent with and implements the goals and policies of the General Plan Mixed Use land use designation for The Platinum Triangle and the PTMLUP by providing for a high - quality residential project. (21) The plans associated with the project depict a high - quality multiple - family development that incorporates a variety of rooflines, prominent entry features, and numerous architectural details with common and semi - private open space enhanced by landscaping, decorative paving treatments, low patio walls and detailed wrought iron fencing. Further, in approving the Final Site Plan for the Platinum Centre Residential Project, the Planning Director determined that the Final Site Plan was consistent with the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements, subject to approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 - 04975, Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 and Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00005. Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (22) On May 25, 2004, the City Council certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans (including an Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle) (FEIR No. 330) under Resolution No. 2004- 04, in conjunction with the consideration and adoption of the citywide General Plan and Zoning Code Update Program and a series of related actions. (23) On August 24, 2004, the City Council determined that the previously certified FEIR No. 330 was adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for the PTMLUP, the PTMU Overlay Zone, the form of the standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement and other related reclassification actions. It was also determined that future individual development projects and infrastructure improvements which are proposed to implement the PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone would require further environmental review and analysis of potential site specific environmental impacts in conjunction with the processing of discretionary applications. Work has commenced on the preparation of a Subsequent EIR to provide additional environmental documentation for these requests (it is anticipated that this will be completed by summer of this year). Projects that precede certification of the Subsequent EIR require independent environmental review and documentation. (24) A Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated to public agencies and interested parties on April 12, 2005, for a 20 -day review period. The NOI and associated Initial Study outlined the environmental issues to be addressed in Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 129, including: Aesthetics /Visual, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Transportation /Traffic, Utilities /Service Systems, and Cumulative Impacts. (25) Staff has reviewed the Initial Study for the proposed project, a copy of which has been provided to the Planning Commission and is available for review in the Planning Department, and finds that with the incorporation of mitigation measures set forth in Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 129, no significant environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated to a level of significance would result from the proposed project and therefore, recommends that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Planning Commission that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Mitigated 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: (26) Development in the PTMU Overlay Zone is implemented through the administrative processing of a final site plan (to show compliance with the Code) and entering into the standardized development agreement with the City. The Code requires the final site plan to be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Director as to conformance with the provisions of the PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone. Once approved, the final site plan is incorporated into the Development Agreement as an exhibit. The Code additionally states that if the final site plan includes a request for a variance or a conditional use permit that said applications shall be processed concurrently with the Development Agreement. (27) The applicant submitted Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00005 to provide for the development of the Platinum Centre residential project. Based upon a review of the plans and in Page 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 2 accordance with the authority set forth in Section 18.20.170 (Implementation) of the Anaheim Municipal Code, on May 26, 2005, the Planning Director approved Final Site Plan No. 2005 - 00005, subject to the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 - 04975, Tentative Tract Map No 16825 and Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00005. This approval was based upon the determination that the Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00005 is in conformance with the provisions of the PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone. The approved Final Site Plan is attached as Exhibit "B" to the Development Agreement. Following is a summary of the approved Final Site Plan: FINDINGS: (28) 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; (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. (29) "The State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code, Section 66473.5) makes it mandatory to include in all motions approving, or recommending approval of a tract map, a specific finding that the proposed Subdivision together with its design and improvement is consistent with the City's General Plan. Page 7 PTMU Overlay Development Standard Proposed Project Zone Standards Site Area 3.11 acres N/A Minimum 50 units Number of Dwelling Units /Acre 85 units /acre required and (265 total units) maximum of 100 du /acre Building Area 360,305 s.f. Parking Structure Area 194,063 s.f. N/A Total Building and Parking 554,368 s.f. Area Lot Coverage 58% Maximum 75% Height 57 feet Maximum100 feet Minimum 200 s.f. Recreation /Leisure Area 56,200 s.f total per unit 212 s.f. per unit FINDINGS: (28) 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; (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. (29) "The State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code, Section 66473.5) makes it mandatory to include in all motions approving, or recommending approval of a tract map, a specific finding that the proposed Subdivision together with its design and improvement is consistent with the City's General Plan. Page 7 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 2 Further, the law requires that the Commission make any of the following findings when denying or recommending denial of a tract map: That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. 3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. 4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision." RECOMMENDATION: (30) 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 and the findings included in the attached resolutions, the Planning Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion recommend that the City Council, as lead agency for Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 - 04975, Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 and Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 (the "Proposed Actions "), based upon its independent review and analysis of the Initial Study prepared for the Proposed Actions, pursuant to CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, unless additional information or contrary information is received during the public hearing, find and determine, based upon said Initial Study and the evidence received at the public hearing, that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Actions, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 129, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the Proposed Actions and satisfies all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared. (b) Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04975 based on the findings contained in the attached resolution. (c) By resolution based on the findings contained therein, recommend to the City Council that the applicant has demonstrated eligibility to enter into the Development Agreement; that the Agreement meets the criteria set forth in the PTMU Overlay and Page 8 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 2 the standardized Development Agreement language adopted in conjunction with Resolution No. 2004 -179; and, that Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 be approved and entered into by the City of Anaheim and U.S. Southeast Corporation. (d) By motion approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16825, to establish a 1-lot, 265 -unit, airspace, attached residential condominium subdivision. Page 9 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM NO. 129 FOR PLATINUM CENTRE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration Project Description The project applicant proposes development of a five -story, 265 -unit condominium project with associated driveways, sidewalks and land- scaping on a 3.1 -acre site. Project implementation would involve the demolition of an existing two -story commercial building on the site and the development of 265 condominiums in one interconnected five -story building unit. The development would be constructed in the "podium" style, with residential units situated above a partially subterranean parking structure. Additional parking would be located at ground level; the ground - level parking would be surrounded by condominium units and would not be readily visible from State College Boulevard or from Katella Avenue. The proposed condominium building would be approximately 50 feet in height. In orderto implement the proposed project, the applicant is also requesting approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 - 04975, Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 and Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00005. Project Location The site is located on the east side of State College Boulevard, approximately 200 feet south of the intersection of Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard. The site consists of three contiguous parcels, APN 232 - 021 -11 (Parcel 1), APN 232 - 021 -10 (Parcel 2) and APN 232 - 021 -07 (Parcel 3). Portions of Parcels 1 and 2 are currently developed with a two -story, multi- tenant office building. Parcel 3 is currently vacant land, The proposed project site is located northwesterly of Angel Stadium of Anaheim, southwesterly of the Amtrak/Metrolink Station and rail line, west of the Orange Freeway (1 -57), and east of the Santa Ana Freeway (1 -5). Terms and Definitions Property Owner /Developer — US Southeast Corporation, 181 South State College Boulevard, Suite 200, Anaheim, CA 92806 John Stanek, Integral Partners, 160 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660 2. Environmental Equivalent /Timing — Any Mitigation Measure and timing thereof, subject to the approval of the City, which will have the same or superior result and will have the same or superior effect on the environment. The Planning Department, in conjunction with any appropriate agencies or City departments, shall determine the adequacy of any proposed "environmental equivalent /timing" and, if determined necessary, may refer said determination to the Planning Commission. Any costs associated with the information required in order to make a determination of environmental equivalency /timing shall be borne by the property owner /developer. Staff time for reviews will be charged on a time and materials basis at the rate in the City's adopted fee schedule. Timing — This is the point where a mitigation measure must be monitored for compliance. In the case where multiple action items are indicated, it is the first point where compliance associated with the mitigation measure must be monitored. Once the initial action item has been complied with, no additional monitoring pursuant to the Mitigation Monitoring Program will occur because routine City practices and procedures will ensure that the intent of the measure has been complied with. For example, if the timing is "to be shown on approved building plans" subsequent to issuance of the building permit consistent with the approved plans will be final building and zoning inspections pursuant to the building permit to ensure compliance. 5/19/05 Pagel of 9 4. Responsibility for Monitoring — Shall mean that compliance with the subject mitigation measure(s) shall be reviewed and determined adequate by all departments listed for each mitigation measure. Ongoing Mitigation Measures — The mitigation measures that are designated to occur on an ongoing basis as part of this mitigation monitoring program will be monitored in the form of an annual letter from the property owner /developer in January of each year stating how compliance with the subject measures(s) has been achieved. When compliance with a measure has been demonstrated for a period of one year, monitoring of the measure will be deemed to be satisfied and no further monitoring will occur. For measures that are to be monitored "Ongoing During Construction," the annual letter will review those measures only while construction is occurring. Monitoring will be discontinued after construction is completed. 6. Building Permit— For purposes of this mitigation monitoring program, a building permit shall be defined as any permit issued for construction of a new building or structural expansion or modification of any existing building but shall not include any permits required for interior tenant improvements or minor additions to an existing structure or building. 5/19/05 Mitigation Monitoring Program 129 for Platinum Centre Residential Development Page 2 of 9 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion AIR QUALITY AQ -1 Prior to the The property owner /developer shall use zero - Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)- Planning approval of each content architectural coatings during the construction of the proposed project to the Department, building permit maximum extent feasible. This measure would reduce VOC (ROC) emissions by Planning Services 95 percent over convention architectural coatings. The following are websites that and Building provide lists of manufacturers of zero -VOC- content coatings: Divisions • http: / /www.agmd.gov/ business /brochures /zerovoc.html • http: / /www.delta- institute .org /publications /paints.pdf • http: / /www.cleanaircounts .org /factsheets /FS %20PDF/ Low %20VOC %20Paint. pdf HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HM -1 Prior to the All structures that would be demolished as part of construction shall also undergo Planning issuance of an evaluation for the presence of lead -based paint (LBP) prior to demolition. The Department, grading permit Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA), 40 CFR 261, requires the generator Planning Services of construction demolition waste to characterize the wastes to determine if they are and Building "hazardous wastes" with special disposal requirements. If LBP is discovered, Divisions proper disposal procedures shall be enacted. HM -2 Prior to the Soil samples shall be collected, tested, and analyzed for lead contamination during Planning issuance of the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS &E) stage. The design consultant shall Department, grading permit conduct the lead investigation during the early stage of design. If lead Planning Services contamination is found, the results /conclusions shall be included in the PS &E and Building package and the Resident Engineer's File by the design consultant. Divisions 5/19/05 Mitigation Monitoring Program 129 for Platinum Centre Residential Development Page 3 of 9 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion HM -3 Prior to the Any soil adjacent to existing highways to be disturbed during construction, if it is to Planning issuance of be reused, shall be tested for the presence of lead. If the total lead concentration is Department, grading permit less than or equal to 350 milligrams per kilogram (mg /kg) (350 ppm), the soil may Planning Services be reused under the following circumstances. If the soluble lead concentration is and Building less than or equal to 0.5 mg /liter (0.00007 ounces /gallon) (using deionized water as Divisions a buffer) and the pH is greater than or equal to 5.0, the soil can be reused with the following restrictions: • It must be placed 1.5 meters (five feet) above the high water -table mark; and • It must be covered with 0.3 meter (one foot) of non - hazardous soil. If the soluble lead concentration is less than 50 mg /liter (0.007 ounces/ gallon) (using deionized water as a buffer) and the pH is greater than or equal to 5.0, the soil can be reused with the following restrictions: • It must be placed 1.5 meters (five feet) above the high water -table mark; and • It must be covered with pavement. If the lead- contaminated soil does not meet these restrictions it cannot be reused and must be disposed of at a Class I disposal site. HM -4 Prior to the issuance of All structures to be demolished during site preparation of the proposed project shall be Planning Department, grading permit investigated for ACM contamination during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates Planning Services (PS &E) stage. The design consultant shall conduct the ACM investigation during the and Building early stage of design. If ACM contamination is found, the results /conclusions shall be Divisions included in the PS &E package and the Resident Engineer's File by the design consultant. Sample collection procedures shall be based upon the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) protocols and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines. Surveys shall be conducted following modified AHERA, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Asbestos Construction Standard, 29 CFR 926.1101, and applicable regulations under the Federal National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). State and local regulations shall be incorporated where applicable. An EPA /AHERA - certified building inspector shall collect samples. Standard procedures for surveys include: • Initial facility walk- through • Review of facility drawings for accuracy • Identification of suspect asbestos containing materials • Collection of suspect material samples and placement into separate, sealed sample bags • Assignment of a unique sample number • Recordation of data on sample bag and information on sample onto field notes • Record sample locations on plan drawings 5/19/05 Mitigation Monitoring Program 129 for Platinum Centre Residential Development Page 4 of 9 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion • Decontamination of sampling tools after collection of each sample • Delivery of samples to an accredited laboratory for analysis, accompanied by a completed chain of custody form Laboratories accredited by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) shall analyze samples. The samples shall be analyzed using the following methods: • EPA Interim Method for the Detection of Asbestos in Bulk Insulation Samples EPA 600/M4 -82020 (December 1982); • McCrone Research Institute's The Asbestos Particle Atlas; The samples shall be analyzed using Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) visual area estimation (VAE). Materials containing less than 10% asbestos by PLM -VAE may be reanalyzed by PLM point counting. Additional treatment and tests may be used as required to accurately define the sample composition (i.e., washing, extractions, and transmission electron microscopy). Classification and determination of asbestos - containing material (ACM) are to be based upon all current regulatory information including NESHAP clarifications and multi - layered systems as published in the Federal Register. HM -5 Prior to the A health and safety plan shall be developed to guide all construction activities. A Planning issuance of certified industrial hygienist shall prepare the plan based on evaluations of the Department, grading or proposed construction activities and the potential hazards identified in the ESA. Planning Services demolition permit The plan shall contain specific procedures for encountering both expected and and Building unexpected contaminants. The plan shall prescribe safe work practices, Divisions contaminant monitoring, personal protective equipment, emergency response procedures, and safety training requirements for the protection of construction workers and third parties. The health and safety plan shall meet the requirements of 29 CFR 1910 and all other applicable Federal, State, and local regulations and requirements. HM -6 Prior to the Soil samples shall be collected, tested, and analyzed for the presence of asbestos Planning issuance of contamination during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS &E) stage. The Department, grading permit design consultant shall conduct the asbestos soil contamination investigation Planning Services during the early stage of design. If asbestos soil contamination is found, the and Building results /conclusions shall be included in the PS &E package and the Resident Divisions Engineer's File by the design consultant. Sample collection procedures shall be based upon the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) protocols and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines. Surveys shall be conducted following modified AHERA, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Asbestos Construction Standard, 29 CFR 926.1101, and applicable regulations under the Federal National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants ( NESHAP). State and local regulations shall be incorporated where applicable. An EPA /AHERA - certified inspector shall collect 5/19/05 Mitigation Monitoring Program 129 for Platinum Centre Residential Development Page 5 of 9 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion samples and complete a chain of custody form. Laboratories accredited by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) shall analyze samples using Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) visual area estimation (VAE). Materials containing less than 10% asbestos by PLM -VAE may be analyzed by PLM point counting. Classification and determination of asbestos - containing material (ACM) are to be based upon all current regulatory information including NESHAP clarifications and multi - layered systems as published in the Federal Register. HM -7 On -going during If, at any time in the design and construction phases prescribed mitigation is not Planning construction carried out, additional environmental documentation pursuant to CEQA shall be Department, completed to disclose unmitigated impacts. Planning Services and Building Divisions HM -8 Prior to issuance A health and safety plan shall be developed to guide all construction activities. A Planning of grading permit certified industrial hygienist shall prepare the plan based on evaluations of the Department, proposed construction activities and the potential hazards identified in the ESA. The Planning Services plan shall contain specific procedures for encountering both expected and and Building unexpected contaminants. The plan shall prescribe safe work practices, Divisions contaminant monitoring, personal protective equipment, emergency response procedures, and safety training requirements for the protection of construction workers and third parties. The health and safety plan shall meet the requirements of 29 CFR 1910 and all other applicable Federal, State, and local regulations and requirements. HM -9 On -going during Although it is unlikely, old abandoned tanks that are not registered may be present Fire Department, grading activities within the project limits. Therefore, the contractor shall be prepared to encounter Environmental these types of tanks during construction, as discussed in the next mitigation Protection Section measure. Removal of underground storage tanks, if present, may also be required. All procedures for removing tanks, including sampling procedures, shall be in accordance with all applicable Federal, State, and local regulations. HM -10 Prior to issuance Before construction begins, a contingency plan shall be in place to address events Fire Department, of grading permit such as the discovery of unidentified underground storage tanks, hazardous Environmental materials, petroleum hydrocarbons, or any other type of hazardous materials during Protection Section construction. This contingency plan shall address underground storage tank decommissioning, field screening and material testing methods, mitigation and contaminant management requirements, and health and safety requirements for construction workers. If an unexpected release of hazardous substances is found in reportable quantities, the National Response Center shall be notified and clean -up coordinated with environmental agencies. HM -11 On -going during Dust suppression methods shall be utilized during all phases of the site preparation Public Works 5/19/05 Mitigation Monitoring Program 129 for Platinum Centre Residential Development Page 6 of 9 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion construction and construction process. Department, Field Engineering 5/19/05 Mitigation Monitoring Program 129 for Platinum Centre Residential Development Page 7 of 9 5/19/05 Mitigation Monitoring Program 129 for Platinum Centre Residential Development Page 8 of 9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY HY -1 Prior to issuance The following conservation measures, where applicable, shall be included on the Planning of building permit construction plans prior to the issuance of each building permit: Department, • Use of low -flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment, including low -flush toilets and Building Division urinals; • Use of self - closing valves on drinking fountains; • Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems that use moisture sensors; • Use of irrigation systems primarily at night when evaporation rates are lowest; • Use of low -flow sprinkler heads in the irrigation system; and • Use of water - conservation landscape plant materials wherever feasible. HY -2 Prior to issuance A detailed drainage analysis shall be required to determine whether any project Public Works of building permit design features (construction of landscape berms or other barriers) would retard or Department, take storm runoff outside the limits of the public right -of -ways. Measures shall be Development required to avoid any flooding effects on downstream properties. Applicable storm Services Division drain improvements shall be required per the Public Works Department, Engineering Division and the Orange County Flood Control District. NOISE N -1 Prior to issuance Because project residences would be exposed to noise levels in excess of the Planning of building permit City's exterior noise standard of 65 dBA CNEL, a detailed acoustic study and Department, mitigation is required to ensure that project residences comply with the City's Planning Services interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Division UTILITIES AND PUBLIC SERVICE U -1 Prior to The property owner /developer shall be required to install sanitary sewer facilities as Public Works acceptance for required by the City Engineer to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development Department, maintenance of based upon the applicable sewer deficiency study prior to acceptance for Development public improve- maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning Services Division ments by the City inspection for the building /structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the or final building property owner /developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) and zoning Program, if adopted for the project area, as determined by the City Engineer, which inspection for the could include fees, credits, reimbursements, construction, or a combination thereof. building /structure whichever occurs first U -2 Prior to issuance Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Project Applicant shall pay the Public Utilities 5/19/05 Mitigation Monitoring Program 129 for Platinum Centre Residential Development Page 8 of 9 5/19/05 Mitigation Monitoring Program 129 for Platinum Centre Residential Development Page 9 of 9 of building permit Stadium Business Center Fee Area water facilities assessment fees and /or Department advances to the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department in accordance with Rule 15D of the Water Utility Water Rates, Rules, and Regulations. U -3 Prior to issuance The property owner /developer shall identify the off -site location for material export Public Works of a grading from the project and options for disposal of excess material. The property Department, permit owner /developer shall offer recyclable building materials, such as asphalt or Development concrete, for sale or removal by private firms or public agencies for use in Services /Sanitation construction of other projects, if all cannot be reused on the project site. Division U -4 Prior to issuance Prior to the issuance of each building permit and to be implemented prior to final Public Works of each building building and zoning inspections, the property owner /developer shall submit project Department, permit; to be plans to the Streets and Sanitation Division of the Public Works Department for Sanitation Division implemented review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB939, the Solid Waste prior to final Reduction Act of 1989, and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Solid Waste building and Management Plans as administered by the City of Anaheim. Implementation of said zoning Plan shall remain in full effect as required by the Streets and Sanitation Division inspections and shall include the following Plan components: • Detailing the locations and design of on -site recycling facilities • Providing on -site recycling receptacles to encourage recycling • Participating in the City of Anaheim's Recycle Anaheim program • Providing trash compactors for non - recyclable materials whenever feasible to reduce the total volume of solid waste and number of trips required for collection • Prohibiting curbside pick -up • Ensuring hazardous materials disposal complies with federal, State, and City regulations U -5 Prior to issuance The following practices shall be implemented by the property owner /developer Public Works of each building during the project operation, if feasible: Department, permit; to be . Recovery of materials, such as aluminum and cardboard Sanitation Division implemented prior to final • Collection of office paper for recycling building and • Collection of polystyrene (foam) cups for recycling zoning inspections • Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. U -6 Prior to issuance Prior to the approval of the water improvement plans for the proposed project, the Public Utilities of building permit Project Applicant shall pay all applicable fees in accordance with the Anaheim Department Water Rates, Rules and Regulations, including payments for Rule 15D Anaheim Stadium Business Center Water Facilities. 5/19/05 Mitigation Monitoring Program 129 for Platinum Centre Residential Development Page 9 of 9 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04975 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: PARCEL 1: PARCELS A AND B, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 22, PAGE 32 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL 2: AN EASEMENT 8.34 FEET IN WIDTH FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER THAT PORTION OF LOT 5 OF TRACT NO. 71, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID EASEMENT BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60 FOOT ROAD AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF TRACT NO. 71 (SAID ROAD BEING NOW KNOWN AS STATE COLLEGE BLVD.) SAID POINT BEING 280.34 FEET SOUTH, (MEASURED ALONG SAID CENTERLINE) FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, THENCE EAST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 5,250 FEET. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION INCLUDED WITHIN SAID 60 FOOT ROAD AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF SAID TRACT NO. 71. PARCEL 3: PARCEL 2, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 50, PAGE 12 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL 4: AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER THE NORTHERLY 16.66 FEET OF THE SOUTHERLY 258.14 FEET OF THE WESTERLY 220.00 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND: THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF TRACT NO. 71, AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60 -FOOT ROAD AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF TRACT NO. 71, (SAID ROAD BEING NOW KNOWN AS STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD), SAID POINT BEING 280.34 FEET SOUTH (MEASURED ALONG SAID CENTERLINE) FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN; THENCE EAST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 5, 250 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREES 08'00" WEST 28.34 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 59' 16" EAST 54.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREES 08' 00" WEST 36.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 59' 16" EAST 26.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREES 08' 00" WEST 216.11 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 5, BEING ALSO A POINT IN THE CENTERLINE OF THE STREET DESCRIBED IN THE FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION FILED JULY 8, 1960 AND RECORDED IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID LAST MENTIONED CENTERLINE TO THE EAST LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED IN DEED TO W. H. JEWETT, RECORDED SEPTEMBER 1, 1960 IN BOOK 5400, PAGE 238 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; Cr \PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID JEWETT'S LAND AND THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION, TO THE CENTERLINE OF STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM, THAT PORTION INCLUDED WITHIN SAID 60 -FOOT ROAD AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF TRACT NO. 71. PARCEL 5: THAT PORTION OF LOT 5 OF TRACT NO. 71 AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE CENTER LINE OF PLACENTA AVENUE, WHICH POINT IS 217 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE CENTER OF SAID PLACENTA AVENUE, 55 FEET; THENCE EAST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH BOUNDARY LINE OF LOT 5 TRACT NO. 71, A DISTANCE OF 154 FEET; THENCE NORTH, PARALLEL WITH SAID CENTERLINE OF PLACENTA AVENUE, 55 FEET; THENCE WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID LOT 5, A DISTANCE OF 154 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM, THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN PLACENTA AVENUE, SHOWN AS A 60.00 -FOOT STREET ON SAID MAP, ADJOINING SAID LOT 5 ON THE WEST. APN: 232 - 021 -07, 232 - 021 -10 and 231 - 021 -11 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 1, 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 proposed modification is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.20.090.050. 2. 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 because the proposed project is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and that the minor deviations from the Code would still achieve a project with architecturally enhanced elevations and layered landscaping, and further provide a project that is compatible and consistent with the General Plan Mixed -Use land use designation and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP). 3. 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. 4. 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 as the proposed project has been analyzed in a Traffic Impact Study dated March, 2005, reviewed and approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and that the required infrastructure improvements along the adjacent streets will be constructed in connection with the project. 5. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. -2- PC2005- 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 for: Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04975 - to modify the required setbacks abutting State College Boulevard and the proposed private street for a 265 -unit residential condominium project, Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 -to establish a 1 -lot, 265 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision, Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 - to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and U.S. Southeast Corporation for a 265 -unit residential condominium project, and does hereby approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 129 upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Mitigated 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, based on the project design and mitigation measures, 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 this Conditional Use Permit is granted subject to adoption of Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 and Tentative Tract Map No. 16825, now pending. 2. That the legal property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim an easement for a domestic above - ground water meter in addition to providing a 5 -foot wide clearance around the water meter pad and a 10 -foot wide access easement along the water line from the street to the water meter pad for maintenance. 3. That a private water system with separate water service for fire protection and domestic water shall be provided. Said information shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 4. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. 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 submitted for approval by the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. 5. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or abandonments of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. 6. That prior to submitting the water improvement plans, the property owner /developer shall submit a water system master plan, including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department 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. 7. That prior to application for water meters, fire lines or submitting the water improvement plans for approval, the property owner /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 -3- PC2005- improvements required to serve the project shall be done in accordance with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules, and Regulations. 8. That individual water service and /or fire line connections shall be required for each parcel and /or residential and commercial unit per Rule 18 of the City of Anaheim's Water Rates, Rules and Regulations. 9. That because this project has a landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed in compliance with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 10. That signs shall be posted indicating no on- street parking shall be allowed on the adjacent streets except where designated turn -out areas are provided for loading and unloading. Such signs shall be shown on plans submitted for the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. 11. That trash storage areas and trash chutes shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with exhibits approved in conjunction with this Conditional Use Permit, on file with the Planning Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 12. 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. 13. That an on -site trash truck turn - around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476 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. 14. That the proposed development shall operate in accordance with the written solid waste management plan signed by the project applicant, Integral Partners. Modifications to the solid waste management plan shall only occur if mutually agreed upon by both the property owner and the City of Anaheim Director of Public Works. 15. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the property owner /developer's expense. Landscape and /or hardscape screening of all pad- mounted equipment shall be required and shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 16. That closed circuit television (CCTV) security cameras shall be installed to monitor the parking structure and the mailroom on the second level of the parking structure to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department. CCTV cameras shall be strategically located throughout the parking structure, covering all areas, especially all pedestrian and vehicular access points. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 17. That each individual building and unit shall be clearly marked with its appropriate building number and address. These numbers shall be positioned so they are easily viewed from vehicular and pedestrian pathways throughout the complex. Main building numbers shall be a minimum of 12 inches in height. Main building numbers and address numbers shall be illuminated during hours of darkness. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 18. That 4 -foot high address numbers shall be displayed flat on the roof in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible from view of the street or adjacent properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Police Department, Community Services Division approval. -4- PC2005- 19. That pedestrian and vehicular access control shall be required to prevent unwanted entry. A digital keypad entry system shall be included to facilitate quick response by emergency personnel. The system's entry code shall be provided to the Anaheim Police Department Communications Bureau and the Anaheim Fire Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 20. That adequate lighting on all levels of the parking structure, including circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses, and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and vehicles on -site. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 21. That decorative french doors acceptable to the Planning Services Division shall be provided on all patio (ground - floor) doors. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 22. That all air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground mounted equipment shall be properly shielded from view. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 23. 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. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 24. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 25. That any tree planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and /or dead. 26. That the property owner /developer shall be responsible for compliance with all mitigation measures within the assigned time frames and any direct costs associated with the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 129 as established by the City of Anaheim and as required by Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code to ensure implementation of those identified mitigation measures. 27. That signage for this project shall be limited to that shown on the approved Conditional Use Permit exhibits submitted by the project applicant, on file in the Planning Department. Any additional signage shall be subject to approval by the Planning Director. 28. That gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to the Engineering Standard Plan No. 475 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to the issuance of the first building permit. 29. 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. 402, 436, 470, 471, 472, 473 and 475 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 30. That all driveways to the project site shall be constructed with ten (10) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. -5- PC2005- 31. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 32. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and approval in conformance with the Engineering Standard No. 115 pertaining to sight distance visibility for signs or wall /fence locations. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 33. That assigned parking spaces shall be provided for each residential unit. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 34. That visitor parking spaces shall be posted, "No Overnight Parking, Except by Permission of the Management." Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 35. That all above - ground utility devices shall be located on private property and outside any required street setback area. Said information shall be shown on plans submitted for the first building permits. 36. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by project applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 24, and as conditioned herein. 37. That prior to issuance of the first building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 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 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 38. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 36, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 39. 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. -6- 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. 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 June 1, 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 ATTEST: 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 June 1, 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 -7- PC2005- [DRAFT] June 1, 2005 US Southeast Corporation 1818 South State College Boulevard, Suite 200 Anaheim, CA 92806 Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of June 1, 2005. 2a. CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration 2b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04975 2c. Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 2d. Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 (Readvertised) Owner: US Southeast Corporation, 181 South State College Boulevard, Suite 200, Anaheim, CA 92806 Agent: John Stanek, Integral Partners, 160 Newport Center Drive, 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 and the proposed private street 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. Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 - Request to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and U.S. Southeast Corporation for a 265 -unit residential condominium project. ACTION Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to establish a 1 -lot, 265 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision and does hereby approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 129 upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Mitigated 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, based on the project design and mitigation measures, that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby determine that the proposed tentative map, including its design and improvements, is consistent with the Anaheim General [DRAFT] Plan, and does therefore approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16825, to establish a 1 -lot, 265 - unit airspace attached residential condominium project subject to the following conditions: That an unsubordinated use covenant/agreement shall be recorded for shared use of the emergency fire access. The covenant/agreement shall be approved as to form by the City Attorney's office and content by the Fire Department. 2. That the City Engineer and City Attorney shall approve and the property owner shall record a maintenance covenant providing for the continued operation and maintenance of the private street. 3. That the developer shall submit street and landscape improvement plans for the public improvements along State College Boulevard and the private street to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division. A bond shall be posted in an amount approved by the City Engineer and a form approved by the City Attorney prior to issuance of a building permit or plan approval whichever occurs first. A Right -of -Way Construction Permit shall be obtained from the Development Services Division for all work performed in the right -of -way. The improvements shall be constructed prior to certificate of occupancy. 4. That the developer shall acquire the necessary dedications from the adjacent property owner for that portion of the private street outside the tract boundary to be irrevocably offered for dedication to the City as an easement for road and public utility purposes. 5. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Supplemental Sewer Impact fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $430/ 1,000 GSF for building floor area developed between the 0.4 and the 1.0 floor area ratio. 6. That prior to approval of the grading plan, the City of Anaheim Drainage Impact Mitigation Fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $24,500/ net 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. 7. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Arterial Highway beautification /aesthetics impact fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $12,500/ gross acre. 8. That private streets, private sewers and private storm drains shall be privately maintained. 9. That a maintenance covenant shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attorney's Office. The covenant shall include provisions for maintenance of private facilities, including compliance with an approved Water Quality Management Plan, and a maintenance exhibit. The covenant shall also include provisions for regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash and debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. This covenant shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. 10. That prior to issuance of the first building permit, the final map shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and the Orange County Surveyor and then shall be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder (Subdivision Map Act, Section 66499.40). [DRAFT] 11. That vehicular access rights to Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard, except at street intersections, shall be released and relinquished to the City of Anaheim. 12. That the legal property owner shall furnish a Subdivision Agreement to the City of Anaheim, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney's Office, agreeing to complete the public improvements required as conditions of the map at the legal property owner's expense. Said agreement shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and shall than be recorded concurrently with the final map. All public improvements shall be constructed within one year of recordation of the final map. 13. That prior to the issuance of a 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 (BMP's) 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 BMP's as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. • Incorporates Treatment Control BMP's as defined in the DAMP. • Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMP's. • Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMP's, and describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMP's. 14. That prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: • Demonstrate that all structural BMP's 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 BMP's described in the Project WQMP • Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available onsite. • Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMP's. 15. That prior to grading plan approval, 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 (NOI) 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. 16. That all existing structures shall be demolished and the appropriate demolition permits obtained from the Building Division for said work. 17. That the legal owner of subject property shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim easements for street, public utility and other public purposes for the widening of Katella Avenue to the ultimate right -of -way and Fire Department access over the private street. [DRAFT] 18. That a cash payment shall be paid for the future construction of Katella Avenue to the ultimate condition. 19. That the developer shall construct a 15" & 18" sewer line in Katella Avenue within the project frontage to connect to the State College Boulevard trunk line. The project's civil engineer shall prepare final construction drawings for the complete sewer line. Costs associated with the design and construction of the sewer line may be used to offset the sewer impact fees. If the developer's costs exceed the required sewer impact fees, the developer may request creation of a reimbursement agreement to provide for the reimbursement of the constructed sewer line at such time as the adjacent properties develop and connect to the sewer line. 20. That grading shall conform to requirements of Chapter 17.04 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. The grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works, Development Services Division for review and approval. A grading permit is required for cut or fills exceeding 500 cubic yards, and will take at least eight (8) weeks to obtain. 21. That prior to final map approval, all units shall be assigned street addresses by the Building Division. Street names for the new private street (if requested by the developer or required by the City) shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Division. 22. That prior to final map approval, tract fees shall be paid and tract bonds shall be posted. 23. That prior to approval of a grading plan, a Drainage Report shall be submitted to Subdivision Section for review and approval. 24. That approval from the Orange County Flood Control District shall be obtained prior to any connection to the OCFCD channel. 25. That prior to grading plan approval, Condition Nos. 6, 13, 15 and 23, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 26. That prior to final tract map approval, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 11, 12, 16, 17, 18, 21 and 22, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 27. 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. Sincerely, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary Anaheim Planning Commission Cr em.doc EXC- TTM16825.doc RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City Council City of Anaheim c/o City Clerk P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92805 (Space Above Line For Recorder's Use) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00005 BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND U.S. SOUTHEAST CORPORATION 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section1. DEFINITIONS ........................................................................ ..............................5 1.1 Assessment District ................................................................ ............................... 5 1.2 Authorizing Ordinance ........................................................... ............................... 5 1.3 CITY ...................................................................................... ............................... 5 1.4 Conditional Use Permit .......................................................... ............................... 5 1.5 Development .......................................................................... ............................... 5 1.6 Development Agreement Date ............................................... ............................... 5 1.7 Development Agreement Statute ........................................... ............................... 6 1.8 Development Approvals ........................................................ ............................... 6 1.9 Enabling Ordinance ............................................................... ............................... 6 1.10 Existing Land Use Regulations .............................................. ............................... 6 1.11 Final Site Plan ........................................................................ ............................... 6 1.12 Gross Floor Area/ GFA ........................................................... ............................... 6 1.13 Interim Development Fees ...................................................... ..............................6 1.14 Mortgage ................................................................................ ............................... 6 1.15 Mortgagee .............................................................................. ............................... 7 1.16 Owner ...................................................................................... ..............................7 1.17 Parking Areas ......................................................................... ............................... 7 1.18 Permitted Buildings ............................................................... ............................... 7 1.19 Platinum Triangle Area ........................................................... ..............................7 1.20 Procedures Resolution ........................................................... ............................... 7 1.21 Project ..................................................................................... ..............................7 1.22 Property .................................................................................. ............................... 7 1.23 Support Commercial Uses ..................................................... ............................... 7 1.24 Term ....................................................................................... ............................... 7 Section2. TERM .................................................................................... ............................... 7 Section 3. BINDING COVENANTS ..................................................... ............................... 8 Section 4. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT ................................................. ............................... 8 Section 5. PROJECT LAND USES ......................................................... ..............................9 Section 6. PERMITTED BUILDINGS .................................................... ..............................9 6.1 Description of Permitted Buildings ........................................ ..............................9 6.2 Parking Areas .......................................................................... ..............................9 Section 7. DENSITY OF PERMITTED BUILDINGS ........................... ..............................9 Section8. ENFORCEMENT ................................................................... ..............................9 Section 9. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES ................... .............................10 9.1 Public Park ............................................................................. .............................10 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 '1' Pace 9.2 Utilities (Water, Electrical, Gas, Sewer, and Drainage) ........ .............................10 9.2.1 Water Service ............................................... ............................... 11 9.2.2 Storm and Sewer Drains ................................ .............................11 9.3 Timing, Phasing and Sequence of Public Improvements and Facilities .............11 9.4 Traffic Circulation Improvements ......................................... .............................11 Section 10. REIMBURSEMENT PROVISION ....................................... .............................11 Section 11. DEDICATIONS AND EXACTIONS ................................... .............................11 Section 12. FEES, TAXES, AND ASSESSMENTS ................................ .............................12 12.1 Fees, Taxes and Assessments ................................................ .............................12 12.2 Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees ....................... .............................12 12.2.1 Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee ........ .............................12 12.2.2 Fire Facilities Fee ........................................... .............................12 12.2.3 General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee .......................12 12.2.4 Library Facilities Fee ..................................... .............................12 12.2.5 Park Fee ......................................................... .............................12 12.2.6 Police Facilities Fee ....................................... .............................12 12.2.7 Public Works Supplemental Sewer, Storm Drain and Beautification Fees ......................................... .............................12 12.2.8 Traffic Impact Fee .......................................... .............................13 12.3 Excluded Development Fees .................................................. .............................13 12.3.1 Water Utilities Fees ........................................ .............................13 12.3.2 Electrical Utilities Fees .................................. .............................13 12.3.3 City Processing Fees ...................................... ............................. 12.4 Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and /or Maintenance Assessment District.................................................................................... .............................13 12.5 Accounting of Funds .............................................................. .............................13 12.6 Imposition of Increased Fees Taxes or Assessments ............. .............................13 Section 13. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS ...... .............................14 Section 14. NEXUS /REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP CHALLENGES ...........................14 Section 15. TIMING OF DEVELOPMENT ............................................ .............................14 Section 16. EXISTING USES .................................................................. .............................14 Section 17. FUTURE APPROVALS ........................................................ .............................14 17.1 Basis for Denying or Conditionally Granting Future Approvals ........................14 17.2 Standard of Review ................................................................ .............................14 17.3 Future Amendments to Final Site Plan .................................. .............................15 Section 18. AMENDMENT ...................................................................... .............................15 18.1 Initiation of Amendment ........................................................ .............................15 18.2 Procedure ............................................................................... .............................15 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -11- Pace 18.3 Consent .................................................................................. .............................15 18.4 Amendments .......................................................................... .............................15 18.5 Effect of Amendment to Development Agreement ............... .............................15 Section 19. RESOLUTION OF INTENT AND USES FOR THE PROPERTY .................. 15 19.1 Non - Cancellation of Rights ................................................... .............................15 Section 20. BENEFITS TO CITY ............................................................ .............................16 Section 21. BENEFITS TO OWNER ....................................................... .............................16 Section 22. UNDERTAKINGS AND ASSURANCES CONTEMPLATED AND PROMOTED BY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT STATUTE ..................... 16 Section 23. RESERVED AUTHORITY ................................................... .............................17 23.1 State and Federal Laws and Regulations ............................... .............................17 23.2 Building Codes ....................................................................... .............................17 23.3 Public Health and Safety ........................................................ .............................17 Section 24. CANCELLATION ................................................................. .............................17 24.1 Initiation of Cancellation ....................................................... .............................17 24.2 Procedure ............................................................................... ............................. 24.3 Consent of Both Parties ......................................................... .............................17 Section 25. PERIODIC REVIEW ............................................................. .............................17 25.1 Time for Review .................................................................... .............................17 25.2 OWNER's Submission .......................................................... .............................18 25.3 Findings .................................................................................. .............................18 25.4 Initiation of Review by City Council ..................................... .............................18 Section 26. EVENTS OF DEFAULT ....................................................... ............................. 26.1 Defaults by OWNER ............................................................. .............................18 26.2 Specific Performance Remedy ............................................... .............................19 26.3 Liquidated Damages Remedy ................................................ .............................19 Section 27. MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION ............................... .............................19 27.1 Notice to OWNER ................................................................. ............................. 27.2 Public Hearing ....................................................................... .............................20 27.3 Decision ................................................................................. .............................20 27.4 Implementation .................................................................... ............................... 20 27.5 Schedule for Compliance ....................................................... .............................20 Section28. ASSIGNMENT ...................................................................... .............................20 28.1 Right to Assign ...................................................................... .............................20 28.2 Release Upon Transfer ........................................................... ............................. Section 29. NO CONFLICTING ENACTMENTS .................................. .............................21 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -111- Pace Section30. GENERAL ............................................................................. .............................22 30.1 Force Majeure ........................................................................ .............................22 30.2 Construction of Development Agreement ............................. .............................22 30.3 Severability ............................................................................ .............................22 30.4 Cumulative Remedies ............................................................ .............................22 30.5 Hold Harmless Agreement ..................................................... .............................22 30.6 Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge ........................ .............................23 30.7 Public Agency Coordination .................................................. .............................23 30.8 Initiative Measures ................................................................. .............................23 30.9 Attorneys' Fees ...................................................................... .............................24 30.10 No Waiver .............................................................................. ............................. 30.11 Authority to Execute ............................................................ ............................... 24 30.12 Notice ..................................................................................... .............................24 30.12.1 To OWNER ................................................... .............................24 30.12.2 To CITY ......................................................... .............................24 30.13 Captions ................................................................................. .............................25 30.14 Consent .................................................................................. .............................25 30.15 Further Actions and Instruments ............................................ .............................25 30.16 Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute .................... .............................26 30.17 Governing Law ...................................................................... ............................. 30.18 Effect on Title ........................................................................ .............................26 30.19 Mortgagee Protection ............................................................. .............................26 30.20 Notice of Default to Mortgagee, Right of Mortgagee to Cure ............................26 30.21 Bankruptcy ............................................................................. .............................26 30.22 Disaffirmance ......................................................................... .............................27 30.23 No Third Party Beneficiaries ................................................. .............................27 30.24 Project as a Private Undertaking ............................................ .............................27 30.25 Restrictions ............................................................................ .............................27 30.26 Recitals ................................................................................... .............................28 30.27 Recording ............................................................................... .............................28 30.28 Title Report .......................................................................... ............................... 28 30.29 Entire Agreement ................................................................... .............................28 30.30 Successors and Assigns .......................................................... .............................28 30.31 OWNER'S Title of Property .................................................. .............................28 30.32 Exhibits .................................................................................. .............................28 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -iv- DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005- 0000 BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND U.S. SOUTHEAST CORPORATION This Development Agreement is entered into this day 21 of June, 2005, by and between the City of Anaheim, a charter city and municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California (hereinafter "CITY ") and U.S. Southeast Corporation, a California corporation (hereinafter "OWNER "), pursuant to the authority set forth in Article 2.5 of Chapter 4 of Division 1 of Title 7, Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code (the "Development Agreement Statute "). RECITALS This Development Agreement is predicated upon the following facts: A. To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California adopted the Development Agreement Statute, Sections 65864, et seq., of the Government Code. The Development Agreement Statute authorizes CITY to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property in order to, among other things: encourage and provide for the development of public facilities in order to support development projects; provide certainty in the approval of development projects in order to avoid the waste of resources and the escalation in project costs and encourage investment in and commitment to comprehensive planning which will make maximum efficient utilization of resources at the least economic cost to the public; provide assurance to the applicants of development projects (1) that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, subject to the conditions of approval of such projects and provisions of such development agreements, and (2) encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the private and public economic costs of development. B. These Recitals refer to and utilize certain capitalized terms which are defined in this Development Agreement. The parties intend to refer to those definitions in conjunction with the use thereof in these Recitals. C. On May 25, 2004, the Anaheim City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -00419 setting forth the City's vision for development of the City of Anaheim (the "General Plan Amendment "), and certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans ( "FEIR No. 330 "), in conjunction with its consideration and approval of the General Plan Amendment, amendment of CITY's zoning code, and a series of related actions. D. CITY desires that the approximately 820 -acre area generally bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -1- (Interstate 5) on the west, and the Southern California Edison Company Easement on the north (hereinafter called "The Platinum Triangle Area ") be developed as a combination of high quality industrial, office, commercial and residential uses, as envisioned in the General Plan Amendment. E. In order to carry out the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle, on May 25, 2004, 2004, the City Council approved The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, setting forth the new vision for The Platinum Triangle. F. To further implement the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle, the City Council has established The Platinum Triangle Mixed -Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (hereinafter the "PTMU Overlay Zone ") consisting of approximately three hundred and seventy -five acres within The Platinum Triangle as depicted in The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to provide opportunities for high quality well- designed development projects that could be stand -alone projects or combine residential with non - residential uses including office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities within the area. G. OWNER represents that it owns in fee approximately 3.35 acres of real property located at 1818 S. State College, Ave., Anaheim, CA, 92806, in the City, County of Orange (hereinafter "County "), State of California (hereinafter collectively called the "Property") in The Platinum Triangle and zoned PTMU Overlay and more particularly shown and described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference. H. OWNER desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Development Agreement by developing 265 for -sale condominium homes, on five stories over basement level parking, at a density of 85 units per acre. A mix of one and two bedroom residential units will range in size from 651 to 1,226 square feet. Ground level residential units will "wrap" the entire ground level parking area on all sides of the building, each with their own private patio or balcony. Ground level units will also be slightly elevated (approximately 18 inches) from the ground to ensure resident privacy from adjacent sidewalks. Internally oriented podium level residential units will have larger private patios, while the remainder of externally oriented units on this level will have balconies. All residential units on the top three levels will have balconies. There are no commercial uses planned for this site. A total of 556 parking stalls are planned on both ground (guest and resident) and basement (resident only) levels. Both guest and resident parking areas will be controlled by a series of gates to ensure privacy and availability of parking spaces all as more particularly set forth in the Final Site Plan (hereinafter collectively called the "Project "). L CITY desires to accomplish the goals and objectives set forth in the CITY's General Plan and the objectives for the PTMU Overlay Zone as set forth in subsection 18.20.010.020 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, and finds that the Project will accomplish said goals and objectives. J. The City Council, as duly recommended by the Planning Commission, adopted Ordinance No. 5936 on August 24, 2004, reclassifying the property in The Platinum Triangle, including the Property, into the PTMU Overlay Zone. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -2- K. Pursuant to the Final Site Plan, OWNER will submit tentative maps and /or vesting tentative maps, if required. OWNER further anticipates the submission of detailed construction plans and other documentation required by CITY in order for the OWNER to obtain its building permits. L. As consideration for the benefits gained from the vested rights acquired pursuant to the Development Agreement Statute, to conform with the requirements of the PTMU Overlay Zone, and to comply with the applicable mitigation measures imposed by Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106, CITY is requiring that OWNER construct and install a number of public improvements, including off -site traffic circulation improvements, and provide other public benefits. M. In order to avoid any misunderstandings or disputes which may arise from time to time between OWNER and CITY concerning the proposed development of the Project and to assure each party of the intention of the other as to the processing of any land use entitlements which now or hereafter may be required for such development, the parties believe it is desirable to set forth their intentions and understandings in this Development Agreement. In order for both CITY and OWNER to achieve their respective objectives, it is imperative that each be as certain as possible that OWNER will develop and that CITY will permit OWNER to develop the Project and public improvements as approved by CITY within the time periods provided in this Development Agreement. N. CITY, as a charter city, has enacted Ordinance No. 4377 on November 23, 1982, which makes CITY subject to the Development Agreement Statute. Pursuant to Section 65865 of the Development Agreement Statute, CITY adopted Resolution No. 82R -565 (the "Procedures Resolution ") on November 23, 1982. The Procedures Resolution establishes procedures and requirements for the consideration of development agreements upon receipt of an application. O. On , 20, as required by Section 1.0 of the Procedures Resolution, OWNER submitted to the Planning Department an application for approval of a development agreement (hereinafter called the "Application "). The Application included a proposed development agreement (the "Proposed Development Agreement"). P. On , 20 , as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 2.1 of the Procedures Resolution, the Planning Director gave public notice of the City Planning Commission's intention to consider a recommendation to the City Council regarding adoption of a development agreement. Q. On June 1, 2005, as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 2.2 of the Procedures Resolution, the City Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Application. R. On that date, the City Planning Commission, after considering an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for this Development Agreement, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, found and determined that FEIR No 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with Mitigation Monitoring 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -3- Plan No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Development Agreement and the Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 129, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Development Agreement and satisfies all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Development Agreement. S. The Planning Commission further found that the Development Agreement meets the following standards set forth in Section 2.3 of the Procedures Resolution, to wit, that the Proposed Project: (a) is consistent with the CITY's existing General Plan, (b) is compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district, (c) is compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area and (d) is not otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of CITY. Based upon the aforesaid findings, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Application and this Development Agreement pursuant to Resolution No. PC T. On , 20, as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 3.1 of the Procedures Resolution, the City Clerk caused public notice to be given of the City Council's intention to consider adoption of a development agreement. U. On 20, as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 3.2 of the Procedures Resolution, the City Council held a public hearing on the Application. V. On that date, the City Council after considering an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for this Development Agreement, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, found and determined that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Development Agreement and the Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. , are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Development Agreement and satisfies all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Development Agreement. W. On June 21, 2005, the City Council found and determined that this Development Agreement: (i) is consistent with the CITY's existing General Plan; (ii) is not otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of CITY; (iii) is entered into pursuant to and constitutes a present exercise of the CITY's police power; and (iv) is entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and the Procedures Resolution. X. In preparing and adopting the General Plan and in granting the Development Approvals, CITY considered the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of CITY and prepared in this regard an extensive environmental impact report and other studies. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, in preparing and adopting the General Plan and in granting the Development Approvals, the City Council carefully considered and determined the 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -4- projected needs (taking into consideration the planned development of the Project and all other areas within the CITY) for water service, sewer service, storm drains, electrical facilities, traffic /circulation infrastructure, police and fire services, paramedic and similar improvements, facilities and services within The Platinum Triangle, and the appropriateness of the density and intensity of the development comprising the Project and the needs of the CITY and surrounding areas for other infrastructure. Y. On , 20 , the City Council adopted the Authorizing Ordinance authorizing the execution of this Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement Statute, as it applies to CITY, and pursuant to the Enabling Ordinance, the Procedures Resolution and the CITY's inherent powers as a charter city, and pursuant to the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. DEFINITIONS. The following words and phrases are used as defined terms throughout this Development Agreement, and each defined term shall have the meaning set forth below. 1.1 Assessment District "Assessment District" for purposes of this Development Agreement means a special district, assessment district or benefit area existing pursuant to State law or the charter powers of the CITY for purposes of financing the cost of public improvements, facilities, services and /or public facilities fees within a distinct geographic area of the CITY. 1.2 Authorizing Ordinance The "Authorizing Ordinance" means Ordinance No. approving this Development Agreement. 1.3 CITY The "CITY" means the City of Anaheim, a charter city and municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under its charter and the Constitution and laws of the State of California. 1.4 Conditional Use Permit The "Conditional Use Permit" means Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 2005 -04975 that modifies in part the minimum open setback requirements on a portion of the property frontage along State College Blvd. and the proposed private street, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "C." 1.5 Development "Development" means the improvement of the Property for purposes of effecting the structures, improvements and facilities comprising the Project, including, without limitation: grading, the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the Project whether located within or outside the Property; the construction of structures and buildings and the installation of landscaping. 1.6 Development Agreement Date The "Development Agreement Date" means the later of (i) the date of recordation in the office of the County Recorder of this Development Agreement, or a memorandum thereof, or (ii) the effective date of the Authorizing Ordinance. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -5- 1.7 Development Agreement Statute The "Development Agreement Statute" means Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code as it exists on the Development Agreement Date. 1.8 Development Approvals "Development Approvals" means the Final Site Plan and all site specific plans, maps, permits and other entitlements to use of every kind and nature contemplated by the Final Site Plan which are approved or granted by CITY in connection with development of the Property, including, but not limited to: site plans, tentative and final subdivision maps, vesting tentative maps, variances, conditional use permits and grading, building and other similar permits. To the extent any of such site specific plans, maps, permits and other entitlements to use are amended from time to time, "Development Approvals" shall include, if OWNER and CITY agree in writing, such matters as so amended. If this Development Agreement is required by law to be amended in order for "Development Approvals" to include any such amendments, "Development Approvals" shall not include such amendments unless and until this Development Agreement is so amended. 1.9 Enabling Ordinance The "Enabling Ordinance" means Ordinance No. 4377 enacted by the CITY on November 23, 1982. 1.10 Existing Land Use Regulations "Existing Land Use Regulations" mean the ordinances and regulations adopted by the City of Anaheim in effect on the Effective Date, including the adopting ordinances and regulations that govern the permitted uses of land, the density and intensity of use, and the design, improvement, construction standards and specifications applicable to the development of the Property, including, but not limited to, the General Plan, the Zoning Code, The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106, Mitigation Monitoring Program No. , and all other ordinances of the City establishing subdivision standards, park regulations, impact or development fees and building and improvement standards, but only to the extent the Zoning Ordinance and such other regulations are not inconsistent with this Development Agreement. Existing Land Use Regulations do not include non -land use regulations, which includes taxes. 1.11 Final Site Plan The "Final Site Plan" means Final Site Plan No. 2005- 00005, as approved by the City Council on June 21, 2005, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department, and made a part hereof by this reference, which is summarized in Exhibit "B" attached hereto. 1.12 Gross Floor Area /GFA "Gross Floor Area" or "GFA" means the gross floor area of any of the Permitted Buildings. 1.13 Interim Development Fees "Interim Development Fees" are the fees imposed within The Platinum Triangle pending adoption of permanent fee programs by the City as set forth in Paragraph 12.2 of this Agreement. 1.14 Mortgage "Mortgage" means a mortgage, deed of trust or sale and leaseback arrangement or other transaction in which the Property, or a portion thereof or an interest therein, is pledged as security. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -6- 1.15 Mortgagee "Mortgagee" means the holder of the beneficial interest under a Mortgage, or the owner of the Property, or interest therein, under a Mortgage. 1.16 Owner "Owner" is U.S. Southeast Corporation, a California corporation, and any person or entity with which or into which U.S. Southeast Corporation may merge, and any person or entity who may acquire substantially all of the assets of U.S. Southeast Corporation, and any person or entity who receives any of the rights or obligations of under this Development Agreement in accordance with the provisions of Section 28 (Assignment) of this Development Agreement. 1.17 Parking Areas The "Parking Areas" means all parking structure(s), and /or all surface parking servicing the Project. 1.18 Permitted Buildings "Permitted Buildings" include 265 for -sale condominium homes, on five stories over basement level parking, and the Parking Areas as identified in Section 6 of this Development Agreement and as further set forth in the Final Site Plan. This Development Agreement establishes maximum and minimum characteristics for each of the Permitted Buildings, as set forth in the Final Site Plan. 1.19 Platinum Triangle Area "The Platinum Triangle" means that portion of the City of Anaheim generally bounded on the east by the Santa Ana River, on the south by the Anaheim city limits, on the west by the Santa Ana Freeway, and on the north by the Southern California Edison Easement. 1.20 Procedures Resolution The "Procedures Resolution" is Resolution No. 82R -565 adopted by CITY pursuant to Section 65865 of the Development Agreement Statute. 1.21 Project The "Project" means the development project contemplated by the Development Plan with respect to the Property, including but not limited to on -site and off -site improvements, as such development project is further defined, enhanced or modified pursuant to the provisions of this Development Agreement. 1.22 Properly. The "Property" means that certain real property shown and described on Exhibit "A" to this Development Agreement. 1.23 Support Commercial Uses "Support Commercial Uses" are commercial\retail uses which may include retail uses, banking or financial offices, food service, restaurants, service establishments and other similar uses in keeping with the nature of the Project and the required uses needed to support the occupants of office buildings, other office development, sports and entertainment venues and residential development in The Platinum Triangle. 1.24 Term "Term" is defined in Section 2 of this Development Agreement. Section 2. TERM. 2.1 The term (hereinafter called "Term ") of this Development Agreement shall be that period of time during which this Development Agreement shall be in effect and bind the parties hereto. The Term shall commence on the Development Agreement Date and shall extend 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -7- for a period of five (5) years thereafter, terminating at the end of the day on the fifth anniversary of the Development Agreement Date, subject to the periodic review and modification or termination provisions defined in Section 25 and Section 27, respectively, of this Development Agreement, and further subject to a reasonable extension for completion of the Project in accordance with the Timing of Development schedule set forth in Section 15 of this Development Agreement. 2.2 This Development Agreement shall terminate and be of no force and effect upon the occurrence of the entry of a final judgment or issuance of a final order, after all appeals have been exhausted, directed to CITY as a result of any lawsuit filed against CITY to set aside, withdraw or abrogate the approval of the City Council of this Development Agreement or if termination occurs pursuant to the provisions of the Procedures Resolution and such termination is so intended thereby. 2.3 If not already terminated by reason of any other provision in this Development Agreement, or for any other reason, this Development Agreement shall automatically terminate and be of no further force and effect upon completion of the Project pursuant to the terms of this Development Agreement and any further amendments thereto and the issuance of all occupancy permits and acceptance by CITY of all dedications and improvements as required by the development of the Project. Section 3. BINDING COVENANTS The provisions of this Development Agreement to the extent permitted by law shall constitute covenants which shall run with the Property for the benefit thereof, and the benefits of this Development Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and all successors in interest to the parties hereto. Section 4. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT. As a material part of the consideration of this Development Agreement, unless otherwise provided herein, the parties agree that the Existing Land Use Regulations shall be applicable to development of the Project. In connection with all subsequent discretionary actions by CITY required to implement the Final Site Plan and any discretionary actions which CITY takes or has the right to take under this Development Agreement relating to the Project, including any review, approval, renewal, conditional approval or denial, CITY, shall exercise its discretion or take action in a manner which complies and is consistent with the Final Site Plan, the Existing Land Use Regulations (as the same may be modified in accordance with this Development Agreement) and such other standards, terms and conditions expressly contained in this Development Agreement. CITY shall accept and timely process, in the normal manner for processing such matters as may then be applicable, all applications for further approvals with respect to the Project called for or required under this Development Agreement, including, any necessary site plan, tentative map, vesting tentative map, final map and any grading, construction or other permits filed by OWNER in accordance with the Development Approvals. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 'g' Section 5. PROJECT LAND USES. The Property shall be used for such uses as may be permitted by the Development Approvals and the Existing Land Use Regulations. The duration of this Development Agreement, the density and intensity of use, developable GFA, footprint square footage, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings and structures, lot sizes, set back requirements, zoning, public improvements, and the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes shall be those set forth in the Development Approvals, the Existing Land Use Regulations and this Development Agreement pursuant to Section 65865.2 of the Development Agreement Statute. Section 6. PERMITTED BUILDINGS 6.1 Description of Permitted Buildings The Permitted Buildings to be located on the Property shall be as set forth on the Final Site Plan. The Project shall be constructed substantially in conformance with the Final Site Plan. 6.2 Parking Areas The Parking Areas shall be constructed so that there will be sufficient parking spaces available within the Property as depicted and substantially in conformance with the Final Site Plan. Prior to commencement of construction of the first Permitted Building, OWNER shall restrict the use of the Parking Areas to, and shall record a covenant against the Property in a form approved by the City Attorney stating that the use of the Parking Areas shall be limited to tenants, visitors, patrons, invitees and other users of the Permitted Buildings. Said covenant shall also provide that the Parking Areas shall not be used to provide public parking for patrons of Angel Stadium of Anaheim, The Grove of Anaheim or the Arrowhead Pond of Anaheim without the prior written approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and the Executive Director of Convention /Sports and Entertainment, which approval shall be at CITY's sole discretion. Section 7. DENSITY OF PERMITTED BUILDINGS. The Permitted Buildings shall be between the minimum and maximum sizes, and shall not exceed the maximum heights and maximum footprints set forth on the Final Site Plan. Section 8. ENFORCEMENT. Unless this Development Agreement is terminated or cancelled pursuant to the provisions of this Development Agreement, this Development Agreement or any amendment hereto, shall be enforceable by any party hereto notwithstanding any change hereafter in any applicable general plan, specific plan, zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance or building ordinance adopted by CITY which alters or amends the rules, regulations or policies of Development of the Project as provided in this Development Agreement pursuant to Section 65865.4 of the Development Agreement Statute; provided, however, that the limitations of this Section shall not apply to changes mandated by State or Federal laws or other permissible changes or new regulations as more particularly set forth in Section 23 of this Development Agreement. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -9- Section 9. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES. In addition to performing any other obligations heretofore imposed as conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit "C," as material consideration for the CITY's entering into this Development Agreement, OWNER shall undertake the construction and installation of the following public improvements required to support the Project and to enhance area -wide traffic circulation and emergency police and fire protection service within the time periods as set forth below and in conformance with the Existing Land Use Regulations. CITY shall cooperate with OWNER for the purpose of coordinating all public improvements constructed under the Development Approvals or this Development Agreement to existing or newly constructed public improvements, whether located within or outside of the Property. OWNER shall be responsible for and use good faith efforts to acquire any right(s) -of -way necessary to construct the public facility improvements required by, or otherwise necessary to comply with the conditions of, this Development Agreement or any Development Approvals. Should it become necessary due to OWNER's failure or inability to acquire said right(s) -of -way within four months after OWNER begins its efforts to so acquire said right(s) -of -way, CITY shall negotiate the purchase of the necessary right(s) -of -way to construct the public improvements as required by, or otherwise necessary to comply with the conditions of, this Development Agreement and, if necessary in accordance with the procedures established by State law, and the limitations hereinafter set forth in this section, CITY may use its powers of eminent domain to condemn said required right(s) -of way. OWNER agrees to pay for all costs associated with said acquisition and condemnation proceedings. If the CITY cannot make the proper findings or if for some other reason under the condemnation laws CITY is prevented from acquiring the necessary right(s) -of -way to enable OWNER to construct the public improvements required by, or otherwise necessary to comply with the conditions of, this Development Agreement, then the parties agree to amend this Development Agreement to modify OWNER's obligations accordingly. Any such required modification shall involve the substitution of other considerations or obligations by OWNER (of similar value) as are negotiated in good faith between the parties hereto. Nothing contained in this Section shall be deemed to constitute a determination or resolution of necessity by CITY to initiate condemnation proceedings. 9.1 Public Park If the Property is eight (8) or more acres OWNER shall be required to dedicate, improve and maintain a minimum size of 44 square feet for each residential unit for public park purposes as set forth in the Final Site Plan. The value of the parkland dedication will be credited against overall park in lieu fees paid for the project. Consistent with existing Code requirements and policies, no credit will be given for improvements. 9.2 Utilities (Water, Electrical, Gas, Sewer, and Drainage) OWNER shall construct the public improvements necessary for the provision of requisite water, electrical, gas, sewer and drainage requirements for Project as more fully set forth in the Development Approvals. OWNER shall construct and relocate utilities as may be required to provide services to the Permitted Buildings on the Property or that are displaced by the construction of the Permitted Buildings. As OWNER submits detailed construction plans in order to obtain building permits for a Permitted Building and /or the size and nature of the Project varies, the utilities that OWNER will construct or relocate may be revised accordingly by the CITY. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 _10- 9.2.1 Water Service OWNER will provide engineering studies to size the water mains for ultimate development within the Project. Said engineering studies will be conducted prior to rendering of water service or signature approval of the final water improvement plans, whichever occurs first. The studies shall be subject to the approval of the General Manager, Public Utilities Department or authorized designee. The water system may be constructed incrementally, provided that said incremental phasing is adequate to provide municipal demands and fire flow protection for the proposed development phasing. OWNER will conform with Rule 15D of the Water Utility's Rates, Rules and Regulations which provides for, in part, a fee based on GFA and the advancement of additional funds to construct the upgraded water facilities. OWNER shall be entitled to reimbursement in accordance with the terms of Rule 15D for the advancement of additional funds to construct the upgraded water facilities. 9.2.2 Storm and Sewer Drains Prior to final building and zoning inspections for each Permitted Building, OWNER will construct sewers and storm drains to serve the ultimate development of the Property as provided by areawide engineering studies to be conducted prior to issuance of any building permits for the first Permitted Building and updated prior to the issuance of any building permits for each subsequent Permitted Building. All studies shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. OWNER will construct improvements identified in said studies. The systems may be constructed incrementally provided that said incremental phasing is adequate to provide capacity for the proposed development phasing. 9.3 Timing, Phasing and Sequence of Public Improvements and Facilities The timing, phasing and sequence of the construction of public improvements and facilities or the payment of fees therefor shall be constructed or paid in accordance with the timing, phasing and sequence set forth in this Development Agreement and the Final Site Plan 9.4 Traffic Circulation Improvements In order to assist CITY in providing for area - wide traffic circulation as required by this Project, OWNER shall cause to be made the traffic circulation improvements identified for the Project as Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for the Project as shown on the Final Site Plan. Section 10. REIMBURSEMENT PROVISION In the event OWNER is required to construct public improvements which are supplemental to the requirements of the Project for the benefit of other properties, CITY will work with OWNER to establish mechanisms for proportional reimbursement from owners of the benefited properties. Section 11. DEDICATIONS AND EXACTIONS. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Project, OWNER shall irrevocably offer for dedication the rights -of -way, including connector streets and Market Street, if applicable, and other areas as more fully set forth in the Final Site Plan for the uses set forth in the Final Site Plan. These dedications shall be in fee or as an easement at the discretion of CITY, and upon completion and acceptance by CITY of the associated improvements in compliance with the specifications as approved by CITY, CITY shall accept OWNER's offer of dedication. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -1 1- Nothing contained in this Development Agreement, however, shall be deemed to preclude CITY from exercising the power of eminent domain with respect to the Property or the Project, or any part thereof. Section 12. FEES, TAXES, AND ASSESSMENTS. 12.1 Fees, Taxes and Assessments OWNER shall be responsible for the payment of fees in the amount and at the times set forth in the Existing Land Use Regulations, as said amounts and timing may be modified in accordance with this Development Agreement. 12.2 Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees CITY anticipates that a number of fees will be adopted to pay the costs attributable to new development in The Platinum Triangle. The Interim Development Fees constitute amounts estimated by the applicable Departments to be the approximate fair share of costs attributable to the Project. If an identified fee has been adopted prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Project, the OWNER shall pay the fee. If an identified fee has not been adopted at the time of issuance of said building permit, the OWNER shall pay the applicable Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees set forth in attached Exhibit "D." If the OWNER has paid a Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fee, and upon subsequent adoption of a corresponding fee it is determined that the OWNER has paid an amount greater than the amount payable pursuant to the adopted fee, the excess amount paid as an Interim Development Fee shall be refunded to the OWNER. CITY shall not be obligated to adopt any of the identified fees. If any such identified fee is not adopted, the parties agree that the Interim Development Fee is adequate to address the impacts of the Project. 12.2.1 Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee OWNER will pay an Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee as set forth in Exhibit "D -l." Exhibit "D -2." 12.2.2 Fire Facilities Fee OWNER will pay a Fire Facilities Fee as set forth in 12.2.3 General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee OWNER will pay a processing FEE attributable to the cost of creating and establishing the Master Land Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone for The Platinum Triangle, as well as the costs of associated environmental documentation, as said additional costs are set forth in Exhibit "D -3." 12.2.4 Library Facilities Fee OWNER will pay a Library Facilities Fee as set forth in Exhibit "D -4." 12.2.5 Park Fee OWNER will pay the Park Fee as set forth on Exhibit "D -5." W and, if the Property is eight or more acres in size, OWNER will dedicate, develop and maintain a minipark substantially in conformance with the Final Site Plan. 12.2.6 Police Facilities Fee OWNER will pay the Police Facilities Fee to defray the costs of capital facilities and equipment as set forth in Exhibit "D -6." 12.2.7 Public Works Supplemental Sewer, Storm Drain and Beautification Fees OWNER will pay Public Works Fees for supplemental sewer impacts, storm drain impacts, and arterial highway beautification /aesthetics as set forth in Exhibit "D -7." 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -12- 12.2.8 Traffic Impact Fee OWNER will pay the Supplemental Traffic Impact Fee for improvements required to provide acceptable traffic service levels in and through the area's Master Plan of Arterial Highways system as set forth in Exhibit "D -8." 12.3 Excluded Development Fees Fees Excluded from Existing Land Use Regulations. The following fees shall not be included among the fees which would otherwise fall within the definition of Existing Land Use Regulations: 12.3.1 Water Utilities Fees OWNER will pay all applicable fees in accordance with the Water Utilities Rates, Rules and Regulations in effect at the time of application for service including Rule 15D which provides for, in part, a fee based on GFA to construct the necessary water facility improvements within The Platinum Triangle. 12.3.2 Electrical Utilities Fees OWNER will pay all fees in accordance with the Electrical Utilities Rates, Rules and Regulations in effect at the time of application for service. 12.3.3 City Processing Fees OWNER shall pay all standard City -wide processing fees for building permits, zoning review, and other similar fees associated with the Development of the Project which are in existence at the time of approval of this Development Agreement at the rate in existence at the time said fees are normally required to be paid to CITY. 12.4 Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and /or Maintenance Assessment District Prior to the date a building or grading permit is issued relating to implementation of the Final Site Plan, or within a period of ninety (90) days from the date of execution of this Development Agreement, whichever occurs first, OWNER shall execute and record an unsubordinated covenant in a form approved by the City Attorney's Office wherein OWNER agrees not to contest the formation of any assessment district(s) which may be formed to finance Platinum Triangle infrastructure and /or maintenance, which district(s) could include the Property. The covenant shall not preclude OWNER from contesting (i) the determination of benefit of such improvements to the Property, (ii) the properties included in said district or area, (iii) the manner in which said fee is determined or (iv) the manner in which said improvement costs are spread. 12.5 Accounting of Funds CITY will comply with applicable requirements of Government Code Section 65865 relating to accounting of funds. 12.6 Imposition of Increased Fees Taxes or Assessments Except as expressly set forth or reserved in this Development Agreement, CITY shall not, without the prior written consent of OWNER, impose any additional fee, tax or assessment on the Project or any portion thereof as a condition to the implementation of the Project or any portion thereof, except such fees, taxes and assessments as are described in or required by this Development Agreement, including the Existing Land Use Regulations or the Development Approvals. The rates of such fees, taxes and assessments shall be the rates in existence at the time said fees, taxes and assessments are normally required to be paid to CITY. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to prohibit CITY from imposing fees, taxes or assessments on the Property which are unrelated to the implementation of the project. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -13- Section 13. COVENANTS. CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS In consideration for CITY entering into this Development Agreement and other consideration set forth in this Agreement, OWNER agrees to record unsubordinated covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC &Rs) applicable to the Property in a form and content satisfactory to the Planning Director and the City Attorney incorporating the requirements and obligations set forth in Exhibit "E" to this Agreement, entitled the "Development Requirements and Maintenance Obligations." Section 14. NEXUS /REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP CHALLENGES. OWNER consents to, and waives any right it may have now or in the future to challenge the legal validity of the conditions, requirements, policies or programs required by existing land use regulations or this Agreement including, without limitation, any claim that they constitute an abuse of the police power, violate substantive due process, deny equal protection of the laws, effect a taking of property without payment of just compensation, or impose an unlawful tax. Section 15. TIMING OF DEVELOPMENT Timing of Development shall be as set forth in the Final Site Plan. Section 16. EXISTING USES. CITY and OWNER agree that those existing legally established uses on the Property may be retained until the Project is implemented. When those existing uses are demolished, no credit for any such demolished square footage for which Interim Development Fees have not been paid will be given OWNER against Interim Development Fees due on a square footage basis as provided for in this Development Agreement. OWNER will pay the full Interim Development Fees for Permitted Buildings constructed pursuant to the Final Site Plan. Section 17. FUTURE APPROVALS. 17.1 Basis for Denying or Conditionally Granting Future Approvals Before OWNER can begin grading on the Property or other development of the Property, OWNER must secure several additional permits and /or approvals from CITY. The parties agree that to the extent said Development Approvals are ministerial in nature, CITY shall not, through the enactment or enforcement of any subsequent ordinances, rules, regulations, initiatives, policies, requirements, guidelines, or other constraints, withhold such approvals as a means of blocking construction or of imposing conditions on the Project which were not imposed during an earlier approval period unless CITY has been ordered to do so by a court of competent jurisdiction. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, CITY and OWNER will use their best efforts to ensure each other that all applications for and approvals of grading permits, building permits or other developmental approvals necessary for OWNER to develop the Project in accordance with the Final Site Plan are sought and processed in a timely manner. 17.2 Standard of Review The rules, regulations and policies that apply to any additional Development Approvals which OWNER must secure prior to the Development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations, as defined in this Development Agreement. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -14- 17.3 Future Amendments to Final Site Plan Future amendments to all or a portion of the Final Site Plan which increase the intensity or density of the Development of the Property, or change the permitted uses of the Property, and are not among those described in Section 18.4 of this Development Agreement may subject the portion or portions of the Project being amended or affected by the amendment to any change in the CITY'S General Plan, zoning designations and rules applicable to the Property and further environmental review and possible mitigation of adverse impacts under CEQA in effect at the time of such amendment. Any such amendment to the Final Site Plan shall be processed concurrently with the processing of an amendment to this Development Agreement. It is the desire and intent of both parties, except as set forth herein, that any such future amendment of the Final Site Plan will not alter, affect, impair or otherwise impact the rights, duties and obligations of the parties under this Development Agreement with respect to the unamended portions of the Final Site Plan. Section 18. AMENDMENT. 18.1 Initiation of Amendment Either party may propose an amendment to this Development Agreement. 18.2 Procedure Except as set forth in Section 18.4 below, the procedure for proposing and adopting an amendment to this Development Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Development Agreement in the first instance. Such procedures are set forth in Sections 2, 3 and 5 of the Procedures Resolution. 18.3 Consent Except as provided in Section 25 of this Development Agreement, any amendment to this Development Agreement shall require the consent of both parties. No amendment of this Development Agreement or any provision hereof shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each party hereto. 18.4 Amendments Subject to the foregoing provisions of this Section, the parties acknowledge that refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that changes are appropriate with respect to the details and performance of the parties under this Development Agreement. The parties desire to retain a certain degree of flexibility with respect to the details of the Development of the Project and with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Development Agreement. If and when the parties find that changes or adjustments are necessary or appropriate to further the intended purposes of this Development Agreement, they may, unless otherwise required by law, effectuate such changes or adjustments as specified in the Development Approvals. 18.5 Effect of Amendment to Development Agreement The parties agree that except as expressly set forth in any such amendment, an amendment to this Development Agreement will not alter, affect, impair, modify, waive or otherwise impact any other rights, duties or obligations of either party under this Development Agreement. Section 19. RESOLUTION OF INTENT AND USES FOR THE PROPERTY. 19.1 Non - Cancellation of Rights Subject defeasance pursuant to Sections 25, 26 or 27 of this Development Agreement, the Final Site Plan and other Development Approvals as 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -15- provided for in this Development Agreement shall be final and the rights once granted thereby shall be vested in the Property upon recordation of this Development Agreement. Section 20. BENEFITS TO CITY. The direct and indirect benefits CITY (including, without limitation, the existing and future anticipated residents of CITY) expects to receive pursuant to this Development Agreement include, but are not limited to, the following: The participation of OWNER in the accelerated, coordinated and more economic construction, funding and dedication to the public, as provided in this Development Agreement, of certain of the vitally needed on -site and area -wide public improvements and facilities, and assurances that the entire Project will be developed as set forth in the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement in order to encourage development of The Platinum Triangle; and The considerations set forth in Sections 9 and 10 of this Development Agreement. Section 21. BENEFITS TO OWNER. OWNER has expended and will continue to expend large amounts of time and money on the planning and infrastructure construction for the Project. OWNER asserts that OWNER would not make any additional expenditures, or the advanced expenditures required by this Development Agreement, without this Development Agreement and that any additional expenditures which OWNER makes after the Development Agreement Date will be made in reliance upon this Development Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, this Development Agreement provides for the completion of public improvements and facilities prior to the time when they would be justified economically in connection with the phasing of the Project, and of a size which would be justified only by the magnitude of the Project provided for by the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement. The benefit to OWNER under this Development Agreement consists of the assurance that OWNER will preserve the right to develop the Property as planned and as set forth in the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement. The parties acknowledge that the public benefits to be provided by OWNER to CITY pursuant to this Development Agreement are in consideration for and reliance upon assurances that the Property can be developed in accordance with the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement. Section 22. UNDERTAKINGS AND ASSURANCES CONTEMPLATED AND PROMOTED BY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT STATUTE. The mutual undertakings and assurances described above and provided for in this Development Agreement are for the benefit of CITY and OWNER and promote the comprehensive planning, private and public cooperation and participation in the provision of public facilities, and the effective and efficient development of infrastructure and facilities supporting development which was contemplated and promoted by the Development Agreement Statute. CITY agrees that it will not take any actions which are intended to circumvent this Development Agreement; provided, however, that any action of the electorate shall not be deemed an action for purposes of this section. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -16- Section 23. RESERVED AUTHORITY 23.1 State and Federal Laws and Regulations In the event that the State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after this Development Agreement has been entered into, prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of the Development Agreement, such provisions of the Development Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State or Federal laws or regulations, provided, however, that this Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY shall not adopt or undertake any rule, regulation or policy which is inconsistent with this Development Agreement until CITY makes a finding that such rule, regulation or policy is reasonably necessary to comply with such State and Federal laws or regulations. 23.2 Building Codes This Development Agreement shall not prevent CITY from applying new rules, regulations and policies contained in model codes, including, but not limited to, the Anaheim Building Code as adopted in Title 15, Section 15.02. 23.3 Public Health and Safety This Development Agreement shall not prevent CITY from adopting new rules, regulations and policies, including amendments or modifications to model codes described in Section 23.2 of this Development Agreement which directly result from findings by CITY that failure to adopt such rules, regulations or policies would result in a condition injurious or detrimental to the public health and safety. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY shall not adopt any such rules, regulations or policies which prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Development Agreement until CITY makes a finding that such rules, regulations or policies are reasonably necessary to correct or avoid such injurious or detrimental condition. Section 24. CANCELLATION. 24.1 Initiation of Cancellation Either party may propose cancellation of this Development Agreement. 24.2 Procedure The procedure for proposing a cancellation of and canceling this Development Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Development Agreement in the first instance. Such procedures are set forth in Sections 2, 3 and 5 of the Procedures Resolution and Section 65868 of the Government Code. 24.3 Consent of Both Parties Any cancellation of this Development Agreement shall require the mutual consent of both parties. Section 25. PERIODIC REVIEW 25.1 Time for Review CITY shall, at least every twelve (12) months after the Development Agreement Date, review the extent of good faith compliance by OWNER with the terms of this Development Agreement. OWNER'S failure to comply with the timing schedules set forth in the Final Site Plan shall constitute rebuttable evidence of OWNER'S lack of good faith compliance with this Development Agreement. Such periodic review shall determine 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -17- compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement pursuant to California Government Code Section 65865.1 and other successor laws and regulations. 25.2 OWNER's Submission Each year, not less than forty-five (45) days nor more than sixty (60) days prior to the anniversary of the Development Agreement Date, OWNER shall submit evidence to the City Council of its good faith compliance with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement. OWNER shall notify the City Council in writing that such evidence is being submitted to CITY pursuant to the requirements of Section 6.2 of the Procedures Resolution. OWNER shall pay to CITY a reasonable processing fee in an amount as CITY may reasonably establish from time to time on each occasion that OWNER submits its evidence for a periodic review. 25.3 Findings Within forty-five (45) days after the submission of OWNER's evidence, the City Council shall determine, on the basis of substantial evidence, whether or not OWNER has, for the period under review, complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement. If the City Council finds that OWNER has so complied, the review for that period shall be deemed concluded. If the City Council finds and determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement for the period under review, OWNER shall be given at least sixty (60) days to cure such non - compliance and if the actions required to cure such non- compliance take more than sixty (60) days, then CITY shall give OWNER additional time provided that OWNER is making reasonable progress towards such end. If during the cure period, OWNER fails to cure such noncompliance or is not making reasonable good faith progress towards such end, then the City Council may, at its discretion, proceed to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a time schedule for compliance in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 27 of this Development Agreement. 25.4 Initiation of Review by City Council In addition to the periodic review set forth in this Development Agreement, the City Council may at any time initiate a review of this Development Agreement upon the giving of written notice thereof to OWNER. Within thirty (30) days following receipt of such notice, OWNER shall submit evidence to the City Council of OWNER's good faith compliance with this Development Agreement and such review and determination shall proceed in the manner as otherwise provided in this Development Agreement. Section 26. EVENTS OF DEFAULT. 26.1 Defaults by OWNER Within forty -five (45) days after the submission of OWNER's evidence, the City Council shall determine on the basis of substantial evidence, whether or not OWNER has, for the period under review, complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement. If the City Council finds that OWNER has so complied, the review for that period shall be deemed concluded. If the City Council finds and determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement for the period under review, OWNER shall be given at least sixty (60) days to cure such non - compliance and if the actions required to cure such non - compliance take more than sixty (60) days, then CITY shall give OWNER additional time provided that OWNER is making reasonable progress towards such 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 end. If during the cure period OWNER fails to cure such non - compliance or is not making reasonable progress towards such end, then the City Council may, at its discretion, proceed to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a time schedule for compliance in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 27 of this Development Agreement. 26.2 Specific Performance Remedy Due to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it will not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its pre- existing condition once implementation of this Development Agreement has begun. After such implementation, OWNER may be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property and provide for other benefits. OWNER has invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of this Development Agreement and will be investing even more significant time in implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Development Agreement, and it is not possible to determine sum of the money which would adequately compensate OWNER for such efforts. For the above reasons, CITY and OWNER agree that damages would not be an adequate remedy if CITY fails to carry out its obligations under this Development Agreement. Therefore, specific performance of this Development Agreement is the only remedy which would compensate OWNER if CITY fails to carry out its obligations under this Development Agreement, and CITY hereby agrees that OWNER shall be entitled to specific performance in the event of a default by CITY hereunder. CITY and OWNER acknowledge that, if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations under this Development Agreement, CITY shall have the right to refuse to issue any permits or other approvals which OWNER would otherwise have been entitled to pursuant to this Development Agreement. If CITY issues a permit or other approval pursuant to this Development Agreement in reliance upon a specified condition being satisfied by OWNER in the future, and if OWNER then fails to satisfy such condition, CITY shall be entitled to specific performance for the sole purpose of causing OWNER to satisfy such condition. The CITY's right to specific performance shall be limited to those circumstances set forth above, and CITY shall have no right to seek specific performance to cause OWNER to otherwise proceed with the Development of the Project in any manner. 26.3 Liquidated Damages Remedy The parties hereto agree that this Development Agreement creates an obligation and duty upon OWNER to undertake and complete development of the Project within the time and manner specified herein. In the event OWNER breaches this Development Agreement by failing to undertake and complete development of the Project within the time and manner specified herein, the parties further agree that CITY will suffer actual damages as a result thereof, the amount of which is uncertain and would be impractical or extremely difficult to fix; therefore, OWNER agrees to pay CITY, in the event of any such breach by OWNER, the sum of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,00) as liquidated and actual damages which sum shall be in addition to any other remedies available to CITY as a result of such breach pursuant to this Section 26. Section 27. MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION. If pursuant to Section 26.1 of this Development Agreement, CITY elects to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a revised time schedule for compliance as herein provided, then CITY shall proceed as set forth in this Section. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -19- 27.1 Notice to OWNER CITY shall give notice to OWNER of City Council's intention to proceed to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a time schedule for compliance within ten (10) days of making the CITY's findings. 27.2 Public Hearing The City Council shall set and give notice of a public hearing on modification, termination or a time schedule for compliance to be held within forty-days after the City Council gives notice to OWNER. 27.3 Decision The City Council shall announce its findings and decisions on whether this Development Agreement is to be terminated, how this Development Agreement is to be modified or the provisions of the Development Agreement with which OWNER must comply and a time schedule therefor not than ten (10) days following completion of the public hearing. 27.4 Implementation Modifying or terminating this Development Agreement shall be accomplished by CITY enacting an ordinance. The ordinance shall recite the reasons which, in the opinion of the CITY, make the modification or termination of this Development Agreement necessary. Not later then ten (10) days following the adoption of the ordinance, one copy thereof shall be forwarded to OWNER. This Development Agreement shall be terminated or this Development Agreement as modified shall become effective on the effective date of the ordinance terminating or modifying this Development Agreement. 27.5 Schedule for Compliance Setting a reasonable time schedule for compliance with this Development Agreement may be accomplished by CITY enacting a resolution. The resolution shall recite the reasons which, in the opinion of CITY, make it advisable to set a schedule for compliance and why the time schedule is reasonable. Not later than ten (10) days following adoption of the resolution, one copy thereof shall be forwarded to OWNER. Compliance with any time schedule so established as an alternative to modification or termination shall be subject to periodic review as provided in this Development Agreement and lack of good faith compliance by OWNER with the time schedule shall be basis for termination or modification of this Development Agreement. Section 28. ASSIGNMENT 28.1 Right to Assign OWNER shall have the right to sell, mortgage, hypothecate, assign or transfer this Development Agreement, and any and all of its rights, duties and obligations hereunder, to any person, partnership, joint venture, firm or corporation at any time during the term of this Development Agreement, provided that any such sale, mortgage, hypothecation, assignment or transfer must be pursuant to a sale, assignment or other transfer of the interest of OWNER in the Property, or a portion thereof. In the event of any such sale, mortgage, hypothecation, assignment or transfer, (a) OWNER shall notify CITY of such event and the name of the transferee, together with the corresponding entitlements being transferred to such transferee and (b) the agreement between OWNER and such transferee shall provide that either OWNER or the transferee or both shall be liable for the performance of all obligations of OWNER pursuant to this Development Agreement and the Development Approvals. Such transferee and /or OWNER shall notify CITY in writing which entity shall be liable for the performance of such obligations, and upon the express written assumption of any or all of the obligations of OWNER under this Development Agreement by such assignee, transferee or 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -20- purchaser shall, without any act of or concurrence by CITY, relieve OWNER of its legal duty to perform said obligations under this Development Agreement with respect to the Property or portion thereof, so transferred, except to the extent OWNER is not in default under the terms of this Development Agreement. 28.2 Release Upon Transfer It is understood and agreed by the parties that the Property may be subdivided following the Development Agreement Date. One or more of such subdivided parcels may be sold, mortgaged, hypothecated, assigned or transferred to persons for development by them in accordance with the provisions of this Development Agreement. Effective upon such sale, mortgage, hypothecation, assignment or transfer, the obligations of OWNER shall become several and not joint, except as to OWNER's obligations set forth in Section 10 of this Development Agreement. Upon the sale, transfer, or assignment of OWNER's rights and interests under this Development Agreement as permitted pursuant to the Section 28.1 above, OWNER shall be released from its obligations under this Development Agreement with respect to the Property, or portion thereof so transferred, provided that (a) OWNER is not then in default under this Development Agreement, (b) OWNER has provided to CITY the notice of such transfer specified in Section 28.1 above, (c) the transferee executes and delivers to CITY a written agreement in which (i) the name and address of the transferee is set forth and (ii) the transferee expressly and unconditionally assumes all the obligations of OWNER under this Development Agreement and the Development Approvals with respect to the property, or portion thereof, so transferred and (d) the transferee provides CITY with security equivalent to any security provided by OWNER to secure performance of its obligations under this Development Agreement or the Development Approvals. Non - compliance by any such transferee with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement shall not be deemed a default hereunder or grounds for termination hereof or constitute cause for CITY to initiate enforcement action against other persons then owning or holding interest in the Property or any portion thereof and not themselves in default hereunder. Upon completion of any phase of development of the Project as determined by CITY, CITY may release that completed phase from any further obligations under this Development Agreement. The provisions of this Section shall be self - executing and shall not require the execution or recordation of any further document or instrument. Any and all successors, assigns and transferees of OWNER shall have all of the same rights, benefits and obligations of OWNER as used in this Development Agreement and the term "OWNER" as used in this Development Agreement shall refer to any such successors, assigns and transferees unless expressly provided herein to the contrary. Section 29. NO CONFLICTING ENACTMENTS. By entering into this Development Agreement and relying thereupon, OWNER is obtaining vested rights to proceed with the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement, and in accordance with, and to the extent of, the Development Approvals. By entering into this Development Agreement and relying thereupon, CITY is securing certain public benefits which enhance the public health, safety and general welfare. CITY therefore agrees that except as provided in Section 23 of this Development Agreement, neither the City Council nor any other agency of CITY shall enact a rule, regulation, ordinance or other measure which relates to the rate, timing or sequencing of the Development or construction of all or any part of the Project and which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Development Agreement. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -21- Section 30. GENERAL 30.1 Force Majeure The Term of this Development Agreement and the time within which OWNER shall be required to perform any act under this Development Agreement shall be extended by a period of time equal to the number of days during which performance of such act is delayed unavoidably by strikes, lock -outs, Acts of God, failure or inability to secure materials or labor by reason of priority or similar regulations or order of any governmental or regulatory body, initiative or referenda, moratoria, enemy action, civil disturbances, fire, unavoidable casualties, or any other cause beyond the reasonable control of OWNER. 30.2 Construction of Development Agreement The language in all parts of this Development Agreement shall in all cases, be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning. The captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Development Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving questions of constructions. This Development Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. The parties understand and agree that this Development Agreement is not intended to constitute, nor shall be construed to constitute, an impermissible attempt to contract away the legislative and governmental functions of CITY, and in particular, the CITY's police powers. In this regard, the parties understand and agree that this Development Agreement shall not be deemed to constitute the surrender or abnegation of the CITY's governmental powers over the Property. 30.3 Severability If any provision of this Development Agreement shall be adjudged to be invalid, void or unenforceable, such provision shall in no way affect, impair or invalidate any other provision hereof, unless such judgment affects a material part of this Development Agreement, the parties hereby agree that they would have entered into the remaining portions of this Development Agreement not adjudged to be invalid, void or illegal. In the event that all or any portion of this Development Agreement is found to be unenforceable, this Development Agreement or that portion which is found to be unenforceable shall be deemed to be a statement of intention by the parties; and the parties further agree that in such event they shall take all steps necessary to comply with such public hearings and /or notice requirements as may be necessary in order to make valid this Development Agreement or that portion which is found to be unenforceable. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Development Agreement, in the event that any material provision of this Development Agreement is found to be unenforceable, void or voidable, OWNER or CITY may terminate this Development Agreement in accordance with the provisions of the Development Agreement Statute and the Procedures Resolution. 30.4 Cumulative Remedies In addition to any other rights or remedies, either party may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any default, to enforce any covenant or agreement herein, or to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation, including suits for declaratory relief, specific performance, relief in the nature of mandamus and actions for damages. All of the remedies described above shall be cumulative and not exclusive of one another, and the exercise of any one or more of the remedies shall not constitute a waiver or election with respect to any other available remedy. 30.5 Hold Harmless Agreement OWNER and CITY hereby mutually agree to, and shall hold each other, each other's elective and appointive councils, boards, commissions, 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -22- officers, partners, agents, representatives and employees harmless from any liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury, including death, and from claims for property damage which may arise from the activities of the other's or the other's contractors', subcontractors', agents', or employees' which relate to the Project whether such activities be by OWNER or CITY, or by any of the OWNER's or the CITY's contractors, subcontractors, or by any one or more persons indirectly employed by, or acting as agent for OWNER any of the OWNER's or the CITY's contractors or subcontractors. OWNER and CITY agree to and shall defend the other and the other's elective and appointive councils, boards, commissioners, officers, partners, agents, representatives and employees from any suits or actions at law or in equity for damage caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of the aforementioned activities which relate to the Project. 30.6 Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge In the event of any legal action instituted by a third party or other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of this Development Agreement and /or the Development Approvals, the parties hereby agree to cooperate fully with each other in defending said action and the validity of each provision of this Development Agreement, however, OWNER shall be liable for all legal expenses and costs incurred in defending any such action. OWNER shall be entitled to choose legal counsel to defend against any such legal action and shall pay any attorneys' fees awarded against CITY or OWNER, or both, resulting from any such legal action. OWNER shall be entitled to any award of attorneys' fees arising out of any such legal action. 30.7 Public Agency Coordination CITY and OWNER shall cooperate and use their respective best efforts in coordinating the implementation of the Development Approvals with other public agencies, if any, having jurisdiction over the Property or the Project. 30.8 Initiative Measures Both CITY and OWNER intend that this Development Agreement is a legally binding contract which will supersede any initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation (whether relating to the rate, timing or sequencing of the Development or construction of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative or final), building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements to use approved, issued or granted within the CITY, or portions of the CITY, shall apply to the Project to the extent such initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation is inconsistent or in conflict with this Development Agreement. Should an initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance, or other limitation be enacted by the citizens of CITY which would preclude construction of all or any part of the Project, and to the extent such initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to invalidate or prevail over all or any part of this Development Agreement, OWNER shall have no recourse against CITY pursuant to the Development Agreement, but shall retain all other rights, claims and causes of action under this Development Agreement not so invalidated and any and all other rights, claims and causes of action as law or in equity which OWNER may have independent of this Development Agreement with respect to the project. The foregoing shall not be deemed to limit OWNER's right to appeal any such determination that such initiative, measure, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation invalidates or prevails over all or any part of this Development Agreement. CITY agrees to cooperate with OWNER in all reasonable manners in 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -23- order to keep this Development Agreement in full force and effect, provided OWNER shall reimburse CITY for its out -of- pocket expenses incurred directly in connection with such cooperation and CITY shall not be obligated to institute a lawsuit or other court proceedings in this connection. 30.9 Attorneys' Fees In the event of any dispute between the parties involving the covenants or conditions contained in this Development Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable expenses, attorneys fees and costs. 30.10 No Waiver No delay or omission by either party in exercising any right or power accruing upon non - compliance or failure to perform by the other party under any of the provisions of this Development Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof. A waiver by either party of any of the covenants or conditions to be performed by the other party shall not be construed as a waiver of any succeeding breach of non- performance of the same or other covenants and conditions hereof. 30.11 Authority to Execute The person executing this Development Agreement on behalf of OWNER warrants and represents that he /she has the authority to execute this Development Agreement on behalf of his/her partnership and represents that he /she has the authority to bind OWNER to the performance of OWNER's obligations hereunder. 30.12 Notice. 30.12.1 To OWNER Any notice required or permitted to be given by CITY to OWNER under or pursuant to this Development Agreement shall be deemed sufficiently given if in writing and delivered personally to an officer of OWNER or mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to OWNER as follows: U.S. Southeast Corporation 1818 S. State College Blvd. #200 Anaheim, CA 92806 Attention: Shawn An Cheng or such changed address as OWNER shall designate in writing to CITY. With copies to: Integral Partners, LLC 160 Newport Center Drive, Suite 240 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Attention: John Stanek or such changed address as OWNER shall designate in writing to CITY. 30.12.2 To CITY Any notice required or permitted to be given to CITY under or pursuant to this Development Agreement shall be made and given in writing, if by mail addressed to: 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -24- City Council City of Anaheim c/o City Clerk P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 or such changed address as CITY shall designate in writing to OWNER: With copies to: City Manager City of Anaheim P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 City Attorney City of Anaheim P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 and if personally delivered to the City Clerk, at the Anaheim Civic Center, 200 S. Anaheim. Blvd., Anaheim, California, together with copies marked for the City Manager and the City Attorney or, if so addressed and mailed, with postage thereon fully prepaid, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the City Council in care of the City Clerk at the above address with copies likewise so mailed to the City Manager and the City Attorney, respectively and also in care of the City Clerk at the same address. The provisions of this Section shall be deemed permissive only and shall not detract from the validity of any notice given in a manner which would be legally effective in the absence of this Section. 30.13 Captions The captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Development Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall in no way define, explain, modify, construe, limit, amplify or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any of the provisions of this Development Agreement. 30.14 Consent Any consent required by the parries in carrying out the terms of this Development agreement shall not unreasonably be withheld. 30.15 Further Actions and Instruments Each of the parties shall cooperate with and provide reasonable to the other to the extent contemplated hereunder in the performance of all obligations under this Development Agreement and the satisfaction of the conditions of this Development Agreement. Upon the request of either party at any time, the other party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit if reasonably required, and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any actions as may be reasonably necessary under the terms of this Development Agreement to carry out the intent and to fulfill the provisions of this Development Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Development Agreement. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -25- 30.16 Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute This Development Agreement has been entered into in reliance upon the provisions of the Development Agreement Statute in effect as of the Development Agreement Date. Accordingly, subject to Section 23.1 above, to the extent that subsequent amendments to the Government Code would affect the provisions of this Development Agreement, such amendments shall not be applicable to this Development Agreement unless necessary for this Development Agreement to be enforceable or unless this Development Agreement is modified pursuant to the provisions set forth in this Development Agreement and Government Code Section 65868 as in effect on the Development Agreement Date. 30.17 Governing Law This Development Agreement, including, without limitation, its existence, validity, construction and operation, and the rights of each of the parties shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 30.18 Effect on Title OWNER and CITY agree that this Development Agreement shall not continue as an encumbrance against any portion of the Property as to which this Development Agreement has terminated. 30.19 Mortgagee Protection Entering into or a breach of this Development Agreement shall not defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of Mortgagees having a mortgage on any portion of the Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. No Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Development Agreement to perform OWNER's obligations, or to guarantee such performance prior to any foreclosure or deed in lieu thereof. 30.20 Notice of Default to Mortgagee, Right of Mortgagee to Cure If the City Clerk timely receives notice from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given to OWNER under the terms of this Development Agreement, CITY shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to OWNER. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, for a period up to ninety (90) days after the receipt of such notice from CITY to cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy the default unless a further extension of time to cure is granted in writing by CITY. If the default is of a nature which can only be remedied or cured by such Mortgagee upon obtaining possession, such Mortgagee shall seek to obtain possession with diligence and continually through foreclosure, a receiver or otherwise, and shall thereafter remedy or cure the default or non- compliance within thirty (30) days after obtaining possession. If any such default or non- compliance cannot, with diligence, be remedied or cured within such thirty (30) day period, then such Mortgagee shall have such additional time as may be reasonably necessary to remedy or cure such default or non - compliance if such Mortgagee commences cure during such thirty (30) day period, and thereafter diligently pursues and completes such cure. 30.21 Bankruptcy Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of Section 30.20 of this Development Agreement, if any Mortgagee is prohibited from commencing or pursues and prosecuting foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings in the nature thereof by any process or injunction issued by any court or by reason of any action by any court having jurisdiction of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding involving CITY, the times specified in this Section for 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -26- commencing or prosecuting foreclosure or other proceedings shall be extended for the period of the prohibition. 30.22 Disaffirmance. 30.22.1 CITY agrees that in the event of termination of this Agreement by reason of any default by CITY, or by reason of the disaffirmance hereof by a receiver, liquidator or trustee for OWNER or its property, CITY, if requested by any Mortgagee, shall enter into a new Development Agreement for the Project with the most senior Mortgagee requesting such new agreement, for the remainder of the Term, effective as of the date of such termination, upon the terms, provisions, covenants and agreements as herein contained to the extent and subject to the law then in effect, and subject to the rights, if any, of any parties then in possession of any part of the Property, provided: 30.22.2 The Mortgagee shall make written request upon CITY for the new Development Agreement for the Project within thirty (3 0) days after the date of termination; 30.22.3 The Mortgagee shall pay to CITY at the time of the execution and delivery of the new Development Agreement for the Project expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, to which CITY shall have been subjected by reason of OWNER's default; and 30.22.4 The Mortgagee shall perform and observe all covenants herein contained on OWNER's part to be performed, and shall further remedy any other conditions which OWNER under the terminated agreement was obligated to perform under its terms, to the extent the same are curable or may be performed by the Mortgagee. 30.22.5 Nothing herein contained shall require any Mortgagee to enter into a new agreement pursuant to Section 30.22.1 above, nor to cure any default of OWNER referred to above. 30.23 No Third Party Beneficiaries This Development Agreement and all provisions hereof is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of CITY, OWNER and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have right of action based upon any provision in this Development Agreement. 30.24 Project as a Private Undertaking It is specifically understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that the Project is a private development, that neither party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect hereunder, and that each party is an independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Development Agreement. No partnership, join venture or other association of any kind is formed by this Development Agreement. The only relationship between CITY and OWNER is that of a government entity regulating the development of private property and the owner of such private property. 30.25 Restrictions Property OWNER shall place in any agreements to sell or convey any interest in the Property or any portion thereof, provisions making the terms of this Development Agreement binding on any successors in interest of OWNER and express provision 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 '27' for OWNER or CITY, acting separately or jointly, to enforce the provisions of this Development Agreement and to recover attorneys' fees and costs for such enforcement. 30.26 Recitals The recitals in this Development Agreement constitute part of this Development Agreement and each party shall be entitled to rely on the truth and accuracy of each recital as an inducement to enter into this Development Agreement. 30.27 Recording The City Clerk shall cause a copy of this Development Agreement to be executed by CITY and recorded in the Official Records of Orange County no later than ten (10) days after CITY approves this Development Agreement. 30.28 Title Report CITY is required to sign this Development Agreement only after OWNER has provided CITY with a satisfactory preliminary title report evidencing and showing OWNER's legal and equitable ownership interest in the Property, current within six (6) months, unencumbered except for the exceptions (hereinafter the "Permitted Exceptions ") set in the preliminary title report for the Property dated November 18, 2004, attached hereto as Exhibit "F" (the "Preliminary Title Report "). Any instrument of monetary encumbrance such as a deed of trust or a mortgage entered into subsequent to the date of the Preliminary Title Report and prior to the Development Agreement Date, shall contain language expressly subordinating such instruments of monetary encumbrance to the provisions of this Development Agreement. OWNER shall present evidence, satisfactory to CITY, of OWNER's legal title to Property, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions and any such subordinated instruments of monetary encumbrance, at the time of recordation of this Agreement, or a memorandum thereof. 30.29 Entire Agreement This Development Agreement, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Development Agreement, and this Development Agreement supersedes all previous negotiations, discussions and agreements between the parties, and no parol evidence of any prior or other agreement shall be permitted to contradict or vary the terms hereof. 30.30 Successors and Assigns The burdens of the Development Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of the Development Agreement inure to all successors in interest and assigns of the parties to the Development Agreement. 30.31 OWNER's Title of Property Neither party hereto shall be bound by any provision of this Agreement unless and until OWNER shall record this Development Agreement or a memorandum thereof, in the office of the County Recorder of the County sufficient to cause this Agreement and the obligations contained herein to attach to and encumber OWNER's fee title to Property. 30.32 Exhibits All exhibits, including attachments thereto, are incorporated in this Development Agreement in their entirety by this reference. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -28- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and OWNER have executed this Development Agreement as of the date and year first above written. "CITY" "OWNER" CITY OF ANAHEIM, a By: municipal corporation Mayor ATTEST: SHERYLLSCHROEDER City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: JACK L. WHITE, City Attorney Title: 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -29- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss COUNTY OF ) On , before me, , personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his /her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Notary Public [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss COUNTY OF 1 On , before me, , personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Notary Public [SEAL] 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -30- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss COUNTY OF ) On , before me, , personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his /her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Notary Public [SEAL] 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 '31' EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY Real property in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as follows: PARCEL 1: PARCELS A AND B. AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 22, PAGE 32 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL 2: AN EASEMENT 8.34 FEET IN WIDTH FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER THAT PORTION OF LOT 5 OF TRACT NO. 71, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID EASEMENT BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60 FOOT ROAD AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF TRACT NO. 71 (SAID ROAD BEING NOW KNOWN AS STATE COLLEGE BLVD.) SAID POINT BEING 280.34 FEET SOUTH, (MEASURED ALONG SAID CENTERLINE) FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, THENCE EAST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 5,250 FEET. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION INCLUDED WITHIN SAID 60 FOOT ROAD AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF SAID TRACT NO. 71. PARCEL 3: PARCEL 2, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 50, PAGE 12 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL 4: AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER THE NORTHERLY 16.66 FEET OF THE SOUTHERLY 258.14 FEET OF THE WESTERLY 220.00 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND: THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF TRACT NO. 71, AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60 -FOOT ROAD AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF TRACT NO. 71, (SAID ROAD BEING NOW KNOWN AS STATE 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -32- COLLEGE BOULEVARD), SAID POINT BEING 280.34 FEET SOUTH (MEASURED ALONG SAID CENTERLINE) FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN; THENCE EAST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 5, 250 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREES 08'00" WEST 28.34 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 59' 16" EAST 54.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREES 08' 00" WEST 36.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 59' 16" EAST 26.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREES 08'00" WEST 216.11 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 5, BEING ALSO A POINT IN THE CENTERLINE OF THE STREET DESCRIBED IN THE FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION FILED JULY 8, 1960 AND RECORDED IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID LAST MENTIONED CENTERLINE TO THE EAST LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED IN DEED TO W. H. JEWETT, RECORDED SEPTEMBER 1, 1960 IN BOOK 5400, PAGE 238 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID JEWETT' S LAND AND THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION, TO THE CENTERLINE OF STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM, THAT PORTION INCLUDED WITHIN SAID 60 -FOOT ROAD AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF TRACT NO. 71. PARCEL 5: THAT PORTION OF LOT 5 OF TRACT NO. 71 AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE CENTER LINE OF PLACENTA AVENUE, WHICH POINT IS 217 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE CENTER OF SAID PLACENTA AVENUE, 55 FEET; THENCE EAST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH BOUNDARY LINE OF LOT 5 TRACT NO. 71, A DISTANCE OF 154 FEET; THENCE NORTH, PARALLEL WITH SAID CENTERLINE OF PLACENTA AVENUE, 55 FEET; THENCE WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID LOT 5, A DISTANCE OF 154 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM, THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN PLACENTA AVENUE, SHOWN AS A 60.00 -FOOT STREET ON SAID MAP, ADJOINING SAID LOT 5 ON THE WEST. APN: 232 - 021 -07, 232 - 021 -10 and 231 -021 -11 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 EXHIBIT `B" FINAL SITE PLAN Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 Platinum Centre — Anaheim FSP 2005- 00005— List of Exhibits June 1, 2005 ARCHITECTS PLANS — 11 SHEETS — KTGY PARKING STRUCTURE PLANS — 2 SHEETS - PARKITECTS Conceptual Basement Exhibit No. 15 Sheet A-7 Level Parking Plan FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS PLAN — 1 SHEET — Schirmer En ineerin Exhibit No. 16 Sheet F 1 Fire Department Access Plan LANDSCAPE PLANS — 3 SHEETS — MJS Design Group Exhibit No. 17 Sheet L -1.0 Cover Sheet Exhibit No. 1 Sheet A -1 Conceptual Site Plan Exhibit No. 2 Sheet A -2 Ground Floor Plan Exhibit No. 3 Sheet A -3 Podium Floor Plan Exhibit No. 4 Sheet A -4 Third Level Floor Plan Exhibit No. 5 Sheet A -5 Fourth Level Floor Plan Exhibit No. 6 Sheet A -6 Fifth Level Floor Plan Exhibit No. 7 Sheet A -8 Roof Plan Exhibit No. 8 Sheet A -9 Building Elevations Katella Ave and State College Exhibit No. 9 Sheet A -10 Building Elevations South and Private Drive Elevations Exhibit No. 10 Sheet A -11 Unit Plans 1, 2, & 3 Exhibit No. 11 Sheet A -12 Unit Plans 4 & 5 Exhibit No. 12 Sheet A -13 Detailed Floor and Elevation Plan Exhibit No. 13 Sheet A -14 Si na e Plan Exhibit No. 14 Sheet A -15 Open Space Plan PARKING STRUCTURE PLANS — 2 SHEETS - PARKITECTS Conceptual Basement Exhibit No. 15 Sheet A-7 Level Parking Plan FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS PLAN — 1 SHEET — Schirmer En ineerin Exhibit No. 16 Sheet F 1 Fire Department Access Plan LANDSCAPE PLANS — 3 SHEETS — MJS Design Group Exhibit No. 17 Sheet L -1.0 Landscape Plan Exhibit No. 18 Sheet L -1.1 Fence and Wall Details Exhibit No. 19 Sheet L -2.0 Lighting Plan Exhibit No. 20 Sheet L -2.1 Lighting Details Corp. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -34- SET OF PHOTOGRAPHS Exhibit No. 21 Set of Photographs of Current Site GRADING PLANS - 2 SHEETS — PENCO ENGINEERING Exhibit No. 22 Sheet C -1 TTM 16825 Exhibit No. 23 Sheet 1 of 1 Conceptual Grading Plan COLORS AND MATERIALS BOARD Colors and materials Exhibit No. 24 board *All exhibits in this table are incorporated into Development Agreement No. 2005- 00005; however, the noted exhibits (reduced in size) are attached for ease of reference. Full size sheets of all exhibits are provided in the Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00005 on file in the Planning Department. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 EXHIBIT "C" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS AND MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS Conditions of Approval — Tentative Tract Map 16825 1. That prior to final map approval, an unsubordinated use covenant /agreement shall be recorded for shared use of the emergency fire access. The covenant /agreement shall be approved as to form by the City Attorney's office and the Fire Department. 2. That prior to final map approval, the City Engineer and City Attorney shall approve and the property owner shall record a maintenance covenant providing for the continued operation and maintenance of the street as a private street. That prior to final map approval, the developer shall submit street and landscape improvement plans for the public improvements along State College Boulevard and the private street to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division. A bond shall be posted in an amount approved by the City Engineer and a form approved by the City Attorney prior to issuance of a building permit or plan approval whichever occurs first. A Right of Way Construction Permit shall be obtained from the Development Services Division for all work performed in the right -of- way. The improvements shall be constructed prior to certificate of occupancy. 4. That prior to final map approval, the developer to acquire the necessary dedications from the adjacent property owner for that portion of the private street outside the tract boundary to be irrevocably offered for dedication to the City as an easement for road and public utility purposes. 5. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Supplemental Sewer Impact fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $430/ 1,000 GSF for floor building area developed between the 0.4 and the 1.0 floor area ratio developments. 6. That prior to approval of the grading plan, the City of Anaheim Drainage Impact Mitigation Fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $24,500/ net acre. Credit will be applied for the current development. The project architect or engineer shall 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. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Arterial Highway beautification /aesthetics impact fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $12,500/ gross acre. 8. That private streets, private sewers and private storm drains shall be privately maintained. That prior to final map approval, a maintenance covenant shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attorney's Office. The covenant shall include provisions for maintenance of private facilities, including compliance with approved Water Quality Management Plan, and a maintenance exhibit. The covenant shall be recorded concurrently with the final map, including regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -36- 10. That prior to issuance of the first building permit, the final map shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and the Orange County Surveyor and then shall be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder (Subdivision Map Act, Section 66499.40). 11. That prior to final map approval, vehicular access rights to Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard, except at street intersections, shall be released and relinquished to the City of Anaheim.HOW ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY ON KATELLA? 12. That prior to final map approval, the OWNER shall furnish a Subdivision Agreement to the City of Anaheim, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney's Office, agreeing to complete the public improvements required as conditions of the map at the legal property owner's expense. Said agreement shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and shall than be recorded concurrently with the final map. All public improvements shall be constructed within one year of recordation of the final map. 13. 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 (BMP's) 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 BMP's as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. • Incorporates Treatment Control BMP's as defined in the DAMP. • Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMP's. • Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMP's, and describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMP's. 14. That prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: • Demonstrate that all structural BMP's 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 BMP's described in the Project WQMP Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available onsite. Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMP's. 15. That prior to grading plan approval, 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 (NOI) 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. 16. That prior to final map approval, all existing structures shall be demolished. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 17. That prior to final map approval, the OWNER shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim easements for street, public utility and other public purposes for: • Widening of Katella Avenue to the ultimate R/W. • Fire Department access over the private street. 18. That prior to final map approval, a cash payment shall be paid for the future construction of Katella Avenue to the ultimate condition. 19. That the developer shall construct a 15" & 18" sewer line in Katella Avenue within the project frontage to connect to the State College Blvd. trunk line. The project's civil engineer shall prepare final construction drawings for the complete sewer line required. Costs associated with the design and construction of the sewer line may be used to offset the sewer impact fees. If the developer's costs exceed the required sewer impact fees, the developer may request creation of a reimbursement agreement to provide for the reimbursement of the constructed sewer line at such time as the adjacent properties develop and connect to the sewer line. 20. That grading shall conform to requirements of Chapter 17.04 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. The grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works, Development Services Division for review and approval. A grading permit is required for cut or fills exceeding 500 cubic yards. Allow at least 8 weeks to obtain a grading permit. 21. That prior to final map approval, all units shall be assigned street addresses by the Building Division. Street names for any the new private street (if requested by the developer or required by the City) shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Division. 22. That prior to final map approval, tract fees shall be paid and tract bonds shall be posted. 23. That prior to final map approval, a Drainage Report shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section of the Public Works Departmentsfor review and approval. 24. That approval from the Orange County Flood Control District shall be obtained prior to any connection to the OCFCD channel. Conditions of Approval — Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04975 and Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 25. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, the property owner shall post a bond to the City for all required sewer improvements /upgrades, including the removal of any abandoned lines and /or off site improvements, as required by CUP2005- 04975, FSP No. 2005- 00005, TTM 16825, and MMP. 129 referenced herein. All improvements shall be completed prior to any occupancy of the project. 26. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, the OWNER shall post a bond to the City for the installation of all water supply improvements, including all off site improvements and fire hydrants and the abandonment /removal of any existing water lines, as required by CUP2005- 04975, FSP2005- 00005, TTM 16825, and MMP. 129 referenced herein. All improvements shall be completed prior to any occupancy of the project. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 27. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, OWNER shall post a bond to the City for the undergrounding of all overhead electrical utility structures located on the property as required by CUP2005- 04975, FSP2005- 00005, TTM 16825, and MMP. 129 referenced herein. All improvements /undergrounding shall be completed prior to any occupancy of the project. 28. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, OWNER shall post a bond to the City for all traffic related street improvements, including but not limited to traffic signals, directional signage, striping, and median islands as required by FSP2005- 00005, TTM 16825, and MMP. 129 referenced herein. All improvements, except the required traffic signal shall be completed on a parcel -by- parcel basis, prior to issuance of occupancy of each parcel. 29. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, OWNER shall post a bond to the City for all required sewer improvements /upgrades, including the removal of any abandoned lines and /or off site improvements, as required by CUP2005- 04975, FSP2005- 00005, TTM 16825, and MMP. 129 referenced herein. All improvements shall be completed prior to any occupancy of the project. 30. That prior to assignment of rights of DAG 2005- 00005, OWNER shall post bonds for project - wide improvements as indicated in these conditions. 31. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, OWNER shall submit water improvement plans for the entire project to the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, for review and approval. The plan shall identify the location of large meters with easements, fire lines, and backflow devices for each parcel. Provisions for the maintenance of all associated water line improvements shall be included in the CC & Rs for the project. 32. That OWNER shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim an easement for a domestic above - ground water meter in addition to providing a 5 -foot wide clearance around the water meter pad and a 20 -foot wide access easement along the water line /or water lateral from the street to the water meter pad for maintenance. 33. That a private water system with separate water service for fire protection and domestic water shall be provided. 34. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. 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 above ground and 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 submitted for approval by the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. 35. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Utility Standards. Any existing water services and /or fire lines that are not approved by the Utility for continued use shall be upgraded to current standards, or abandoned by the property owner /developer. If the existing services are no longer needed, they shall be abandoned by the property owner /developer. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 36. 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 Public Utilities Department. 37. That prior to submitting the water improvement plans; the OWNER shall submit a water system master plan, including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department 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. 38. That prior to application for water meters, fire lines or submitting the water improvement plans for approval, the property owner /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 done in accordance with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules, and Regulations. 39. That prior to structural framing, fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and approved by the Fire Department. 40. That an all- weather access road as approved by the Fire Department shall be provided during project construction. 41. That because this project has a landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed in compliance with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 42. That signs shall be posted indicating no on- street parking shall be allowed on the adjacent streets except where designated turn-out areas are provided for loading and unloading. Such signs shall be shown on plans submitted for the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 43. That an on -site trash truck turn- around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476 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. 44. That the proposed development shall operate in accordance with the written solid waste management plan signed by OWNER. Modifications to the solid waste management plan shall only occur if mutually agreed upon by both the property owner and the City of Anaheim Director of Public Works. 45. That all above - ground utility devices shall be located on private property and outside any required street setback area. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 46. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at OWNER'S expense. Landscape and /or hardscape screening of all pad- mounted equipment shall be required and shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 47. That the property shall be served with underground utilities per the Electrical Rates, Rules, and Regulations, and the City of Anaheim Underground Policy. 48. That the OWNER shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement (per final electrical design), along /across high voltage lines, low voltage lines crossing private property, and around all pad- mounted transformers, switches, capacitors, etc. Said easement shall be submitted to the City of Anaheim prior to connection of electrical service. 49. That closed circuit television (CCTV) security cameras shall be installed to monitor the parking structure and the mailroom to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department. CCTV cameras shall be strategically located throughout the parking structure, covering all areas, especially all pedestrian and vehicular access points. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 50. That each individual unit shall be clearly marked with its appropriate address. These numbers shall be positioned so they are easily viewed from vehicular and pedestrian pathways throughout the complex. Main building numbers shall be a minimum of 12 inches in height. Main building numbers and address numbers shall be illuminated during hours of darkness. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 51. That 4 -foot high address numbers shall be displayed flat on the roof of the building in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible from view of the street or adjacent properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Police Department, Community Services Division approval. 52. That pedestrian and vehicular access control shall be required to prevent unauthorized entry. A digital keypad entry system shall be included to facilitate quick response by emergency personnel. The system's entry code shall be provided to the Anaheim Police Department Communications Bureau and the Anaheim Fire Department. 53. That all levels of the parking structure, including circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses, and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and vehicles on -site. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 54. That prior to the issuance of the first building permit, OWNER shall finalize the abandonment of any existing public utilities easements to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division of the Public Works Department. 55. That all air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground mounted equipment shall be properly shielded from view. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 56. 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. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 57. That OWNER shall provide satellite or other cable /transmission television wiring (concealed from outside the building) to each unit and shall not allow individual television service involving the installation of individual dish receivers /transmitters on the exterior of the building 58. That OWNER shall be responsible for compliance with all mitigation measures within the assigned time frames and any direct costs associated with the attached Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 129 as established by the City of Anaheim and as required by Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code to ensure implementation of those identified mitigation measures. 59. That gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to the Engineering Standard Plan No. 475 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to the issuance of the first building permit. 60. 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. 402, 436, 470, 471, 472, 473 and 475 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 61. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager indicating how the vehicular security gates and vehicle turn- around lanes shall function. Any proposed security gates shall meet the minimum requirements as required by the Fire Department. 62. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 63. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and approval in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115 pertaining to sight distance visibility for signs or wall /fence locations. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 64. That all vehicular ramps and grades shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan No. 402, and be approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. 65. That assigned parking spaces shall be provided for each residential unit. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 66. That visitor parking spaces shall be posted, "No Overnight Parking, Except by Permission of the Management." Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 67. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by project applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 24, and as conditioned herein. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 68. That the applicant 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. 69. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, the OWNER shall undertake and implement the maintenance of certain landscaping, private street and private utilities, and the performance of other obligations, as set forth herein. Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection, OWNER shall execute and record with the Orange County Recorder an unsubordinated covenant to run with the land, satisfactory to the Planning Director and the City Attorney, creating maintenance obligations to maintain the following areas and facilities (collectively referred to hereinafter as the 'Maintenance Areas and Facilities ") as indicated below: • Private Street at the east portion of the project including sidewalks, landscaping, street lighting, signage, striping and parkways. • Private sewer lines, grease interceptors, and clean outs. • Private storm drain lines, area drains, inlets, and catch basins. • Internal landscape areas, courtyards, common areas. • Internal hardscape. • Parkway landscaping. • Parkway hardscape. • Onsite fountains and art elements. • Enclosed parking structures with mail facilities, rubbish collection areas, and bicycle storage. • Appliances in each dwelling unit including washer, dryer, stove, refrigerator, microwave, and dishwasher. • HVAC equipment in each dwelling unit. • Recreational amenities areas including public park, pools & spas, barbecue areas, clubhouse meeting room(s) and workout room. • Public restrooms. • Site lighting systems. • Trash collection and facilities. • Squeal -free surface in parking structure. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 • Maintenance of on -site signs and awnings. The obligations described above and depicted in the Maintenance Exhibit shall collectively be referred to as the "Maintenance Obligations." OWNER shall be responsible for the maintenance of the Maintenance Areas and Facilities and performance of the Maintenance Obligations, including any additional obligations, which may be specified herein. The Covenant may provide any of the Maintenance Obligations may be assumed by a duly formed Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and /or Maintenance Assessment District subject to CITY'S written approval. The covenant set forth herein constitutes a general scheme for the development, protection and maintenance of the Property. Said covenant is for the benefit of the Property and shall bind all successor owners thereof. Such covenant shall be a burden upon, and a benefit to, not only the OWNER but also its successors and assigns. Such covenant is intended to be and shall be declared to be running with the land or equitable servitudes upon the land, as the case may be. The Covenant shall provide that amendment of any provision thereof, which may negatively impact performance of the Maintenance Obligations, shall require prior written consent of the City. Termination of this Covenant is not a release of Declarant with regard to Declarant's independent obligations in connection with development and approval of the Project or with regard to obligations and liabilities incurred prior to such termination. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 EXHIBIT "D" PLATINUM TRIANGLE INTERIM DEVELOPMENT FEES 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -45- EXHIBIT "D -1" ELECTRIC UTILITIES UNDERGROUNDING FEE Residential Uses: $11.42 per unit 265 units x $11.42 = $3026.30 The Anaheim Master Land Use Plan and the Underground Conversion Program envision that the public utilities along Katella Avenue, between the State College Boulevard and Anaheim Way will need to be undergrounded. The City -owned facilities will be undergrounded using City funds, pursuant to the Rule No. 20 of the City of Anaheim Rates, Rules & Regulations Some of the facilities along Katella Avenue are owned by Southern California Edison (SCE). Moneys available to underground City -owned facilities may not be used to underground SCE facilities. The interim fee will collect the funds necessary to underground the SCE lines, and thereby significantly improve the appearance of The Platinum Triangle. The cost to underground the SCE lines is estimated at $104, 775. These funds will collected by imposing an interim fee on the Mixed -used residential units planned in The Platinum Triangle. The formula for calculating the fee is the following: Cost to Underground SCE lines = Per -Unit Fee Number of mixed -use residential units The Per -Unit fee is calculated at: $104,775 = $11.42 per Unit 9,175 Units 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -46- EXHIBIT "D -2" FIRE FACILITIES FEE Residential Uses $350.00 per unit Commercial /Office Uses $ 0.20 per square foot 265 units x $350 = $92,750 The purpose of establishing a Fire Protection Fee is to finance improvements and additions to facilities and equipment to support fire protection and paramedic services made necessary by new development and expansion of and additions to existing development within The Platinum Triangle. Development will generate additional need for protection and paramedic services in The Platinum Triangle. There is a need in The Platinum Triangle for expansion of fire protection and paramedic services and for new and expanded development to contribute its fair share towards the costs of additional and improved facilities and equipment. There is a reasonable relationship between the need for the described fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment and the impacts of the types of development proposed for The Platinum Triangle, for which the corresponding Fire Protection Fee described above is charged. There is also a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee and the type of development for which the fee is charged, in that these fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment provide support for fire protection and paramedic services and accommodate additional demand generated by development. The cost estimates set forth below are reasonable cost estimates for adding to fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment in The Platinum Triangle. The Fire Protection Fees collected pursuant to this agreement shall be used to finance only the additional facilities described, which additional facilities are needed to augment existing fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment serving The Platinum Triangle, to offset the impacts of new development and expansion of and additions to existing development within The Platinum Triangle. FIRE FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT Fire truck company with equipment Fire engine company with equipment Fire station $1,000,000 $ 750,000 $3,500,000 TOTAL $5,250,000 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -47- EXHIBIT "D -3" GENERAL PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSING FEE Residential Uses: $8.00 per unit Commercial /Office Uses: $0.01 per square foot 265 units x $8.00 = $2,120 The General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee is based on the following: Intent: Recover partial costs incurred to develop the Mixed -Use Overlay designation for the Platinum Triangle, including the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report Contract Costs Incurred: $146,000 New Development Allowed in Platinum Triangle: 7,044,300 sq.ft. of non - residential uses 9,175 residential units (assume average unit size of 800 sq.ft. = 7,340,000 sq.ft.) 7,044,300 7,340,000 14,384,300 total square feet $146,000/14,384,300 = $.01 per square foot 7,340,000 x $.01 = $73,400 $73,400/9175 = $8 per dwelling unit Planning Entitlement Fee 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -48- EXHIBIT "D -4" LIBRARY FEES Residential Uses $144.39 per unit 265 units x $144.39 = $38,263.35 The amount of the Library fee is based upon the current fee structure for East Santa Ana Canyon residential development for single family residential uses. The 2004 fee for such residential uses is $317.67, based upon an estimated 3.3 persons per dwelling. Using an estimate of 1.5 persons per unit in The Platinum Triangle, the proposed interim developer fee for The Platinum Triangle is $144.39 per unit. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -49- Notes: * Memorandum by Keyser - Marsten dated December 29, 2004 and updated January 15, 2004 by James Rabe of Keyser Marsten, available in the Parks Division office. ** As approved by the City Council in Resolution No. 2004R -128, dated June 15, 2004. * ** The square foot figure for required recreational space per dwelling unit in The Platinum Triangle is lower than the figure used elsewhere in the City, as set forth in Section 17.08. The lower figure is recommended because of the type of residential projects anticipated for The Platinum Triangle. The mixed use type of neighborhoods proposed require smaller human scale parks within a walking distance of 2.5 to 5 minutes of each dwelling unit. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -50- EXHIBIT "D -5" PLATINUM TRIANGLE PARK FEES Residential Uses $7055.74 per unit 265 units x $7,055.74 = $1,869,771.10 Park fees are established by implementing various values identified for The Platinum Triangle into the Park Dedication fee formula, as established by Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapters 17.08 and 17.34, which is as follows: (Land Acquisition Costs + Land Development Costs) x 2 x DU density proposed =fee 1,000 Land acquisition costs are estimated by Keyser - Marsten to be $50 /sq. ft. of property purchased (for industrial properties, including goodwill and relocation costs *). This equals $2,178,000/ac. Land Development costs have been established by the City Council at $173,913.33/ac. ** City Park Acreage Standard of 2 acres /1,000 population was incorporated in the formula set forth in Chapters 17.08 and 17.34, as approved by City Council. Estimated dwelling unit density of 1.5 persons /unit for both the single family attached and apartment complexes as estimated in Final Environmental Impact Report, No. 330, Table 4.3 -1, for the City of Anaheim's General Plan and Zoning Code Update. Using the above figures the park fee is $7,055.74 per unit. ($2,178,000 + $173,913.33) x 2 x 1.5 = $7,055.74 per unit 1,000 Parkland dedication will be required for each 8 acre or larger parcel proposed for residential development. The City's Platinum Triangle consultant, EDAW, has recommended that each dwelling unit for parcels of 8 acres or larger dedicate 44 sq. ft. of public parkland per each dwelling unit proposed. * ** The value of the parkland dedication will be credited against overall park in lieu fees paid for the project. Consistent with existing zoning and policies, no credit will be given for improvements. As an example, if a subdivision were required to dedicate a .5 acre park, credit would be given against the Land Acquisition value, established above, of $2,178,000 per acre. Accordingly the Developer would be entitled to a credit of $1,089,000 for the dedication. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -51- EXHIBIT "D -6" POLICE FACILITIES FEE Residential Uses $31.62 per unit Office Uses $ .10 per square foot Commercial Uses $ .21 per square foot 265 units x $31.62 = $8,379.30 The Revenue and Cost Specialists Consulting firm is still in the process of establishing fee guidelines for The Platinum Triangle area. During the interim the foregoing formula will be applicable to offset the equipment cost for police services in The Platinum Triangle area. The interim fee will be replaced with a one -time capital facilities fee which will be applicable to the Project. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -52- EXHIBIT "D -7" PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLEMENTAL FEES SUPPLEMENTAL SEWER IMPACT FEE All Land Uses $430.00 per 1,000 gross square foot $430.00 x 265.770 = $114,281.10 Gross Floor Building Area developed between 0.4 and 1.0 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) ARTERIAL HIGHWAY BEAUTIFICATION /AESTHETIC IMPACTS FEE All Land Uses 12,500.00 per gross acre 3.35 acres x $12,500 = $41,875 SUPPLEMENTAL STORM DRAIN IMPACT FEE (Drainage District 27)* Residential Uses $24,500.00 per net acre Non - Residential Uses (inc. condominiums) $35,000.00 per net acre $35,000 x 2.7 = $94,500.00 *Drainage District Maps are available in the Public Works Department. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -53- EXHIBIT "D -8" TRAFFIC FEE Residential Uses $871.00 per unit Condominium Uses $643.00 per unit Office Uses $3,384.00 per 1,000 square foot Commercial Uses $10,552.00 per 1,000 square foot 265 units x $643.00 = $170,395.00 The Supplemental Traffic Fee is based upon the following: PLATINUM TRIANGLE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE CALCULATION 1 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, hourly trip rate between 3 & 7 pm weekdays in Platinum 2 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, average trip length during PM peak hour in Platinum Triangle. 3 PM trip rate multiplied by average length, then divided by OCTA standard 1,700 vehicles per hour per lane. 4 Construction plus right -of -way (no landscaping, derived from State College /Lincoln project data below $ 1,582,195 Construction of St.College /Lincoln intersection widening. PM PEAK AVERAGE CAPACITY COST PER IMPACT LAND USE UNIT TRIP RATE 1 LENGTH (MI) 2 CONSUMED 3 LANE MILE 4 FEEMNIT 5 Residential dwelling 0.49 1.67 0.00048086 $ 2,818,092 $ 871 Office tsf 1.36 1.67 0.00133330 $ 2,818,092 $ 3,384 Commercial tsf 3.89 1.67 0.00382504 $ 2,818,092 $ 10,552 1 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, hourly trip rate between 3 & 7 pm weekdays in Platinum 2 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, average trip length during PM peak hour in Platinum Triangle. 3 PM trip rate multiplied by average length, then divided by OCTA standard 1,700 vehicles per hour per lane. 4 Construction plus right -of -way (no landscaping, derived from State College /Lincoln project data below $ 1,582,195 Construction of St.College /Lincoln intersection widening. $4087 linear feet (If) of project length. $ 387.13 per if (no landscape costs included) $ 2,044,039 coast cost/mile $ 774,053 row cost /mile 5 Impact Fee is excluse of Citywide Traffic and Transportation Improvement Fee, which also is due. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -54- EXHIBIT "`E" DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS AND MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS As a condition of approval of Development Agreement No. 2005 - 0000, the City requires OWNER to undertake and implement the maintenance of certain landscaping, private streets and private utilities, and the performance of other obligations, as set forth herein. Prior to the earlier of either the sale of the first residential lot or the issuance of the temporary or permanent "Certificate of Occupancy" for the first residential dwelling unit in Tract Map 16825, OWNER shall execute and record with the Orange County Recorder a declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions ( "CC &Rs ") satisfactory to the Planning Director and the City Attorney creating maintenance obligations for an incorporated association ( "Association ") to establish a financial mechanism or financial mechanisms to maintain the following areas and facilities (collectively referred to hereinafter as the "Common Area ") depicted on Attachment No. 1 attached hereto. Such Area shall include the following: [TO BE DETERNHNED] The obligations described above and depicted in the Maintenance Exhibit shall collectively be referred to as the "Maintenance Obligations." Until such time as the Association is formed, the CC &Rs are recorded, the Common Area is conveyed in fee to the Association, and the Association has assumed responsibility to maintain the Common Area and perform the Maintenance Obligations, OWNER shall be responsible for the maintenance of the Common Area and performance of the Maintenance Obligations, including any additional obligations which may be specified herein. Reconveyance of all or part of the Common Area or any property interest therein to a party other than the Association shall require (i) the prior written consent of the City, (ii) appurtenant easements over the Common Area for the benefit of each and every lot in the Property and (iii) that the reconveyance expressly affirm that the provisions of Civil Code Section 1367 relating to lien rights to enforce delinquent assessments and the CC &Rs shall remain applicable. The CC &Rs may provide any of the Maintenance Obligations may be assumed by a duly formed Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and /or Maintenance Assessment District subject to CITY's written approval. The covenants and restrictions set forth herein constitute a general scheme for the development, protection and maintenance of the Property for the benefit of all owners. Said covenants and restrictions are for the benefit of the Property and shall bind all owners thereof. Such covenants and restrictions shall be a burden upon, and a benefit to, not only the OWNER but also its successors and assigns. All of such covenants and restrictions are intended to be and shall be declared in the CC &Rs to be covenants running with the land or equitable servitudes upon the land, as the case may be. The CC &R's shall provide that termination of the CC &R's or amendment of any provision which may negatively impact performance of the Maintenance Obligations shall require prior written consent of the City. Termination of this Declaration is not a release of Declarant with regard to Declarant's independent obligations in connection with development and approval of the Project or with regard to obligations and liabilities incurred prior to such termination. 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -55- EXHIBIT "F" PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT 539/016909 -0014 579250.03 a05/27/05 -56- Attachment - Item No. 2 To: Sheri Vander Dussen, Planning Director From: Amy Vazquez, Associate Planner Date: May 27, 2005 RE: FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2005-00005 PLATINUM CENTRE CONDOMINIUMS (1818 South State College Boulevard) The Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (Chapter 18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) requires an approved Final Site Plan and a Development Agreement between the property owner and the City of Anaheim for all development that implements the PTMU Overlay Zone in the Katella District, except as otherwise exempt under the Code. A Final Site Plan Application is required to be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Director as to conformance with the provisions of the PTMU Overlay Zone and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. The approved Final Site Plan is then attached as an exhibit to the Development Agreement. The Agreement is submitted to the Planning Commission and City Council for review at a noticed public hearing. When a Final Site Plan application includes a request for a Variance or a Conditional Use Permit, the PTMU Overlay Zone requires the Variance and /or Conditional Use Permit applications to be processed concurrently with the Development Agreement. The project applicant (Integral Partners) has submitted Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00005 to the Planning Department to provide for the development of the Platinum Centre Condominiums (a 5- story, 265 -unit "podium - style" condominium project) in the PTMU Overlay Zone, Katella District. The project site encompasses approximately 3.1 acres near the northeast corner of Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard and is currently developed with an office building. This office building would be demolished in connection with the proposed development. The applicant has also submitted a request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP No. 2005- 04975) for the proposed Platinum Centre Condominium project to modify the required setbacks adjacent to State College Boulevard and the proposed private street. As required by the PTMU Overlay Zone, the Conditional Use Permit will be considered in connection with the Development Agreement. Both applications are agendized for a Planning Commission Attachment - Item No. 2 public hearing on June 1, 2005, with an anticipated City Council public hearing date of June 21, 2005. Staff has reviewed the submitted Final Site Plan application, including the exhibits listed on Attachment `A' to this memo which are on file and available for review in the Planning Department and Attachment `B', Development Intensities for the Katella District. With the exception of the setback modifications requested pursuant to the Conditional Use Permit application, which are under the purview of the Planning Commission and City Council, staff has determined that the Final Site Plan application is in conformance with the provisions of the PTMU Overlay Zone and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Director, by signature below, approve Final Site Plan No. 2005- 00005. Approval of Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00005 is contingent upon the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 - 04975, Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 and Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 by the Planning Commission and the City Council. Approved by: Sheri Vander Dussen, Planning Director Date ATTACHMENT "A" FINAL SITE PLAN Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 Platinum Centre — Anaheim FSP 2005 - 00005— List of Exhibits ARCHITECTS PLANS — 11 SHEETS — KTGY PARKING STRUCTURE PLANS — 2 SHEETS - PARKITECTS Conceptual Basement Exhibit No. 15 Sheet A -7 Level Parking Plan FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS PLAN — 1 SHEET — Schirmer Engineering Corp. Exhibit No. 16 Sheet F1 Fire Department Access Plan LANDSCAPE PLANS — 3 SHEETS — MJS Design Group Exhibit No. 17 Sheet L -1.0 Cover Sheet Exhibit No. 1 Sheet A -1 Conceptual Site Plan Exhibit No. 2 Sheet A -2 Ground Floor Plan Exhibit No. 3 Sheet A -3 Podium Floor Plan Exhibit No. 4 Sheet A -4 Third Level Floor Plan Exhibit No. 5 Sheet A -5 Fourth Level Floor Plan Exhibit No. 6 Sheet A -6 Fifth Level Floor Plan Exhibit No. 7 Sheet A -8 Roof Plan Exhibit No. 8 Sheet A -9 Building Elevations Katella Ave and State College Exhibit No. 9 Sheet A -10 Building Elevations South and Private Drive Elevations Exhibit No. 10 Sheet A -11 Unit Plans 1, 2, & 3 Exhibit No. 11 Sheet A -12 Unit Plans 4 & 5 Exhibit No. 12 Sheet A -13 Detailed Floor and Elevation Plan Exhibit No. 13 Sheet A -14 Signage Plan Exhibit No. 14 Sheet A -15 Open Space Plan PARKING STRUCTURE PLANS — 2 SHEETS - PARKITECTS Conceptual Basement Exhibit No. 15 Sheet A -7 Level Parking Plan FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS PLAN — 1 SHEET — Schirmer Engineering Corp. Exhibit No. 16 Sheet F1 Fire Department Access Plan LANDSCAPE PLANS — 3 SHEETS — MJS Design Group Exhibit No. 17 Sheet L -1.0 Landscape Plan Exhibit No. 18 Sheet L -1.1 Fence and Wall Details Exhibit No. 19 Sheet L -2.0 Lighting Plan Exhibit No. 20 Sheet L -2.1 Lighting Details SET OF PHOTOGRAPHS Exhibit No. 21 Set of Photographs of Current Site GRADING PLANS - 2 SHEETS — PENCO ENGINEERING Exhibit No. 22 Sheet C -1 TTM 16825 Exhibit No. 23 Sheet 1 of 1 Conceptual Grading Plan COLORS AND MATERIALS BOARD F Colors and materials Exhibit No. 24 board *All exhibits in this table are incorporated into Development Agreement No. 2005- 00005; however, the noted exhibits (reduced in size) are attached for ease of reference. Full size sheets of all exhibits are provided in the Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00005 on file in the Planning Department. ATTACHMENT "B" Development Intensities for the Katella, Gene Autry and Gateway Districts Amendment to the Katella District - Residential (Platinum Centre, PC Date 6/1/05) Residential (Dwelling Units) District PTMU Overlay Table 20 -D Approved by Previous Entitlements Proposed by FSP 2005 -00005 by FSP2005 -00005 Existing' Approved Remaining New Construction Demolition Remaining 3 Katella 4,250 0 810 3,440 265 0 3,175 Gene Autry 1,000 0 0 1,000 0 0 1,000 Gateway 1,750 0 352 1,398 0 0 1,398 Total 7,000 0 0 5,838 0 0 5,573 Office (Square Feet) District PTMU Overlay Table 20 -D Approved by Previous Entitlements Proposed by FSP 2005 -00005 by FSP2005 -00005 Existing' Approved Remaining New Construction Demolition Remaining Katella 775,000 385,160 - 30,000 419,840 0 14,100 433,940 Gene Autry 100,000 0 0 100,000 0 0 100,000 Gateway 530,000 408,000 0 122,000 0 0 122,000 Total 1,405,000 1 793,160 1 0 1 641,840 1 0 0 1 655,940 Commercial (Square Feet) District PTMU Overlay Table 20 -D Approved by Previous Entitlements Proposed by FSP2005 -00005 Existing' Approved Remaining New Construction Demolition Remainin 3 Katella 544,300 524,300 15,844 4,156 0 0 4,156 Gene Autry 50,000 5,230 0 44,770 0 0 44,770 Gateway 50,000 1,330 0 48,670 0 0 48,670 Total 644,300 530,860 0 97,596 0 0 97,596 1 Existing at time of EIR No. 330 was circulated (March 18, 2004) Z Approved is net approved (amount proposed minus amount demolished) 3 Following approval of FSP 2005 -00005 4 Negative number indicates demoliton ITEM N0, 3 4 GPRp6js Q DU W P� R g�REE1 RR of ,Zp01 toik M -g9 -0N )US� FgR Z F\RMS SOV�N SERE 3 DU R R6 G 5E 4s . �PC 0 Subject Property Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 �de TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04982 Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: SIDNEY E. BICKEL Q.S. No. 94 REQUEST FOR REINSTATEMENT OF THIS PERMIT BY THE MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO ATIME LIMITATION (APPROVED ON JULY 28, 2003 TO EXPIRE MARCH 1, 2005) TO RETAIN AN AUTOMOTIVE WHOLESALE AND RETAIL FACILITY. 633 South East Street - Quartz Dealer Direct 1818 5 U— a'_ttn R'A) GU P p1 p4364 2 a8 C UP R 4256 R \ �44g0 PR�w ES \ND�S�OP G \N C c vPR R BV \LD \NG R EGYC� � \PL \ND C W P� R g�REE1 RR of ,Zp01 toik M -g9 -0N )US� FgR Z F\RMS SOV�N SERE 3 DU R R6 G 5E 4s . �PC 0 Subject Property Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 �de TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04982 Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: SIDNEY E. BICKEL Q.S. No. 94 REQUEST FOR REINSTATEMENT OF THIS PERMIT BY THE MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO ATIME LIMITATION (APPROVED ON JULY 28, 2003 TO EXPIRE MARCH 1, 2005) TO RETAIN AN AUTOMOTIVE WHOLESALE AND RETAIL FACILITY. 633 South East Street - Quartz Dealer Direct 1818 5 U— a'_ttn R'A) Item No. 2 Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04982 Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: SIDNEY E. BICKEL Q.S. No. 94 REQUEST FOR REINSTATEMENT OF THIS PERMIT BY THE MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO A TIME LIMITATION (APPROVED ON JULY 28, 2003 TO EXPIRE MARCH 1, 2005) TO RETAIN AN AUTOMOTIVE WHOLESALE AND RETAIL FACILITY. 633 South East Street - Quartz Dealer Direct 1818 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 3 3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED) (Motion) 3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1322 (Resolution) ( TRACKING NO. CUP2005- 04982 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This 1.9 -acre, rectangularly- shaped property has a frontage of 240 feet on the west side of East Street with a maximum depth of 344 feet, and is located 182 feet north of the centerline of South Street (633 South East Street - Quartz Dealer Direct). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved on July 28, 2003, to expire on March 1, 2005) to retain an automobile wholesale and retail auction facility under authority of Code Section 18.60.180. BACKGROUND (3) This property is developed with an automobile auction facility and is zoned I (Industrial). The property is located within the Merged Anaheim Redevelopment Project Area, and is designated for Low - Medium Density Residential land uses in the Anaheim General Plan. The General Plan designates properties abutting the site (to the north, south and west) for Low - Medium Density Residential land uses and properties across East Street (to the east) for Low Density Residential land uses. (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 (to establish auto and truck leasing) was approved by the Planning Commission in 1972. On November 22, 1999, the Commission approved a request to retain an unpermitted wholesale automobile auction facility for a period of one (1) year until November 22, 2000. This action was appealed to the City Council and subsequently approved by the Council on February 1, 2000, for a period of twenty (20) months to expire October 1, 2001. On February 11, 2002 and March 1, 2003, the Commission reinstated this permit to expire on March 1, 2005. Resolution No. PC2003- 113 adopted in conjunction with this latest reinstatement contains the following condition of approval: "1. That this conditional use permit shall expire on March 1, 2005." DISCUSSION: (5) The applicant has submitted a request to reinstate Conditional Use Permit No. 1322, to retain an automobile wholesale and retail auction facility. In conjunction with the reinstatement, the applicant requests that Condition No. 1 of Resolution No. PC2003 -113 be amended to allow the permit to be reinstated for an additional two years. According to the applicant, this time is needed in order to purchase a property, construct the necessary improvements and relocate the business. SR- CUP1322akv Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 3 (6) In order to demonstrate that the findings required for reinstatement of this use permit have been satisfied, the applicant has submitted the attached Justification for Reinstatement. The applicant has indicated that the physical aspects of the property remain the same, the permit is being exercised substantially in the same manner and in conformance with all conditions of approval and that the operation of the auto auction is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular area and surrounding land uses. WHOLESALE hLtR DfRE —� AUTO .4i Clfoie Photograph of automobile auction building (7) The Community Preservation Division has submitted the attached memorandums dated May 10 and May 12, 2005, indicating that there are no outstanding complaints pertaining to this property, the conditions of approval are being complied with and the property is being properly maintained. Since January 2005, there have been two (2) complaints pertaining to the auto auction including cars parked in an adjacent neighborhood and an illegal food vender selling from their vehicle. The business owner acknowledged the violations and both cases have been closed. (8) The applicant has indicated that the hours of operation would remain the same with auto auctions conducted every Monday and Friday and lasting approximately three hours and daily hours of operation on Monday from 8:30 a.m. to 9 p.m., and Tuesday through Saturday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. (9) During previous hearings the business owner indicated a willingness to relocate into a more suitable location. Over the past five (5) years the business owner has worked with other cities to find a larger more suitable location for this auction facility, without success. Because this business has operated in compliance with conditions of approval during the last reinstatement period, staff recommends that this permit be reinstated for a period of Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 3 two (2) years to expire on March 1, 2007, allowing the business owner the opportunity to obtain entitlements and construct new facilities at another location. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (10) Staff has reviewed the proposal to reinstate an automobile wholesale and retail auction facility, and finds no significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from reinstating the existing auction facility. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- approved Negative Declaration in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 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. FINDINGS- (11) 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 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 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. (12) Section 18.60.180.030 of the Zoning Code requires that an approval for an extension shall be granted only upon the applicant presenting evidence to establish the following findings: (a) The facts necessary to support each and every required showing for the original approval of the entitlement as set forth in this chapter exist; (b) The permit is being exercised substantially in the same manner and in conformance with all conditions and stipulations originally approved; (c) The permit is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular area and surrounding land uses, nor to the public peace, health, safety and general welfare; and Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 3 (d) With regard only to any deletion of a time limitation, such deletion is appropriate because it has been demonstrated that the use has operated in a manner that is appropriate in the underlying zone and the surrounding area and that the periodic review of the use is no longer necessary and /or that it can be determined that, due to changed circumstances, the use is consistent with the City's long -term plans for the area. RECOMMENDATION: (13) 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, with a time limit of two (2) years to expire on March 1, 2007, by adopting the attached resolution including the findings contained therein. Page 4 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION REINSTATING AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1322, AND AMENDING CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. PC2003 -113, ADOPTED THEREWITH WHEREAS, on March 1, 2003, the Anaheim Planning Commission, by Resolution No. PC2003 -113, approved Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 to retain an automotive auction at 633 South East Street; and WHEREAS, said Resolution No. PC2003 -113 includes the following condition of approval: 11 1. That this conditional use permit shall expire on March 1, 2005." WHEREAS, this property is currently developed with an automotive auction, the underlying zoning is I (Industrial); the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Low - Medium Density Residential land uses; and this property is located within the Merged Anaheim Redevelopment Project Area; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested reinstatement of this conditional use permit to retain an automobile wholesale and retail auction facility pursuant to Code Section 18.60 of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 1, 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 amendment 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 existing automotive auction is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code. 2. That the request to retain the auction facility will 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 automotive auction 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 this conditional use permit is being exercised in substantially the same manner and in conformance with all conditions and stipulations originally approved by the Planning Commission. 5. That this conditional use permit is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular area and surrounding land uses, nor to the public health and safety. 6. The facts necessary to support each and every required showing for the original approval of the entitlement exist; and 7. That * * ** indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to reinstate this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved on July 28, 2003 to expire March 1, 2005) to retain an CR \PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- automotive wholesale and retail auction facility; and does hereby find that the Negative Declaration previously approved in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation in connection with this request upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the previously approved 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 amend Resolution No. PC2003 -113, adopted in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 1322, to reinstate this conditional use permit, and incorporate the following conditions of approval: That this conditional use permit shall expire on March 1, 2007. 2. That the hours of operation, except for off - loading of vehicles, shall be limited to the following, as stipulated by the petitioner: 8:30 a.m. - 9:00 p.m. on Monday 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday through Saturday Automotive auctions may be conducted on Mondays and Fridays for a maximum of three (3) hours on each day during the hours specified above. 3. That all auction vehicles shall be operable and parked in the screened storage area only 4. That the 10 -foot wide landscaped planter area adjacent to East Street shall be properly maintained with ground cover and shrubs as approved by the Planning Department. 5. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor uses other than parking. 6. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash and debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 7. That the chain -link fence shall be maintained and screened with PVC slats. Said slats shall be maintained in good condition. 8. That signage for subject facility shall be limited to the existing and legally permitted signage. Any additional signage shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. 9. That trash storage areas shall be 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. 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 that are visible to the public shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum 1- gallon size clinging vines, planted on maximum 3 -foot centers, or tall shrubbery. 10. That auto maintenance and repair shall not be permitted, nor shall there be any retail sales or display. 11. That there shall be no off - loading of vehicles during the hours of 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. 12. That off loading of vehicles shall be limited to Rose Street behind (west of) the auction facility. 13. That on -site car washing shall be limited to washing with tap water or deionized water without the use of soaps or detergents. Solvents or degreasers may be used on a spot basis, but shall be wiped off before the vehicle is rinsed. 14. That any use of loud speakers shall not be audible to the residential properties. -2- PC2005- 15. That the applicant shall maintain an agreement recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder with nearby property owners for the appropriate number of parking spaces for this use, as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager, at the shopping center located at 1215 East Lincoln Avenue and /or such other nearby sites. The number of parking spaces shall be in excess of that which is required by Code by said commercial retail center and or any other off -site parking site. 16. 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 No. 1, Revision No. 1, dated February 1, 2000, and as conditioned herein. 17. 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. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant 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. Failure to pay all charges shall result in the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 1, 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 ATTEST: 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 June 1, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 2005. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC2005- Attachment - Item No. 3 MEMORANDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Community Preservation Division DATE: May 12, 2005 TO: Amy Vasquez, Assistant Planner FROM: Marls Ilagan, Community Preservation Officer SUBJECT: 633 S. East St. Community Preservation records indicate since January 01, 2004 to May 12, 2005 there were two request for service. On July 20, 2004 was regarding cars parking in the adjacent neighborhood and on September 17, 2004 was regarding an illegal food vendor selling from a vehicle. The result of the inspection concluded that no customer vehicles attending the car auction were observed in the adjacent residential neighborhood. The food vendor was issued a Notice to Appear for the illegal food vending from their vehicle. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at ext 4477 Attachment - Item No. 3 MEMORANDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Community Preservation Division DATE: May 10, 2005 TO: Amy Vazquez, Assistant Planner FROM: Mark Eagan, Community Preservation Officer SUBJECT: C.U.P Inspection for 633 S. East St. On May 6, 2005 at approximately 1015 hours, I conducted an inspection at the above listed property. Upon the completion of my inspection I did not find any current violations on the property. However, required action number 9 indicates a trash enclosure located on the property. I did not observe a trash enclosure. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Mark Ilagan #1000 Community Preservation Officer Phone: 714- 765 -4477 Fax: 714- 765 -4044 • PETITIONER'S STATEMENT JUSTIFICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT Section 18.60.180 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that requests for reinstatements or renewals of a time - lin� ced permit shall be made in writing no later than six (6) months after the expiration date of the permit sought to be reinstated or renewed and must be accompanied by an application form and the required fling fee. In order to reinstate or renew a permit, the facts necessary to support each and every finding for the original approval of the entitlement as set forth in the following excerpts from the Anaheim Zoning Code still exist: 18.66.060 (Relative to Conditional Use Permits) Before the approval authority, or City Council on appeal, may approve a conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact, by resolution, that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions is required: .031 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); .032 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; .033 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; .034 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 .035 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. 18.74.060 (Relative to Variances) Before any variance may be granted by the approval authority, or City Council on appeal, it shall be shown: .0201 That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; .0202 That, because of special circumstances shown in .0201, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. 2. Said permit or variance is being exercised substantially in the same manner and in conformance with all conditions and stipulations originally approved; 3. Said permit or variance is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular area and surrounding land uses, nor to the public peace, health, safety and general welfare; and 4. With regard only to any deletion of a time limitation, such deletion is appropriate because it has been demonstrated that the use has operated in a manner that is appropriate in the underlying zone and the surrounding area and that the periodic review of the use in no longer necessary and/or that it can be determined that, due to changed circumstances, the use is consistent with the City's long -term plans for the area. In order to determine if such findings exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer the following questions fully and as complete as possible. Attach additional sheets if additional is needed. 1. Has any physical aspect of the property for which this use permit or variance been granted changed significantly since the issuance of this use permit or variance? Yes ❑ No Explain: AL' T .�i4�1 G G KJ 4C.tJ (over) CASE NO. CAP H0, 13 2. Have the land Yes ❑ No R Explain: ... • ... .... . .. -- . 40- -- - - 3. Has any aspect of the nature of the operation changed since the issuance of this use permit or variance? Yes ❑ No � /f� pp Explain: / CT //n,y_ ttJ ��i�N/� -� _ ' G",0l9Y E 4. Are the conditions of approval pertaining to the use permit or variance being complied with? YesF<rNo ❑ Explain: C / 5. If you are requesting a deletion of the time limitation, is this deletion necessary for the continued operation of this use or variance? Yesm No ❑ Expl i 77 /i!/D !� - A AAW iL2 QC o C The applicant for this request is: ❑ Property Owner [Authorized Agent Name 6f Property Owner or Authorized Agent (Please Print) Reinstatement ap2fiotion.doc Revised 9113104 ��X�ETI JUN 0 1 2005 CITY rLANNING CLi��tI��I, - sww.4119 Signature of Property Ownff q > 0, 9 2 005 Div,, INS o 1 4 CUP K _- . 1322 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 28, 2003 Item No. 4 4a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED) (Motion) 4b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1322 (Resolution) (TRACKING NO. CUP2003- 04725) Sr6623vn SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This 1.9 -acre, rectangularly- shaped property has a frontage of 240 feet on the west side of East Street with a maximum depth of 334 feet, and is located 182 feet north of the centerline of South Street (633 South East Street - Quartz Dealer Direct). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved on February 11, 2002, to expire on March 1, 2003) to retain an automobile wholesale and retail auction facility under authority of Code Section 18.03.093. BACKGROUND: (3) This property is developed with an automobile auction facility and is zoned ML (Limited Industrial). This property is located within the South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor Redevelopment Project Area, and is designated for General Industrial land uses on the Anaheim General Plan Land Use Map. The surrounding land uses and zoning are indicated on the attached vicinity map. The General Plan Land Use Element Map designates properties abutting the site (to the north, south and west) for General Industrial land uses. The General Plan designates properties across East Street (to the east) for Low Density Residential land uses. (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 (to establish auto and truck leasing) was approved by the Commission in 1972. On November 22, 1999, the Planning Commission approved a request to retain an unpermitted wholesale automobile auction facility for a period of one (1) year until November 22, 2000. This action was appealed to the City Council and subsequently approved by the Council on February 1, 2000, for a period of twenty (20) months to expire October 1, 2001. On February 11, 2002, the Commission reinstated this permit for a period of one year to expire on March 1, 2003. Resolution No. PC2002 -23 adopted in conjunction with this latest reinstatement contains the following condition of approval: "1. That this conditional use permit shall expire on March 1, 2003." DISCUSSION: (5) The petitioner has submitted a request to reinstate Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 to retain an automobile wholesale and retail auction facility. In conjunction with the reinstatement, the petitioner requests that Condition No. 1 of Resolution No. PC2002 -23 be amended to allow the permit to be reinstated for an additional two years. According to the petitioner, this time is needed in order to relocate the business and construct facilities in another city. (6) In order to demonstrate that the findings required for reinstatement of this use permit have been satisfied, the petitioner has submitted the attached Justification for Reinstatement form indicating that the physical aspects of the property remain the same, conditions of Page 1 II. (9) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: • • Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 28, 2003 Item No. 4 approval have been complied with, and that surrounding land uses in the immediate vicinity have not changed. The Code Enforcement Division staff indicate in the attached memorandum dated June 25, 2003, that there are no outstanding complaints pertaining to this property and staff inspections indicate the property is being properly maintained. This property is located within the South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor Redevelopment Project Area. The Community Development Department has reviewed this request and concurs with Planning Department staffs recommendation to reinstate this permit for two years, to facilitate a smooth transition to another city. The petitioner has indicated that the hours of operation would remain the same with auto auctions conducted every Monday and Friday and lasting approximately three hours and daily hours of operation on Monday from 8:30 a.m. to 9 p.m., and Tuesday through Saturday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. (10) During previous hearings the business owner indicated a willingness to relocate into a more suitable location. Over the past three years the business owner worked with other cities to locate a larger more suitable location for this auction facility. The petitioner has indicated that they are processing the appropriate land use permits to relocate this facility to the City of Stanton. Because this business has operated in compliance with conditions of approval during the last reinstatement period and no Code Enforcement complaints have been received, staff recommends that this permit be reinstated for a period of two (2) years to expire March 1, 2005, allowing the business owner the opportunity to obtain entitlements and construct new facilities In the City of Stanton. (11) Staff has reviewed the proposal to reinstate an automobile wholesale and retail auction facility, and finds no significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from reinstating the existing auction facility. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- approved Negative Declaration in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 (as readvertised and approved by the Planning Commission on February 11, 2002) 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. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: (12) 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. Page 2 FINDINGS: Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 28, 2003 Item No. 4 (13) 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. (14) Subsection 18.03.093.040 of the Zoning Code requires that before the Commission grants reinstatement of the approval by extension, modification or deletion, the applicant must present evidence to establish the following findings: (a) The facts necessary to support each and every required showing for the issuance of such entitlement as set forth in this chapter exist; (b) Said permit is being exercised substantially in the same manner and in conformance with all conditions and stipulations originally approved by the approval body; (c) Said permit is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular area and surrounding land uses, nor to the public peace, health, safety and general welfare; and (d) With regard only to any deletion of a time limitation, such deletion is necessary to permit reasonable operation under the permit as granted. RECOMMENDATION: (15) 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 CEQA Negative Declaration serves as the appropriate environmental documentation for this request. Page 3 • • Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 28, 2003 Item No. 4 (b) By resolution approve this request for reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 1322 (Tracking No. CUP2003- 04725) to retain an automobile wholesale and retail auction facility for a period of two (2) years to expire March 1, 2005, based on the following: (i) That this use is currently being exercised substantially in the same manner and in conformance with all conditions and stipulations approved by the approval body on February 11, 2002, as required by Subsection 18.03.093.040 of the Zoning Code. (H) That field inspections by Planning Department staff indicate the property is being satisfactorily maintained and the applicant has demonstrated compliance with all conditions of approval. (iii) That this use is being exercised in a manner which is not detrimental to the surrounding areas or land uses, nor to the public peace, health, safety and general welfare. (c) Staff further recommends that the conditions of approval contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2002 -23 be incorporated into a new resolution with the following conditions of approval: 1. That this conditional use permit shall expire on March 1, 2005. 2. That the hours of operation, except for off - loading of vehicles, shall be limited to the following, as stipulated by the petitioner: 8:30 a.m. - 9:00 p.m. on Monday 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday through Saturday Automotive auctions may be conducted on Mondays and Fridays for a maximum of three (3) hours on each day during the hours specified above. 3. That all auction vehicles shall be operable and parked in the screened storage area only. 4. That the 10 -foot wide landscaped planter area adjacent to East Street shall be properly maintained with ground cover and shrubs as approved by the Planning Department. 5. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor uses other than parking. 6. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 7. That the chain -link fence shall be maintained and screened with PVC slats. Said slats shall be maintained in good condition. 8. That signage for subject facility shall be limited to the existing and legally permitted signage. Any additional signage shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. Page 4 • Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 28, 2003 Item No. 4 9. That trash storage areas shall be 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. 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 1- gallon size clinging vines, planted on maximum 3 -foot centers, or tall shrubbery. 10. That the applicant shall be responsible for maintaining the premises free of litter at all times. 11. That auto maintenance and repair shall not be permitted, nor shall there be any retail sales or display. 12. That there shall be no off - loading of vehicles during the hours of 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. 13. That off loading of vehicles shall be limited to Rose Street behind the auction facility. 14. That on -site car washing shall be limited to washing with tap water or deionized water without the use of soaps or detergents. Solvents or degreasers may be used on a spot basis, but must be wiped off before the vehicle is rinsed. 15. That any use of loud speakers shall not be audible to the residential properties. 16. That the applicant shall maintain an agreement recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder with nearby property owners for the appropriate number of parking spaces for this use, as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager, at the shopping center located at 1215 East Lincoln Avenue and /or such other nearby sites. The number of parking spaces shall be in excess of that which is required by Code by said commercial retail center . and or any other off -site parking site. 17. 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 No. 1, Revision No. 1, dated February 1, 2000, and as conditioned herein. 18. 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 5 ITEM NO. 4 �1 p�) MS 94.1 141 RG\ 6 6 69 5 10 \R RG �6P��ugTRfP \ Gup 4 G D P3 SMP� F 3oe \1A 1 SP 6 g9 X20) OVA RG 566 61114 FtG\ PRU TR R Go? 22oMM. \NO F \RM SMPSNoPS RC6 6 04 3 PE I'CUCUP 43568 l . Q. o Sp g4-A A4 VPFy 9904 g1 6- }� �Mo FyGPZO°1- 0 6 g3 p8 P T�CygPP \Rt U o• U Gl ,� a EU\. "( G AP 4 X2 p S� pCN . - .00003 \ 440, w ti RG 66 6 j,1 GN S6 R 2 K / \ 1 SCR M Rc ��682 ,�� V -� , �,,� vsMNO- - vNO FvR RC GUP 26p9 ; `�5N n f�� Rc of I 0 �) P l8 dP 8y \A3� a SP 94 1 d \ yes. g4 46 c51 -83120 RCL 61 -62 69 (59) a \ Cy ,\. 1 ��1 - R CUP 28 -9 u - CUP 2005 -04980 94.1 6) RGA 3 11- cUP �M. T -CUP 2001 -04306 C� X1114 CGNgS -o2PRC c st CUP 4151 SF ZCIv �_W32S &M1N v.M 940 , CUP 4142 � � ! Rc51 11 R0'6 S NOP S• rn 5 VAR 2634 G� S MPV� a LP 0i STERLING BUSINESS PARK SP g4 gg X591 9 4.1 S VPF SMALL INDUSTRIAL FIRMS5 GL 61' 6 X509 SP �VAON gA 61 „ s R GUP 6N 4 EGR Ft RG�p VPR?O' R GEN R �p 1 G-CR• 1 � d � t 6MERgUS• Cn� ��:e � , d �� w VARP 1 1 �P 119 6 �N 4T R b5 6 92 2 4 A 1 R R 69 3 OP�9 4114 RG ��N0 RG\ CL 1p , 69,92 S \RM tMs RG�V P� W, S io?� Conditional Use Permit No. 4142 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04980 Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: Graphic Requested By: KARL T. SATOR Q.S. No. 140 REQUEST FOR REINSTATEMENT OF THIS PERMIT BY THE MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO ATIME LIMITATION (APPROVED ON OCTOBER 11, 1999 TO EXPIRE OCTOBER 11, 2004) TO RETAIN A60 -FOOT HIGH TELECOMMUNICATIONS MONOPALM. 3150 - 3164 East La Palma Avenue 1821 Item No. 2 Ir 6P 1 a ' tw a. Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 4142 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04980 Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: Graphic Requested By: KARL T. SATOR Q.S. No. 140 REQUEST FOR REINSTATEMENT OF THIS PERMIT BY THE MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TOATIME LIMITATION (APPROVED ON OCTOBER 11, 1999 TO EXPIRE OCTOBER 11, 2004) TO RETAIN A 60 -FOOT HIGH TELECOMMUNICATIONS MONOPALM. 3150 - 3164 East La Palma Avenue 1821 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 4 4a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED) (Motion) 4b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4142 (Resolution) (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04980) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 6.4 -acre property is located south and east of the southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Kraemer Boulevard, having frontages of 281 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue and 127 feet on the east side of Kraemer Boulevard, and is located 440 feet east of the centerline of Kraemer Boulevard and 650 feet south of the centerline of La Palma Avenue (3150 - 3164 East La Palma Avenue). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved October 11, 1999, to expire October 11, 2004) to retain a 60 -foot high telecommunications monopalm under Code Sections 18.38.060 and 18.120.100.050.0511. BACKGROUND: (3) This property is developed with an industrial business park and is zoned SP 94 -1, DA -5 (Northeast Area Specific Plan, Development Area 5- Commercial Area). The Anaheim General Plan designates this property as well as surrounding properties to the west and east for General Commercial lands uses. The property to the north (across La Palma Avenue) is designated as Industrial land uses and to the south is the Riverside (91) Freeway off ramp. (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 4142 (to construct a 60 -foot high telecommunications monopole (disguised as a palm tree) and a 234 square foot accessory ground- mounted equipment enclosure) was approved by the Planning Commission on October 11, 1999, for a period of five (5) years to expire October 11, 2004. The applicant has submitted a letter requesting reinstatement of the permit within the required 180 -day period. Resolution No. PC99 -177 adopted in conjunction with approval of this permit contains the following condition of approval: "1. That the proposed telecommunication facility, consisting of one (1) "mono -palm tree" with three (3) antenna arrays having two (2) antennas each, shall be permitted for a period of five (5) years, to expire October 11, 2004." niscl1SS1()N (5) The applicant has submitted a request to reinstate Conditional Use Permit No. 4142 to retain the telecommunication facility. In conjunction with the reinstatement, the applicant requests that Condition No. 1 of Resolution No. PC99 -177 be amended to allow the permit to be reinstated without a time limit. According to the applicant, this facility is an integral part of their wireless system and is needed to ensure adequate service area coverage for customers. (6) To demonstrate that the findings required for reinstatement of this use permit have been satisfied, the applicant has submitted the attached Justification for Reinstatement. The applicant has indicated that the physical aspects of the property remain the same, the permit is being exercised substantially in the same manner and in conformance with all conditions of approval and that the operation of the telecommunication facility is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular area and surrounding land uses. Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 4 (7) The Community Preservation Division has submitted the attached memorandum dated May 9, 2005, indicating that the facility is in compliance with the conditions of approval of the original permit with the exception of the required vines on the trash enclosure. However, upon closer inspection, the vines have been planted but have not matured enough to provide full coverage on the equipment enclosure. There are no outstanding complaints pertaining to this facility. (8) The applicant has indicated that no notable advances in technology have developed since this facility was approved in 1999. The Commission as a matter of policy has placed a time limit of five (5) years on unscreened and monopole -type telecommunications facilities. The Commission has found this time limit is important for two reasons: 1) to ensure that the facility is operating as intended and in compliance with conditions of approval; and 2) to periodically review the facility to determine if advances in technology would result in a more appropriate installation for a specific location. Page 2 Photograph of existing telecommunications facility Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (9) Staff has reviewed the proposal to retain the telecommunications antenna disguised as a palm tree and the accessory ground- mounted equipment 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 the previously approved Negative Declaration in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 4142 serve as the required environmental documentation for his request 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 a significant effect on the environment. FINDINGS: (10) 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 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 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. (11) Section 18.60.180.030 of the Zoning Code requires that an approval for a reinstatement shall be granted only upon the applicant presenting evidence to establish the following findings: (a) The facts necessary to support each and every required showing for the original approval of the entitlement as set forth in this chapter exist; (b) The permit is being exercised substantially in the same manner and in conformance with all conditions and stipulations originally approved; (c) The permit is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular area and surrounding land uses, nor to the public peace, health, safety and general welfare; and (d) With regard only to any deletion of a time limitation, such deletion is appropriate because it has been demonstrated that the use has operated in a manner that is appropriate in the underlying zone and the surrounding area and that the periodic review of the use is no longer necessary and /or that it can be determined that, due Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 4 to changes circumstances, the use is consistent with the City's long -term plans for the area. RECOMMENDATION: (12) 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 with a time limit of five (5) years to expire October 11, 2009, by adopting the attached resolution including the findings contained therein. Page 4 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005- A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION REINSTATING AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4142, AND AMENDING CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. PC99 -177, ADOPTED THEREWITH WHEREAS, on October 11, 1999, the Anaheim Planning Commission, by Resolution No. PC99 -177 approved Conditional Use Permit No. 4142 to construct a 60 -foot high telecommunications monopole (disguised as a palm tree) and a 234 square foot accessory ground- mounted equipment enclosure at 3150 — 3164 East La Palma Avenue; and WHEREAS, said Resolution No. PC99 -177 includes the following condition of approval: 111. That the proposed telecommunication facility, consisting of one (1) "mono -palm tree" with three (3) antenna arrays having two (2) antennas each, shall be permitted for a period of five (5) years, to expire October 11, 2004." WHEREAS, this property is currently developed with an industrial complex and the subject telecommunications facility, the underlying zoning is SP 94 -1, DA -5 (Northeast Area Specific Plan, Development Area 5- Commercial Area) and the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for General Commercial land uses; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested reinstatement of this conditional use permit to retain the telecommunications facility pursuant to Code Section 18.60 of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 1, 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 amendment 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 applicant's proposal to permit and retain an existing telecommunications antenna (disguised as a palm tree) with accessory ground- mounted equipment is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section Nos. 18.38.060 and 18.120.100.050.0511. 2. That the continued use of the telecommunications facility would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is located since the property is surrounded with industrial land uses. 3. That the size and shape of the site is adequate to allow the continued operation of the facility in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health and safety as the telecommunications facility disguised as a palm tree minimizes any potential aesthetic impacts. 4. That because this is an unmanned facility with infrequent maintenance, the traffic generated by the proposed use will not, under the conditions imposed, impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. 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 and that the use will contribute to an essential and effective wireless communications network system. Cr \PC2005- -1- PC2005- 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 reinstate this permit by modifying or deleting a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved on October 11, 1999 to expire October 11, 2004) to retain a 60 -foot high telecommunications monopalm; and does hereby find that the Negative Declaration previously approved in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 4142 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this request upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the previously- approved 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 reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 4142, incorporating conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. PC99 -177, 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: 1. That the telecommunication facility is approved for a period of five (5) years to expire on October 11, 2009. 2. That the existing telecommunications facility disguised as a palm tree shall be limited to 60 feet in height with six antennas (3 sectors with 2 antennas per sector) said antennas having maximum dimensions of one (1) foot by four (4) foot. No additional or replacement antennas shall be permitted without the approval of the Planning Commission. 3. That all of the six (6) palm trees planted within the adjacent planter area to screen the monopalm shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that they are removed, damaged, diseased and /or dead. 4. That no signs, flags, banners or any other form of advertising or identification shall be attached to the monopalm or the equipment enclosure. 5. That the portion of the property being leased to the communication provider shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash and debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 6. That the Operator shall ensure that its installation and choice of frequencies will not interfere with the 800 MHz radio frequencies required by the City of Anaheim to provide adequate spectrum capacity for public safety and related purposes. 7. That the Operator shall provide a "single point of contact" in its Engineering and Maintenance Departments to ensure continuity on all interference issues. The name, telephone number, fax number and e-mail address of that person shall be provided to the Planning Services Division. The contact person shall be available 24 -hours a day. Interference complaints shall be resolved within 24 hours. 8. That the Operator shall ensure that any of its contractors, sub - contractors or agents, or any other user of the facility, shall comply with the terms and conditions of this permit. 9. That should this telecommunication facility be sold, the Planning Services Division shall be notified in writing within 30 days of the close of escrow. 10. That the telecommunications monopalm shall be continuously maintained in a like new condition such that it maintains its appearance as a live palm tree consistent with approved exhibits. -2- PC2005- 11. That the subject property shall be developed and maintained substantially in accordance with the 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 5, and as conditioned herein. 12. 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. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant 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. Failure to pay all charges shall result in the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 1, 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 ATTEST: 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 June 1, 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 -3- PC2005- 0 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT JUSTIFICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT Section 18.60.180 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that requests for reinstatements or renewals of a time - limited permit shall be made in writing no later than six (6) months after the expiration date of the permit sought to be reinstated or renewed and must be accompanied by an application form and the required filing fee. 1. In order to reinstate or renew a permit, the facts necessary to support each and every finding for the original approval of the entitlement as set forth in the following excerpts from the Anaheim Zoning Code still exist: 18.66.060 (Relative to Conditional Use Permits) Before the approval authority, or City Council on appeal, may approve a conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact, by resolution, that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions is required: .031 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); .032 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; .033 That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full develupment of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to health and safety; .034 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 .035 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. 18.74.060 (Relative to Variances) Before any variance may be granted by the approval authority, or City Council on appeal, it shall be shown: .0201 That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; ..0202 That, because of special circumstances shown in .0201, strict application of the zoning code deprives -the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical•zoning classification in the vicinity. 2.. Said permit or variance is being exercised substantially in the same manner and in conformance'with all conditions and stipulations originally approved; 3.. Said permit or variance is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particulai area and surrounding land uses, nor to the public peace, health, safety and general welfare; and. 4. With regard only to any deletion of a time limitation, such deletion is appropriate because it has been demonstrated that the use has operated in a manner that is appropriate in the underlying zone and the surrounding area and that the periodic review of the use in no longer necessary and/or that it can be determined that, due to changed circumstances, the use is consistent with the City's long -term plans for the area. In order to determine if such findings exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer the following questions fully and as complete as possible. Attach additional sheets if additional space is needed. 1. Has any physical aspect of the property for which this use permit or variance been granted changed significantly since the issuance of this use permit or variance? Yes ❑ No Explain: �v q 0 80 CASE NO.. 4 1 1 A 2 J 2. Have the land uses in thElemediate vicinity changed since the issuan0of this use permit or variance? Yes ❑ No K r Explain: 3. Has any aspect of the nature of the operation changed since the issuance of this use permit or variance? Yes F-1 No" Explain: _ 4. Are the conditions of approval pertaining to the use permit or variance being complied with? Yes® No ❑ Explain: A L 1- _Lo&?Dr'TioNs W APPQo %4` -F 6w9 r 1 42 Ca. s. Of 'r0f.4 PRGIL / TY wau t-b S.c$S7ANTiALGy 6"A4i0VAQTE Cava "G0 7o Me Su&R04W,b1N& AeC RND i2e3i e-r , AI , . A GAAeee 1A) 7eMr AvWW&dAc. The applicant for this request is: ❑ Property Owner ®Authorized Agent A M i T PAT£ V, A6-E"r For AsPEo As syGIATES TEC- ECa_AA C -r Magf` Name of Property Owner or Authorized Agent (Please Print) A t APR 2005 RECE DIV Reinstatement appiication.doc Revised 9113/04 cup Na ern,- 414 St nature of Property Owner or Authorized Agent 41 DS Date NEXT MEETING APR 2 1 2005 INTER DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE 7 ING X T MEET JUN 0 14'2005 Y P OMM IS SIOIN G . (SEA ENC"sf-,D RWo ros) . If you are requesting a deletion of the time limitation; is this deletion necessary for the continued operation of this use or variance? Yeso No ❑ Explain; ?h /E s �,eC� �IG�TY SEQ�ES AS p 4r OF�A 1.r7!I?acG�SS 7W0�� RESOLUTION NO. PC99 -177 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4142 BE GRANTED, IN PART, FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE (5) YEARS TO EXPIRE ON OCTOBER 11, 2004 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 1 IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, A SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 58, PAGE 43 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on October 11, 1999 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 hearing was continued from the August 16 and September 13, 1999 Planning Commission meetings; 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 Section 18.110.100.050.0511 to construct a 60 -foot high telecommunications "monopalm" with waiver of the following: Sections 18.41.063.010 - Minimum structural setback and 18.110.100.090.0901 2. That the waiver of minimum structural setback is hereby denied on the basis that it was deleted following public notification. 3. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized in Development Area 5 (Commercial Area) of the Northeast Area Specific Plan (SP 94 -1). 4. That the proposed use, as approved, will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located. 5. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use, as approved, is adequate to allow full development of the proposal in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety and general welfare because six live palm trees surrounding the proposal will adequately screen the monopole and antenna arrays from nearby properties and public rights -of -way. 6. 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. 7. 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. CR3768PK.DOC -1- � PC99 -177 0 • 8. 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 construct a 60 -foot high telecommunications "monopalm" with waiver of minimum structural setback on a irregularly- shaped 6.4 -acre property located south and east of the southeast comer of La Palma Avenue and Kraemer Boulevard (on the east side of the Orange County Flood Control District Channel), having frontages of 281 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue and 127 feet on the east side of Kraemer Boulevard, and being located 440 feet east of the centerline of Kraemer Boulevard and 650 feet south of the'centerline of La Palma Avenue 3150 —' 3164 East La Palma Avenue); 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, 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: That the proposed telecommunications facility, consisting of one (1) "mono -palm tree" with three (3) antenna arrays having two (2) antennas each, shall be permitted for a period of five (5) years, to expire on October 11, 2004. 2. That a maximum of three (3) antenna arrays with two (2), four (4) foot high by one (1) foot wide, panel type antennas may be located on the "mono - palm "; and that the overall structure shall not exceed a maximum height of sixty (60) feet. The monopole arrays shall extend no further than six (6) feet from the pole and no additional or replacement antennas shall be permitted without the approval of the Planning Commission. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 3. That no signs, flags, banners or any other form of advertising or identification shall be attached to the proposed "mono -palm" structure. 4. (a) That the locations of the mono palm and the trash container, as shown on Exhibit No. 4, shall be reversed. , (b) That at least six (6) live palm trees, minimum forty (40) feet high each, shall be planted and maintained in a healthy condition. These live palm trees shall be planted around the "mono palm" as follows: one (1) to the north, two (2) to the west and three (3) to the south. A final plan showing the location of the live trees and the "mono palm" shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. An irrigation plan for the palm trees shall be submitted to the Building Division for review and approval. Any tree planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner with a tree of like -type and height, in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and /or dead. That the monopole shall be constructed of materials and colors simulating a live palm tree of the same variety as the living palm trees included in this proposal. The artificial palm fronds shall be painted and finished to match the living palm trees. The antenna arrays and individual panel antennas shall be painted green to match the artificial palm fronds attached to the monopole structure. A color and materials board shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted to for building permits. CR3768PK.DOC -2- PC99 -177 6. That this 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. 7. That trash storage areas shall be refurbished to include gates in accordance with City standards and to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, to comply with approved plans on file with said Department. a. That the existing palm trees adjacent to the south elevation of the existing building shall be maintained in a healthy condition. 9. That a six (6) foot high block wall, planted with rapidly growing clinging vines on maximum three (3) foot centers, shall be constructed around the accessory ground- mounted equipment. No barbed wire shall be permitted. Said block wall and landscaping shall be specified on plans submitted for building permits. I 10. That the height of the "mono -palm" shall not exceed the height of the attached panel antennas at anytime. If the panels are lowered, the "mono -palm' height shall be lowered correspondingly. 11. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with the 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, 3, 4 and 5; and as conditioned herein, including that Exhibit No. 4 shall be revised as specified in Condition No. 4(a), above - mentioned;. 12. 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. 2, 4(a) and (b), 5 and 9, 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. 13. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 7 and'11, above- mentioned, . shall be complied with. 14. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code an 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 October 11, 1999. (Original signed by Phyllis R. Boydstun) CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: (Original signed by Margarita Solorio) SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION CR3768PK.DOC -3- PC99 -177 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 October 11, 1999, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, NAPOLES, VANDERBILT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: KOOS, ONE VACANT SEAT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of , 1999. (Original signed by Phyllis R. Boydstun) SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION CR3768PK.DOC -4- PC99 -177 MEMORANDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Community Preservation Division DATE: MAY 9, 2005 TO: DELLA. HERRICK, ASSIGNED PLANNER FROM: KEN MARSH, COMMUNITY PRESERVATION OFFICER SUBJECT: INSPECTION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3150 E. LA PALMA AVE. CUP 4142 - TRACKING NUMBER - CUP2005 -04980 On Friday, May 6, 2005, 1 conducted an inspection of the property located at 3150 E. La Palma Ave., in regards to CUP4142, Tracking number CUP2005- 04980. During this inspection I observed there was a "Monopalm" cell site located on. the southwest corner of the property. I inspected the property for compliance of the Conditions of Approval. All Conditions of Approval were in compliance with the exception of #9. Per Conditions of Approval #9, there are no fast growing vines planted, on three (3) foot centers, around the block wall. There are shrubs and bushes, and one ivy plant, but no .fast growing vines. I will be sending a Courtesy letter to T- Mobile requiring them to plant vines. I will forward a copy of this Notice to you. On return to the office, a record check revealed there was no valid City of Anaheim Business Licenses for the company acting as an agent for T- Mobile, Aspen Associated Telecom, or for the cell site operated by T- Mobile. .Courtesy Notices were mailed to both businesses allowing them 5 days to obtain City of Anaheim Business Licenses (see the attached copies of the two notices). T will inform you when the cell site location is brought into compliance. Please feel free to call meat ext. 4595 if I can be of further assistance. mla palma 3150 e ITEM NO. 5 LIN 0 Zoning Code Amendment 2005 -00039 Subject Property Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: CITY OF ANAHEIM Q.S. No. City -wide REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF THE SIGN CODE TO PERMIT MARQUEE OR READER BOARD SIGNS IN CONJUNCTION WITH A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER WITH A MINIMUM OF TWENTY -FIVE (25) ACRES IN AREA SUBJECT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. City -wide 1852 Item No. 2 _ a ORANGETHORPE w i LA PALMA I A PALMA k0 NORTH LINCOLN Y o LINCOLN w SOUTH tt ¢ "o PUW PY F x p BROADWAY Z m w 6 m m BALL y a in Q CERRITOS O RATELLA 0 3 m O ORANGEWOOD w AP.'A.. O x _ o - r ME A _ ' LA PALMA SPN"(P PNP GP Q _ LNCOLN a 0 Zoning Code Amendment 2005 -00039 Subject Property Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: CITY OF ANAHEIM Q.S. No. City -wide REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF THE SIGN CODE TO PERMIT MARQUEE OR READER BOARD SIGNS IN CONJUNCTION WITH A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER WITH A MINIMUM OF TWENTY -FIVE (25) ACRES IN AREA SUBJECT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. City -wide 1852 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 5 5a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION SECTION 15061(b)(3) (Motion) 5b. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2005 -00039 (Motion) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION (1) This proposed Zoning Code Amendment would apply Citywide. PROPOSAL (2) The applicant, Sandy Sigal, (representing the Anaheim Town Center retail center located at the southeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and State College Boulevard) requests modification of the Sign Code to permit marquee or electronic reader -board signs in conjunction with a commercial retail center having a minimum of twenty -five (25) acres in area, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. BACKGROUND (3) Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004 -00033 to permit marquee or electronic reader -board signs in conjunction with a commercial retail center having a minimum of twenty -five (25) acres in area, subject to a conditional use permit was recommended for approval to the City Council by the Planning Commission on November 1, 2004. Following that recommendation, staff further reviewed the proposed ordinance and had concerns that the amendment would still allow banners to be displayed for each individual tenant at the site four (4) times a year per tenant for nine (9) days for a total of thirty -six (36) days per calendar year even after the reader -board installation. After discussions with staff, the applicant has revised the proposed code amendment to further stipulate that each tenant in the center would only be allowed to display one banner per year (for up to nine days). (4) The Anaheim Town Center was refurbished and upgraded in 2000. The owners of the retail center stage various community events during the year, including Easter events, Bingo, Halloween, Holiday Programs and a monthly Kids Club. In order to promote these events for the benefit of the community on an ongoing basis, the applicant wishes to advertise on a permanent basis along State College Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue. In the past, they have accomplished these promotions by the use of temporary banners through the Special Event Permit process. However, the limited duration of such permits (36 days per calendar year) does not allow for their annual programming needs. The ability to apply for a Conditional Use Permit for a marquee or electronic reader -board sign would afford them the opportunity to provide a more permanent solution. The applicant has indicated that the proposed reader -board would also be utilized by tenants to advertise their businesses. DISCUSSION (5) Although the applicant has revised the code amendment to limit the number of special event permits per year, reducing occurrences for each business from four to one, staff still has concerns regarding the display of banners. The reader -board was intended to replace banners as a better solution to advertising the many events held at the center. Any special event for a particular tenant at the center could be advertised by the reader -board (i.e., a grand opening, a special sale etc.). Additional banners for each of the tenants would add more visual blight and defeat the purpose of permitting a reader - board. Therefore, staff recommends that the Commission approve the proposed amendment but change the wording to eliminate the ability of individual tenants to obtain a special event permit to display banners. Seasonal events such as pumpkin patches and Christmas tree lots would still be allowed under a separate permitting process. SrZCA2005 -00039 Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 5 (6) Staff recommends the amendment to the Sign Code read as follows, with new wording proposed by staff incorporated in bold italics: SECTION 18.44.050 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUIRED. .010 Requirement for Conditional Use Permit. The following signs require a conditional use permit: .0101 Marquee or electronic reader -board signs for an amusement facility, theater, lodging facility, school, automobile dealership (which automobile dealership is the major tenant of a minimum three (3) acre site), a-P use identified as Community and Religious Assembly as set forth in subsection .030 ( "C" Use Classes) of Section 18.36.040 (Non - Residential Primary Use Classes) and a commercial retail center with a minimum of twenty -five (25) acres in area subject to the limitations of Section 18.44.090. A shopping center which constructs said Marquee or Electronic Reader Boards shall not be permitted to display temporary banners in conjunction with a Special Event Permit. (7) Staff supports allowing this type of signage by conditional use permit for larger commercial retail centers within the City. This provision would encourage the promotion of community events through the use of a permanent advertising device instead of banners and other forms of temporary advertisement. It would also facilitate the use of commercial retail centers as community gathering places for seasonal events. The conditional use permit process would allow staff and the Commission to evaluate sign proposals for context, size and location on an individual basis. Development standards for this type of signage, whether wall- mounted or freestanding would be the same as static signs allowed by Code. (8) Staff has determined that only five (5) retail centers in Anaheim would qualify under the 25- acre minimum requirements: West Gate (31.8 -acres located at the northeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Beach Boulevard) Anaheim Plaza (47.1 -acres located at the northeast and southeast corners of Euclid Street and Crescent Avenue); Anaheim Gateway (27.1 - acres located at the southeast corner of Lemon Street and Durst Street); Anaheim Town Center (29.0 -acres located at the southeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and State College Boulevard); and Festival Center (65.4 -acres located at the southwest corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Roosevelt Road). ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS (9) Staff recommends that the project be determined exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), which provides that where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. RECOMMENDATION (10) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the public meeting, and based upon evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public meeting, the Planning Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the proposed amendment as modified by staff is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 5 (b) By motion, recommend to the City Council the adoption of the applicant's Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00039 (as amended by staff) pertaining to marquee and electronic reader -board signs in conjunction with a commercial retail center having a minimum of twenty -five (25) acres in area, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. Page 3 [DRAFT] ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION 18.44.050 OF CHAPTER 18.44 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO SIGNAGE. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1 . That subsection .010 of Section 18.44.050 of Chapter 18.44 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read as follows: 18.44.050 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUIRED. .010 Requirement for Conditional Use Permit. The following signs require a conditional use permit: .0101 Marquee or electronic reader -board signs for an amusement facility, theater, lodging facility, school, automobile dealership (which automobile dealership is the major tenant of a minimum three (3) acre site) or use identified as Community and Religious Assembly as set forth in subsection .030 ( "C" Use Classes) of Section 18.36.040 (Non - Residential Primary Use Classes), and a commercial /retail center with a minimum of twenty -five (25) acres in area subject to the limitations of Section 18.44.090. A shopping center which constructs said Marquee or Electronic Reader Boards shall not be permitted to obtain any Special Event Permit to display banners visible from the street. 0102 Regional guide signs. .0103 Freeway- oriented signs, subject to the procedures and standards set forth in Section 18.44.100. .0104 Billboards, subject to the standards set forth in Section 18.44.230 through Section 18.44.260 inclusive. 0105 Murals visible from public right -of -ways. .0106 Off -site signs for regional shopping centers. No more than one (1) free - standing sign per regional shopping center, no greater than one hundred twenty five (125) square feet in sign area and no higher than fifteen (15) feet, may be located off -site where allowed by conditional use permit. .020 Application Requirements. All applications for a conditional use permit for a sign require submittal by the applicant of photographs of all existing freestanding, [DRAFT] monument, and wall signs on the property and a site plan of the property showing their location(s). The application shall also identify the square footage of all existing wall signs that are to remain. .030 Effect of Conditional Use Permit Approval. Approval of any conditional use permit for a particular land use shall constitute approval of any on- premises signs that are otherwise permitted in the underlying zone in which the use is located unless, as part of the action approving the use, more restrictive sign requirements are imposed. SECTION 2 . SEVERABILITY The City Council of the City of Anaheim hereby declares that should any section, paragraph, sentence or word of this ordinance of the Code, hereby adopted, be declared for any reason to be invalid, it is the intent of the Council that it would have passed all other portions of this ordinance independent of the elimination herefrom of any such portion as may be declared invalid. SECTION 3 . SAVINGS CLAUSE Neither the adoption of this ordinance nor the repeal of any other ordinance of this City shall in any manner affect the prosecution for violations of ordinances, which violations were committed prior to the effective date hereof, nor be construed as a waiver of any license or penalty or the penal provisions applicable to any violation thereof. The provisions of this ordinance, insofar as they are substantially the same as ordinance provisions previously adopted by the City relating to the same subject matter, shall be construed as restatements and continuations, and not as new enactments. SECTION 4 . PENALTY It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to violate any provision or to fail to comply with any of the requirements of this ordinance. Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of this ordinance or failing to comply with any of its requirements shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not exceeding One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or by imprisonment not exceeding six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each such person, firm or corporation shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each day during any portion of which any violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance is committed, continued or permitted by such person, firm or corporation, and shall be punishable therefore as provided for in this ordinance. [DRAFT] SECTION 5 . PENALTY. Except as may otherwise be expressly provided, any person who violates any provision of this ordinance is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished in the manner provided in Section 1.01.370 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Anaheim held on the day of 2005, and thereafter passed and adopted at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the day of , 2005, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CITY OF ANAHEIM By MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM OrdinanceZCA2005 -00039 Q �* 4p April 11, 2005, M J� 0)0 SEC e O M P A N I E S 5850 Canoga Ave Suite 650 oodland Hills, CA 91367 Tel: (818) 710 -6100 Fax: (818) 710 -6116 ".newmarkmerril l.com Los Angeles San Diego Las Vegas Orange County Ventura County Development Asset Management Property Management Construction Mr. Greg Hastings Zoning Division Manager City of Anaheim Planning Department 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California 92805 Re: Letter for Amending Zoning Code 18.44.050 Section .010 /.0101 Anaheim Town Square Dear Mr. Hastings: NewMark Merrill purchased Anaheim Town Square in 1999 and immediately knew that this was an excellent opportunity to remodel and reposition an aging shopping center. We knew that the City of Anaheim has an outstanding reputation with developers and we felt that this was and is a relationship that will be ongoing for a long time. NewMark Merrill has a reputation as a leader in development, remodeling, re- Merchandising and marketing of centers for community involvement which is a major difference between us and many other developers. In 2000, NewMark Merrill, invested over $4,500,000.00 million dollars to refurbish and re- tenant Anaheim Town Square. An important component of the success of this refurbishment has been the commitment by NewMark Merrill to market our center to the community as a destination and a happening place to be. Our continued community activities /events at our center, brings the residents of Anaheim together to our center to enjoy such events as: Easter, Bingo, Halloween, Holiday Programs and our monthly (last Saturday of the month) Kids Club that has over 300 kids each month. In fact, we invest over $100,000 annually to promote our center to the surrounding community. To promote our events, it is necessary to advertise them along both Lincoln and State College. In the past we have utilized large banners that have been placed in the landscape areas adjacent to the streets. Working with Planning Department staff, we have discussed the possibility of creating a more permanent arrangement that would be more complementary to the clean look of our buildings and landscape areas. We therefore would request that the Planning Commission consider recommending to City Council an amendment to the Zoning Code that C O M P A N I E S would enable us to apply for a conditional use permit for one or more Marquee or Electronic Reader Boards to be placed on our property. Our request would be for the highlighted wording to be added as follows to the recently revised zoning code: 18.44.050 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUIRED. .010 Requirements for Conditional Use Permit. The following signs require use a conditional use permit: .0101 Marquee or Electronic Reader -Board signs for an amusement facility, theater, lodging facility, church, community service organization, school, automobile dealership (which automobile dealership is the major tenant of a minimum three (3) acre site or use identified as Community and Religious Assembly as set forth in subsection .030 ( "C" Use Classes) of section 18.36 .040 (Non - Residential Primary Use Classes) and a commercial retail center with a minimum of twenty — five (25) acres in area subject to the limitations of section 18.44.090. A shopping center which constructs said Marquee or Electronic Reader Boards shall not be permitted to display banners visible from the street, except with a one 9-day permit annually per tenant subject to the limitations of Section 18.44.090. Excluded from the above are such seasonal uses like pumpkin patches and Christmas tree lots that would remain exempt from the banner restrictions for banners properly placed on the fencing surrounding such temporary outdoor uses. Adding this wording (relative to minimum number of parking spaces or minimum square footage) is consistent with the new code provision allowing seasonal banners on light poles. This would also insure that'the owners and merchants could permit only one opportunity per year to utilize grand - opening, sales or holidays specials banners and that "no" banners would be temporarily installed on Lincoln or State College which would be visible to pedestrian or vehicle traffic. . NewMark Merrill Companies would like to take this opportunity to thank the Planning Commission for considering our request, approving and submitting the above to the City Council of Anaheim for approval. Once the code amendment has been approved we will submit to Planning Staff our concept for proposed signage to fulfill our needs consistent with the standards of the City. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments. Sinceroly, Sandy D. igal Chief Executive Officer & Chairman ITEM N0. 6 o_ U T -CUP 2002 -04511 T -CUP 2001 -04344 H- 1 CUP 2469 U) MOTEL& RESTAURANT >- 1 Z O J AREA NO.'4 0 C1 (LOCAL BUSINESS) U RCL 2005 -00147 1 STONYBROOK DRIVE 1 j eaGn nin a 1 C1 (LOCAL ORANGE CO UNTY LIMITS RCL 2 -- ANAHEIM CITY LIMITS RCL 8 -99 -11 RM -4 RCL 58 -59 -34 RCL 57 -58 -26 APARTMENTS CUP 3145 SHOPS & COCKTAIL LOUNGE - 1 120' COLCHESTER DRIVE C -G r q RCL 98 -99 -11 o n n RCL 58 -59 -34 I r �l I I RM -2 I dl RCL 78 -79 -45 Y I w RCL 54 -55 -40 I w LU Z1 CUP 982 1 01 CUP 1220 60 D.U. CONDO I –� CUP 3J'49 w RCL 57 -58 -26 O CUP 1 SHO l l� WEST ANAHEIM COMMERCIAL CORRh C -G REDEVELOPMENT VAR 2005 C -G I ;UP 2003 -04768 RCL 98 -99 -11 POST OFFICE RCL 54 -55 -40 CUP 2003 -04768 W r �l o mro�m RCL 57 -58 -26 CUP 3342 CUP 3866 LLI C G rn v� �n d . " C -P'9 .N� GOODYE R �M RCL 98 -99 -11 RCL 57 -58 -26 UUUUU C -G Z CUP 2005 -04983 RCL 98 -99 -11 0 CUP 2005 -04960 RCL 58 -59 -34 –� CUP 3J'49 RCL 57 -58 -26 O CUP 1 SHO APARTMENTS CUP 2961 CUP 1354 y CUP 1620 VAR 1494 m ��rnH �7O 4°'¢0 U abwaU� UNU >m w)a U C -G CUP 3980 CUP 2003 -04768 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04983 Requested By: CHRIS DI RUGGIERO C -G VAR 1211 S BROOKHURST SHOPPING CENTER 3147 1 F- LLI LLI F_ U) Y O w m CUP 3267 1 D \RKI G LOT C -G RCL 98 -99 -11 RCL 57 -58 -35 CUP 3267 VAR 648 CUP 3159 MEDICAL OFFICES C -G RCL 98 -99 -11 RCL 58 -59 -111 OFFICE BLDG C -G RCL 98 -99 -11 RCL 67 -68 -86 RCL 62-63 -113 RCL 54 -55 -7 T -CUP 2004 -04937 CUP 2004 -04868 CUP 2317 CUP 2181 CUP 1 977 VAR 1918 BALLHURST PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER BROOKMORE AVE. o-L RCL 98 -99 -11 RCL 63-64 -108 RCL 62-63 -113 BANK RCL 8 -99 -11 1 RCL 54 -55 -7 CUP 2969 1 SUBWAY SANDWICH SHOP C-G RCL 54 -55- RCL 54 -55 -7 RESTAURANT C -G 98 -99 -11 CUP 144 L 54 -55 -7 VACANT C -G RCL 98 -99 -11 RCL 54 -55 -7 T -CUP 2002 -04314 T -VAR 2002 -04515 VAR 4363 fT 4krt'„ Subject Property Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Q.S. No. 34 REQUEST TO PERMIT AND RETAIN AN EXISTING CHURCH IN CONJUNCTION WITH A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 2230 West Colchester Drive, Suite Nos. 13 -16 - Iglesia Evangelica Impacto Nuevo 1823 VANCOUVER DRIVE i STONYBROOK DRIVE Item No. 2 a 1 Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04983 Subject Property Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: CHRIS DI RUGGIERO Q.S. No. 34 REQUEST TO PERMIT AND RETAIN AN EXISTING CHURCH IN CONJUNCTION WITH A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 2230 West Colchester Drive, Suite Nos. 13 -16 - Iglesia Evangelica Impacto Nuevo 1823 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 6 6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion) 6b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion) 6c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04983 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped 0.87 -acre property is located at the southeast corner of Colchester Drive and Colony Street, having frontages of 120 feet on the south side of Colchester Drive and 309 feet on the east side of Colony Street (2230 West Colchester Drive, Suite Nos. 13- 16). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit under authority of Code Section 18.08.030.040.0402 to permit and retain a church within an existing non - conforming commercial retail center with waiver of the following: SECTIONS 18.42.040 Minimum number of parking spaces AND 18.08.070 (212 required; 64 existing and proposed and recommended by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager) BACKGROUND: (3) This property is developed with an existing non - conforming commercial retail center, is zoned CG (BCC) (General Commercial — Brookhurst Commercial Corridor Overlay) and is located within the West Anaheim Commercial Corridors Project of the Merged Anaheim Redevelopment Area. The Anaheim General Plan designates this property and all surrounding properties except the property to the south for Medium Density Residential land uses. The property to the south is designated for Neighborhood Commercial land uses. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) The following zoning actions pertain to this property: a. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04960 (to permit and retain an existing church (Victory Outreach Church Suites 1 -5) within an existing non - conforming commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces) was approved by the Commission on March 21, 2005 for a period of two (2) years. b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04861 (to permit and retain two existing churches, a narcotics anonymous meeting hall, and to establish land use conformity with the City's zoning code requirements for an existing non - conforming commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces) was withdrawn by the property owner's agent at the January 10, 2005, Commission meeting. c. Conditional Use Permit No. 3649 (to permit a 2,609 square foot church within an existing commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces (115 required; 67 existing and proposed)) was approved by the Planning Commission on December 13, 1993, for a period of two years. This permit expired and was never reinstated. The requested church is operating in the same location as this previously - approved and expired church. SR CUP2005 04983 PC 060105 Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 6 d. Conditional Use Permit No. 1662 (to permit on -sale liquor in a lodge at 2230 West Colchester Drive) was approved by the Planning Commission on November 8, 1976. The previously- approved lodge is no longer in operation. e. Variance No. 1323 (to sell alcoholic beverages to be consumed on the premises at The Barbary Coast ) was granted by the Planning Commission on January 16, 1961, and then terminated by the Planning Commission on December 16, 1991. On February 4, 1992, the City Council reversed the termination, by approving a modified request for sale of beer and wine in conjunction with a restaurant, subject to four (4) conditions imposed and stipulated to by the owner, with review required on August 5, 1992. On March 3, 1992, the City Council denied a request for rehearing. On June 18, 1992, an Orange County Superior Court Order reinstated subject variance without a termination date and required adoption and completion of certain conditions. PROPOSAL: (5) This application is the result of a Community Preservation Division investigation based upon a request for service pertaining to a thrift store operating as a Twelve -Step Recovery Program, the overall condition of the property, vagrancy, and smoking within the building. Upon responding to the request for service, staff identified a number of code violations pertaining to the property, including, but not limited to, the following: • Two (2) unpermitted churches • An unpermitted narcotics anonymous meeting hall • An unpermitted comedy club (operating as part of the meeting hall) • An unpermitted storage unit • Trash, refuse and discarded furniture along the rear of the building (6) The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to permit and retain one of the existing churches (Ministerio Impacto Nuevo) within the existing non - conforming 11,979 square foot commercial retail center. (7) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the commercial center consists of five (5) businesses within sixteen (16) tenant spaces located in two (2) buildings on the property. There are two small landscaped areas and a trash enclosure within the parking lot. The Victory Outreach Church occupies Suites 1 -5; the Orange County Recovery Center (and comedy club) occupies Suites 6 -8; and the applicant, Ministerio Impacto Nuevo Church occupies Suites 13 -16 The recovery center and comedy club are operating without the benefit of appropriate land use approvals and required building permits. Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 6 (8) Vehicular access is provided via an alley along the east side of the property, which is accessed from Colchester Drive. Site access is also obtained from the Ralph's shopping center parking lot to the south. Plans indicate a total of 64 existing on -site parking spaces for this property. Code requires 212 spaces based the following: Use Square Code Parking Requirement Spaces Feet Required Victory Outreach Church 2,360 29 spaces per 1,000 square feet 69 (Suites 1 -5) (no fixed of assembly area or 0.333 space seating) per fixed seat whichever is greater Office 800 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet 3 Orange County Recovery Center 1,680 29 spaces per 1,000 square feet 49 (Suites 6 -8) (no fixed of assembly area or 0.333 space seating) per fixed seat whichever is greater Office 400 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet 2 Barber Salon 780 5.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet 4 Suite 9 El Encanto Bar 2,460 17 spaces per 1,000 square feet 42 Suites 10 -12 Ministerio Impacto Nuevo 1,154 29 spaces per 1,000 square feet 35 (Suites 13 -16) (no fixed of assembly area or 0.333 space seating) per fixed seat whichever is greater Office/ 1,269 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet Fellowship room (accessory to 713 8 sanctuary) Classroom 563 None TOTAL 11,979 212 Note: Code does not require any parking for the accessory Sunday school classrooms. Accessory uses (e.g., multi - purpose room) do not require additional parking provided such areas are not used concurrently with the sanctuary. (9) The floor plan for the Ministerio Impacto Nuevo Church (Exhibit No. 2) indicates a 1,154 square foot sanctuary and platform area, a 713 square foot fellowship room and 1,782 square foot of administrative offices and a classroom area. View of the property from the east Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 6 (10) Photographs and staff inspections indicate the existing single story building is masonry, with a stucco finish and storefront windows on the east elevation. A 20 -foot wide planter is located adjacent to the north side of the building along Colchester Drive. The west elevation contains rear entrances to each of the tenant spaces and a combination block and chain link fence enclosure. No exterior modifications to the building, signage or landscaping are proposed as part of this application. (11) Existing landscaping consists of two planters within the parking area, which contain shrubs and grass, and an approximately 20 -foot wide landscaped setback area along Colchester Drive, which contains one (1) tree. Code requires one tree for every 20 lineal feet of street frontage, (6 trees on Colchester Drive and 16 trees on Colony Street) 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 (25,923 square feet / 3000 square feet = 9 trees within associated planter areas). (12) The submitted letter of operation and parking study for the Ministerio Impacto Nuevo indicate the church is a Spanish /Portuguese ministry. This location would contain church services and administrative offices for the church. The hours of operation are as follows: Sunday 10:30 am -12 pm 40 people in attendance Sunday 7 pm- 9 pm 25 people in attendance Tuesday 7:30 pm- 9 pm 23 people in attendance Friday 7:30 pm- 9 pm 20 people in attendance ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (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 a significant effect on the environment. EVALUATION: (14) Churches are permitted within the C -G (BCC) zone subject to approval of a conditional use permit. (15) The requested waiver pertains to the minimum number of parking spaces. Code requires a minimum of 212 spaces for the commercial retail center, (including the two (2) churches and the recovery center meeting hall) and plans indicate 64 proposed spaces. The applicant has submitted a parking analysis prepared by Traffic Safety Engineers, Inc., dated March 15, 2004, to substantiate the requested parking waiver. The parking study analyzes existing on- site parking demand, including both churches and the unpermitted meeting hall. The City Traffic and Transportation Manager has reviewed the parking analysis and has determined that the proposed parking areas referenced in the study are sufficient for the churches, meeting hall, and commercial uses on the property. Based on the study, the parking demand at peak use is 70% of the parking available on site for the requested church and other uses on the site. Staff has also conducted site inspections at various times and days throughout Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 6 the week (Tuesday and Wednesday mornings and afternoons, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday evenings, and Sunday mornings). Based on staffs inspections, the parking demand at peak use is 65% of available parking during the week and 95% of available parking during the weekend. The City Traffic and Transportation Manager has reviewed this study and has determined that subject to recommended conditions of approval, the actual supply of 64 spaces on the property is adequate for the requested church and other uses on the site. Based upon the City Traffic and Transportation Manager's analysis and recommendation, staff recommends approval of this waiver based on the following findings: "(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 reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. The parking study indicates that peak parking demand for off - street parking spaces is substantially lower than the quantity provided for the two (2) churches, the meeting hall, and other commercial tenants. (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. The proposed project will not increase or compete for on- street parking because the parking lot has more than adequate parking to accommodate both churches, the meeting hall, and other commercial tenants. Parking counts indicate 5% to 30% of on -site parking is vacant during peak hours. (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The parking study indicates the on -site parking area is sufficient to accommodate the demand of parking generated by the subject church in conjunction with the current on- site uses, including the two other unauthorized assembly uses and therefore would not increase the demand for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the site. (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 on -site parking is 65% to 95% occupied during peak parking demand periods. (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. The project site parking area has a total of three (3) access outlets. Peak traffic demands occur on Sundays and weeknights only. No impeding of traffic access into or out of the adjacent parking lots was observed during parking demand surveys of the project parking lot." (16) Due to the extensive Code violation history pertaining to this property, staff had conducted field inspections of the interior of this tenant space. Staff observations included, but were not limited to, unpermitted improvements to the interior of the tenant spaces, insufficient building Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 6 ingress /egress, substandard exiting mechanisms on the doors, as well as unpermitted electrical and plumbing modifications. Regardless of the Planning Commission's action on this conditional use permit, the property owner is obligated to correct Building Code and Fire Code violations as determined by the Building Division and Fire Department. (17) The interior portion of this tenant space where the church currently operates has undergone a significant amount of interior tenant improvements without proper review and approval by the Fire Department and Building Division. This commercial tenant space has been converted into assembly area and has not been evaluated for conformance to the Fire and Building Codes related to occupancy and exiting requirements. Because these modifications to the building may compromise the safety of members of the church, staff has included a condition of approval requiring the operator and /or the property owner submit plans and obtain appropriate building permits for all outstanding tenant improvements within sixty (60) days of the Planning Commission's approval. For safety reasons, staff has included a condition of approval requiring the church to reduce the occupancy of their meetings to a maximum of 49 congregants until such time as improvements to change the occupancy are Properly permitted. The applicant has met with staff and was present at the October 14, 2004 city inspection and is aware of the items that need to be addressed. (18) Staff is not opposed to the requested community assembly use located within this commercial retail center provided the use operates without disturbance to the surrounding residential neighborhood. Further, the life safety and Building Code issues must be addressed and sufficient parking needs to be supplied for all the uses to operate without creating parking impacts on the surrounding residential streets and nearby commercial lots. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the church for a period of two years to allow staff sufficient time to evaluate the impact of the use on the adjacent I neighborhood Staff has included standard conditions of approval pertaining to property maintenance, landscaping maintenance and quarterly Community Preservation inspections. (19) The Community Preservation Division is actively engaging the property owner and the operators of the other church (approved by the Commission on March 21, 2005) and the meeting hall to bring them into compliance with the Code and conditions of approval (church), or submit to the conditional use permit process as this applicant did, or to relocate or vacate the premises). FINDINGS: (20) Section 18.42.110 of the parking ordinance sets forth certain findings, as indicated in Paragraph 15 above, which are required to be made before a parking waiver may be approved by the Planning Commission. Those findings are italicized in paragraph 15 above. Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed upon the granting of any waiver pursuant to this Section by the Planning 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 waiver which shall subject said waiver to termination or modification pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of this Code. (21) 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: Page 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 6 (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; (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: (22) 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 for a period of two (2) years to expire June 1, 2007, by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. Page 7 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04983 BE GRANTED (2230 WEST COLCHESTER DRIVE, SUITES 13 -16) 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 1, 2,3 AND 4 OF TRACT NO. 2701, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 115, PAGES 5 AND 6 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 1, 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 use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section18.08.030.040.0402 to permit and retain a church in conjunction with an existing non- conforming retail center with waiver of the following: SECTIONS 18.42.040 ANn is ns n7n Minimum number of parkinq spaces. (212 required; 64 existing and proposed and recommended by the Traffic and Transportation Manager) 2. That the parking study and site investigations indicate that peak parking demand for off - street parking spaces provides for a 5% to 35% surplus of spaces for the uses on the site. 3. That the church use will not increase or compete for on- street parking because the parking lot has adequate parking to accommodate this church and other assembly and commercial tenants comprising this commercial center. 4. That the parking study indicates the property's parking area is sufficient to accommodate the demand of parking generated by this assembly use and other uses on the property and therefore would not increase the demand for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the site. 5. That the project will not cause increased traffic congestion within off - street parking areas of the site because, based on the applicant's parking study and staffs inspections, on -site parking is only 65 %- 70% occupied during peak parking demand periods during the week and 95% on the weekend. 6. That the on -site parking area has a total of three (3) access outlets. Peak traffic demands occur on Sundays and weeknights only. No impeding of traffic access into or out of the adjacent parking lots was observed during parking demand surveys of the project parking lot. 7. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code. Cr \PC2005- -1- PC2005- 8. That the proposed use as conditioned herein will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located. 9. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development of the use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health and safety. 10. 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. 11. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 12. That * ** people 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 and retain an existing church in conjunction with a commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces; 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 this permit shall expire on June 1, 2007. 2. That the hours of operation for the church (Suites 13 -16) shall be limited to the following, as stipulated in the applicant's letter of operation: Sunday 10:30 am -12 pm 40 people in attendance Sunday 7 pm- 9 pm 25 people in attendance Tuesday 7:30 pm- 9 pm 23 people in attendance Friday 7:30 pm- 9 pm 20 people in attendance 3. That no portable signage shall be utilized to advertise any of the uses located on the site. 4. That no outdoor events shall be permitted. 5. That the only accessory school activity shall be Sunday school and these facilities shall not include any private daycare, nursery, elementary, junior and /or senior high schools. 6. That the granting of the parking waiver is contingent upon operation of the uses in conformance with the assumptions and /or conclusions relating to the operation and intensity of uses as contained in the applicant's parking demand study that formed the basis for approval of said waiver. Exceeding, violating, intensifying or otherwise deviating from any of said assumptions and /or conclusions, as contained in the parking demand study, shall be deemed a violation of the expressed conditions imposed upon said waiver which shall subject this to termination or modification pursuant to the provisions of Sections 18.60 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. -2- PC2005- That the following items observed at staffs physical inspection on October 14, 2004, shall be addressed within a period of sixty (60) days. The appropriate permits shall be obtained for any necessary work as follows: • Provide address numbers on front of building. CFC Section 901.4.4 • The owner shall hire a licensed architect to 1) conduct a comprehensive facility investigation; 2) prepare accurate "as- built" plans to reflect the existing tenant improvements and obtain permits for items indicated below; 3) modify the plans in order to fully comply with the applicable codes; and 4) submit new "Tenant Improvement" plans for permits and inspections. The owner is required to hire a licensed architect to conduct a comprehensive facility investigation. A licensed architect shall prepare the plans because they involve "Assembly" occupancies (potential of increased risk for fire related injuries). Change of Occupancy from B to A3 is required if occupancy exceeds 49. • Interior walls constructed without permits. • Opening in masonry wall on south side of the tenant space requires review and approval. • Upgrade restrooms, exit doors, and new counter top for handicap accessibility. • Mechanical, electrical, plumbing works (electrical fixtures, outlets, a/c distributions, gas, water line, sewer cleanout at the middle of pavement, etc.) require permits. • Obtain approval of occupancy change from the Building Division (before occupancy may exceed 49). That the following items shall be addressed immediately: • Provide two 2A1 OBC fire extinguishers, serviced by a California State Licensed Company. Title 19 • A flame- retardant certificate shall be provided for all drapes, or remove. CFC Section 1103.3.3.1 • Maintain proper amounts of Exit doors provided with panic hardware and they must swing outward. CFC Section 1207.1 and 1207.2 • Remove all secondary locks, latches, or bolts from Exit doors. CFC Section 1207.3 • Remove tape from circuit breakers secured in the "On" position. CFC Section 8504. • Remove all extension cords. CFC Section 8506.1 • Add panic hardware to gates outside. They must have panic hardware and swing outward. CFC Section 1208.2 and 1208.4 • Install illuminated exit signs. • Unlock gate at west side for access to the public sidewalk (gate within the 4' -6" block wall was locked). That the maximum occupancy of any assembly use shall be limited to 49 persons until such time that plans are submitted to the Building Division and Fire Department for review and approval. Upon such approval, the occupancy may be increased for each of the assembly use to the number of congregants identified in the parking study. 10. That there shall be no outdoor storage on site at any time; and that the existing outdoor storage located to the rear (west) of the commercial center shall be removed. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. 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. -3- PC2005- 14. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 15. That the property owner /applicant shall pay the costs of quarterly Community Preservation inspections for a period of one year, and as often as necessary thereafter until the subject property is brought into compliance, or as deemed necessary by the City's Community Preservation Division to gain and /or maintain compliance with State and local statutes, ordinances, laws and regulations. 16. That subject property shall be maintained 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. 17. That within a period of sixty (60) days from the date of this resolution, Condition Nos. 7, 10, 12 and 16, 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. 18. 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 applicant 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 June 1, 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. ATTEST: CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION 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 June 1, 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 1 2005. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -5- PC2005- March 15, 2004 Rev. Eglai Dealmeida New Impact Ministry And Rev. Juan Castro Victory Outreach Church 2230 W. Colches r Drive Anaheim., CA 1. 7, :dstlIng Site Conditions A. Project Location TRAFFIC SAFETY ENGINEERS, INC. MCC APPROVAL ' a0N /s± �' o (?(9 - -t eip 4.p �;�c 9 5 7 0 w S Is (d cdro ,.., Dear Rev. Dealmeida and Rev. Castro: This report summarizes our traffic parking study for the New Impact Ministry try and Victory Outreach Church located at 2230 W. Colchester Drive,, Anaheim. We trust that the findings of this parking study will be of assistance to the City of Anaheim in formulating their decision pertaining to the existing church use. Both the New Impact Ministry and the Victory Outreach Church are located in an existing industrial: center located at the southeast intersection comer of Colchester Drive and Colony Street. The existing center consists of a ;jingle -story building with approximately 11,089 square feet of floor area. A total of 16 suites are available (four suites for the New Impact Ministry, three suites for the bar, one for the barber shop, three for the drug!alcobol rehabili- tation center, and the remaining five suites are for the Victory Outreach Church). The •project site provides a total of 64 parking spaces. CUP NO. 2004 "4 9 33 3100 hikRYW00Q DRIVE ORANGE. CA 92867 TEL! 714.974. 7RRq =Av. 74 fl7A 411A9 ...... _......___.. - ___ Page 2 Based on the City's Parking Code requirements, a combined total of 226 parking spaces will be required for the proposed churches and other tenants in the industrial center. Detailed calculations of these parking requirements are shows below: Site Use New Impact Ministry Victory Outreach Church Bar. Barber Shop "IlltPrug/Alcohol Rehabilitation B. Chi rch A^ -tivity Summary Major weekday and weekend church activities are srir aarized below: New Impact Ministry Day of Week Time Period:; 7 :30pmto9pm Bible Study & Prayer Meeting (Tuesday night) Sunday Service Sunday Night Prayer Meeting_ 2 . Parking pemand Surveys Parking surveys conducted at the existing industrial center parking lot on various church activity pert :as of the week are tabulated below: Time of Survey 7 :30 pm 11:30 am Size 112 Seats (2,609 sq. ft). 154 Seats (3,160 sq, City Parking Code Requirements The highest of 0.33 space /seat or 29 spaces /1,000 sq. ft. The highest of 0.33 space /seat or 22 000 sq. ft. �°" k Use 17 spaces /1,000 sq. ft. N►5.5 spaces /1,000 sq. ft. 5.5 spaces /1,000 sq. ft. Lz /, ®cam? Subtotal for Chur c 2,460 sq. ft. 780 sq. ft. 2,088 sq. ft -urnd Total 10:30 am to 12:30 pm 7:30 pm to 9:00 pm Victory Outreach Day of Week Bible Study & Prayer Meeting (Wednesday & Friday nights) Sunday Service Sunday Night Prayer Meeting Number of Parking Spaces Occupied 3 - - 04 (Tuesday) 3 -3 -04 (Weclr ay) 3 - - 04 (Friday) 31 36 " 46 Parking Spaces Required by Code Church Time Period 7pmto9pm 10 am to Noon 6pmnto8 37 or 76 51 or 92 3 -7 -04 (Sunday) 42 38 CUP No 2004 -4083 Page 3. Findings anti Conclusions Our parking tilization surveys indicated a peak parking demand of 46 parking spaces for all the presently occupied suites within the industrial center at a time which coincides with the church's activity periods on both weeknights. and Sunday. . .This Desk parking demand of 46 spaces is approximately 70% of the total available 64 spaces ovided for the center. Therefore_ it is reasonable to conclude that the existing 64 parking spaces are more than adequate to serve the peak parking demands of the entire ce ter. Section 18.06.080 of the Anaheim Parking Ordinance requires certain findings to be inade before parking waivers can be granted by the Planning Commission. On the basis of this report, five findings must be made. The findings and specific responses are provided as follows: A. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off -street parking spaces to be provided for such -.use than the nv:uriber of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. Response: The parking study indicates that the peak parking demand for off - street: parking spaces is substantially lower than the quantity provided for tht. existing church and other tenant rises. B. That the variance, under the condition's. 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. Response: The proposed project will not increase or compete for on -street parking because its parking lot has more than adequate parking to accommodate the existing church and other tenant parking demands. C. That the variance, 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 m compliance with Section 18.06.010.020 o the Code) CUP No. 2004 '4 q Page 4 Response: There is no reason to encroach.other•parking facilities because the project's parking lot provides ample parking as indicated in. the parking analysis. D. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such uses. Response: Traffic and parking congestion will not occur because the supply of parking spaces for the project site is only 70% occupied during the peak parking demand period. E. That the variance, 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. Response: The project site parking lot has a total. o outlets. Peak traffic demands occur on Sundays and weeknights only. No impeding of traffic access into or out of the adjacent parking lots was observed during parking demand surveys of the project parking lot. Should you need additional information or clarification of this parking study, please feel free to call us at any time. Respectfully Submitted, Traffic Safety Engineers e •• � � C. Hui Lai, P.E. Traffic Engineer CUP NO 2004 -4 c $ 3 Letter of Operation • EGLAI ALMEIDA, SENIOR PASTOR From 6:00 PM to 9:00 PM IGLESIA EVANGELICA MINISTERIO IMPACTO NUEVO NEW IMPACT MINISTRY P0. BOX 3536 • ANAHEIM, CA 92803 • PHONE (714) 780-0437 "ASSEMBLY OF GOD CHURCH" Sunday 10:30 A.M. to 12:30 P.M 40 people 7:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. 25 people Tuesday 7:30 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. 23 people Friday 7:30 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. 20 people Every two month we use one Saturday to do a revival "y en los postreros dias, dice Dios derramare de mi espiritu sobre toda carne" .... Hechos 2:17 E -Mail: impacto@prodigy.net ITEM NO. 7 T LU VAN 2000 CUP 439 o = RCL RCL 88 -89 -40 C) v I (SABC) m z t RCL RCL 63 -64 -10 C 4 7 F — wz o Rcsc T -CUP 2003 -04794 VAR 4357 9n RC 59 L -60 -54 C ° RCL CUP 4076 VAR 4140 CUP 69 Z _ RCL CUP 3278 VAR 1777 I (sasc> N Y T -CUP CUP 3026 W RCL 61-62-37 X z T -CUP VAR 821 N T-CUP MOBILEHOME RCL 61 -62 -25 SgRCL cUP2 T -CUP T -CUP LIQUOR T -CUP STORE T -CUP T -CUP t T -CUP T -CUP T RS -A- T -CUP 43,000 GOLDEN RCL 82 SKIES I 56.57 -92 ' N SKI I CUP 289 MOBILEHOME PARK CUP 253 C -G RCL 88 -89 -42 CUP 2967 RCL 66 -67 -38 CUP 2672 RCL 66 -67 -14 CUP 171 RCL 60 -61 -11 VAR 3910 BURGERS RCL 55 -56 -19 3 VAR 1827 RCL 54 -55 -42 RESTAURANT �au 110 -) CUP 2002- n CUP 2002 0461 00023 CERRITOS AVENUE �4� ° c otiAO °� y 3 r' (Res of Int to �4 �, v) ti0 oti poi o ylx� r �' SABC —day Zone) J ry�po t r �) RCL 18 MRk RCL 57-58-16 (r M CUP 3738 O 1 6 g 0 y s ; UP 2)05 04981. CUP 3350k7 6 G V 6 g1 y0 r nri1 I CUP 3088 1 4� CUP 2328 CJ 0 '�J Q �'�91R6 4 " CUP 1849, C-G Z C+ Q ti CUP 2002-04611 D F66-67-36 CUP 1589 �f CUP 2002 -04610 fTl VAR 3i66 S 9 ; ) i RCL 2000 00023 o -- 9 O lQ Q -�� g 5 A (Res of Int. to }( o RCL 54-5542 JQ��'y USINESS ARK SABC Overlay Zone) rc - RCL 66-67-36 y �P 5�#�; CUP 3738 RCL 60-61 -113 , AVE cua z3i4 W CUP 2003 -04817 CERRITOS ��. O VAR 4356 k �� cUP 1849 C VAR 3148 �� bb r VAR 1961 CUP 200 04611 CUP 3350 I`� -� M INDUSTRIAL 9� L� cuP 2ooz -oaslo cuP z37a RCL 2000 - 00023 "' � CUP 2005 04981 BUILDING S ".SABC Overlayy Zone) CUP 1589 �� , 1 J Q " RCL 78 -79 -02 VAR 3166 S (� tj -� a�� SP 82-2 CUP 3738 RCL 66 -67.61 (108) VACANT ♦ I ♦ RCL 57 -58 -16 1 ALRO WAY ♦ CUP 2271 RCL 66 -67 -14 ♦ CUP ago RCL 55 -56 -19 ♦ VAR 3167 S RCL 54 -5542 ISP 92 -1 1 ♦ VACANT CUP 1827 RCL 66 - 67 - 61 108) ♦ SP 92 - CUP 1647 CUP 2060 VAR 2753 BAKERY RCL 77 -78-58 ♦ ♦ C0G > LEASE ALL ANAHEIM RCL CUP 2964108) ♦ p BUSINESS PARK SP 92 -1 VAR 3009 ♦ ooy 1 RCL 66 - 67 - 6 1 It 08) VAR 730 ♦ ♦ 'A oG � 1 51 (27) CENTER CHILDRENS STORE 5 -112 ♦ F,QeO RCL 66 -67 -14 ♦ ! G RCL 55 -56 -19 74 S P 92-1 9 5 MFG RCL 54 -55 42 ,2 RCL 77 -7858 ♦ 09,p CUP 1827 4S RCL 66 -6751 (108) ♦'LSO CUP 1647 AND VAR 3009 ♦ VAR 2753 JG VAR 730 ♦ . Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04981 Subject Property Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: Graphic Requested By: ANAHEIM BUSINESS CAMPUS, LLC Q.S. No. 87 REQUEST TO PERMIT A BANQUET HALL WITH ON- PREMISES SALES AND CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 167 West Cerritos Avenue, Building No. 2 - The Place 1822 Item No. 2 al i � r - 9 f� RO WAY OEM _ . Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04981 Subject Property Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: Graphic Requested By: ANAHEIM BUSINESS CAMPUS, LLC Q.S. No. 87 REQUEST TO PERMIT A BANQUET HALL WITH ON- PREMISES SALES AND CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 167 West Cerritos Avenue, Building No. 2 - The Place 1822 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 7 7a 7b 7c NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04981 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 12.3 -acre property is located at the southwest corner of Cerritos Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard and has a frontage of 600 feet on the west side of Anaheim Boulevard (167and 175 West Cerritos Avenue, Building No. 2- The Place). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit under the authority of Code Section 18.08.030.0402 to permit a banquet hall with on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages with waiver of the following: (Motion) (Motion) (Resolution) SECTIONS 18.42.040 Minimum number of parking spaces AND 18.08.070 720 required; 494 proposed and recommended by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager) BACKGROUND: (3) This property is developed as a part of a commercial /industrial center and is zoned C -G (SABC) (General Commercial — South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor Overlay) and is also located within the Merged Anaheim Redevelopment Project Area. The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element designates this property for General Commercial land uses. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) The following zoning actions pertain to this property: (a) Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -04611 (to permit a church with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces [650 spaces required; 485 proposed]) was approved by the Planning Commission on October 7, 2002. The church is no longer operating at this location and the proposed banquet hall would be taking over this tenant space. The conditional use permit for the church will expire on October 7, 2005. (b) Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -04610 (to permit an adult day care center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces [650 spaces required; 485 proposed]) was approved by the Planning Commission on October 7, 2002. (c) Conditional Use Permit No. 3350 (to permit a birthing center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces [688 spaces required; 591 proposed] for UCI Medical Center) was approved by the Commission on October 22, 1990. (d) Conditional Use Permit No. 3195 (to permit a cell site for mobile telephone units) was approved by the Commission on September 25, 1989. (e) Conditional Use Permit No. 3089 (to permit on- premises sale of alcoholic beverages with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces [701 spaces required; 609 proposed] for the Moose Lodge) at 317 -321 West Cerritos Avenue was approved by the Commission on December 5, 1988. SR- CUP2005 -04981 akv Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 7 (f) Conditional Use Permit No. 2328 (to permit on -sale beer and wine in an existing sandwich shop with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces [668 spaces required; 594 proposed]) was approved by the Commission on May 17, 1982. (g) Conditional Use Permit No. 2374 (to permit a physio- therapy and sauna establishment with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces [671 spaces required; 594 proposed]) was approved by the Commission on September 20, 1982. (h) Variance No. 3166 (to waive permitted location and maximum height to permit one freestanding sign) was approved by the Commission on August 25, 1980. (i) Conditional Use Permit No. 1849 (to permit industrial uses within a commercial complex and off -site signing with waivers of minimum setback from an intersection and minimum ground clearance) was approved by the Commission on July 3, 1978. Q) Variance No. 3025 (to waive minimum site screening requirements to construct a commercial /industrial complex) was approved on July 3, 1978. (k) Conditional Use Permit No. 1589 (to permit an automotive service facility) was approved by the Commission on December 22, 1975. PROPOSAL: View looking north at proposed banquet hall location (6) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates this proposal would be located within a 5,173 square foot suite of building No. 2, at the north end of the commercial /industrial complex. Page 2 (5) The proposed project includes the operation of a banquet facility with on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages in an existing commercial /industrial complex. No exterior modifications to the existing building are proposed in conjunction with this request. Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 7 (7) The floor plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates a 5,173 square foot area consisting of an office, an entry area, a break room, storage area and assembly area that would hold up to 300 guests. (8) Conceptual sign plans were submitted with this request indicating a wall sign at the entrance to the banquet hall. Staff is recommending a condition of approval that final sign plans be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. (9) The submitted letter of operation indicates the hours would be Friday, Saturday and Sunday, 5 p.m. to 12 a.m. The business would include full service banquet services for weddings, birthday parties, and other private parties. The service includes providing tables, chairs, food, drinks and decorations. The letter stipulates that no cooking is proposed on site; that food would be brought in by caterers of the guests. The applicant has also stated that security would be provided for each event. (10) Vehicular access to the commercial /industrial complex is provided via several driveways from Cerritos Avenue just west of Anaheim Boulevard (Cerritos Avenue terminates within the project site). Plans indicate a total of 494 existing on -site parking spaces for this commercial complex (not including public street parking). Code requires 720 spaces based the following chart: Suite Number and Square Feet Code Parking Requirement Parking Use Per 1,000 square feet of GFA Required Building One 305/313/325/329 /337/353 14,198 1.55 (plus 4 spaces for office area in excess of 42.3 Office & Industrial (7,691 excess 10% of total GFA for office area and 1.55 for office ) industrial area 317 -321 Moose Lode 3,462 Per parking study analysis 28 Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 7 333 Industrial 1,731 1.55 2.7 355 Office 2,853 4 11.4 Building Two 125 -157 Adult Daycare 13,650 1 space per employee plus 1 space per each 10 clients 32 159/163 Office /Industrial 3,460 (776 excess office ) 1.55 (plus 4 spaces for office area in excess of 10% of total GFA for office area and 1.55 for industrial area 7.3 167 -175 Proposed Banquet hall 5,173 29 for assembly area 150 Building Three 100/110/120 Office 9,126 4 36.4 Building Four 150/160 Office 16,564 4 66.2 Building Five 190/194/198 Office 8,257 4 33 196 Office /Industrial 1,733 (691 excess office ) 1.55 plus (4 spaces for office area in excess of 10% of total GFA for office area and 1.55 for industrial area 2.2 Building Six 210 - 228/232- 240/254/260 Office /Industrial 22,086 (excess office 9,104) 1.55 (plus 4 spaces for office area in excess of 10% of total GFA for office area and 1.55 for industrial area) 56.3 Building Seven 300 Medical Office 1,156 6 7 302/304/308/310 /362- 392, 394 Offices 26,409 4 105.6 3006, Vacant 4,217 4 17 354, Vacant 2,613 4 10.5 306 -312, Vacant 5,629 4 22.5 Building Eight 201 Office 2,359 4 9.4 209 Restaurant 1,144 8 9.1 217- 225/229/233/245 /251- 255/259/263/271/285/2 87 289/291/293/295/299 Offices 17,617 4 70.5 TOTAL 720 Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 7 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (11) 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 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 a significant effect on the environment. EVALUATION: (12) The establishment of the proposed banquet facility with on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages is permitted within the C -G Zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (13) The requested waiver pertains to the minimum number of parking spaces. Code requires a minimum of 720 spaces for the commercial /industrial center. The applicant has submitted a parking analysis prepared by Traffic Safety Engineers, Inc., dated April 4, 2005, to substantiate the requested parking waiver. The parking study analyzes existing on -site parking demand, including the proposed banquet hall. Based on the study, the parking demand for the proposed banquet hall would take place on Friday, Saturday and Sunday evenings, when almost all of the other businesses within the center are closed. The City Traffic and Transportation Manager has reviewed this study and has determined that subject to the condition pertaining to the hours of operation, the actual supply of 494 spaces on the property is adequate for the requested banquet hall and other uses on the site. Because of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager's analysis and recommendation, staff recommends approval of this waiver based on the following findings: "(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 reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. The parking study indicates that peak parking demand for off - street parking spaces is substantially lower than the quantity provided for the business campus, including the proposed banquet facility. (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. The business campus will not increase or compete for on- street parking because its parking lot has more than adequate parking to accommodate both the center and the proposed banquet facility's peak parking demands. (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The business campus parking lot is physically separated from other adjacent development. Furthermore, there is no reason to encroach into other parking facilities Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 7 because the campus's parking lot provides ample parking as indicated in the parking analysis. (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. Traffic and parking congestion will not occur because the supply of parking spaces is almost double the anticipated project peak parking demand. (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. The business campus is physically separated for the adjacent private properties. Therefore, there will be no impeding of the traffic access into or out of adjacent parking lots." (14) The Police Department submitted the attached memorandum dated May 12, 2005, noting that the reporting district in which the property is located has a crime rate of 188 percent above the citywide average. Reporting districts to the north, east and south all have crime rates above the citywide average. Reporting District 2024, located directly west, is the only district with a crime rate below the citywide average (68 percent below average). The Police Department opposes this request due to the high crime rate in the area and is concerned that no kitchen is proposed with this request. A kitchen is a requirement of ABC (Alcoholic Beverage Control) in order to obtain a Type 47 license, but it not a Code requirement. The submitted floor plan does not restrict the construction of kitchen facilities within the tenant space, the applicant has been informed of this State licensing requirement and staff has included a condition of approval requiring the applicant to construct kitchen facilities prior to obtaining a alcoholic beverage license from ABC. (15) This business is currently operating at 1383 Gene Autry Way. The property is within the Platinum Triangle and has been sold to a mixed -use developer. The applicant has been given notice to vacate their existing location by August 1, 2005. The Police Department also included the calls for service for this current business location in the memorandum, which indicates that there has been one (1) call for service in response to a drunk person in a car. (16) Staff believes that if properly conditioned to regulate the alcoholic beverage consumption and parking issues, the operation of the proposed banquet hall could serve as a desirable venue for community celebrations. Specifically, the applicant has proposed to hire licensed security guards, monitor alcohol distribution with wristbands for patrons and providing a well -lit building exterior. These operational limitations are recommended conditions of approval for this request and if approved by the Commission, would become a requirement of this conditional use permit. . FINDING- q - (17) Section 18.42.110 of the parking ordinance sets forth certain findings, which are required to be made before a parking waiver may be approved by the Planning Commission. Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed upon the granting of any waiver pursuant to this Section by the Planning 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 Page 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 7 violation of the express conditions imposed upon said waiver which shall subject said waiver to termination or modification pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Code. (18) 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; (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: (19) 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, the Planning Commission approve, for two (2) years, the applicant's request to permit a banquet hall with on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces by adopting the attached resolution and including the findings and conditions contained herein. Page 7 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04981 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: PARCEL 1, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 131, PAGES 1 AND 2 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL WATER RIGHTS, CLAIMS OR TITLE TO WATER, WHETHER OR NOT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN PARCEL NO. 200434 -1 IN THAT CERTAIN FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION, SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 771 150, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH WAS RECORDED AUGUST 6, 1998 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19980511583 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 1, 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 use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.08.030.040.0402 to permit a banquet hall with the on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages with waiver of the following: SECTIONS 18.42.040 Minimum number of parking spaces. AND 18.08.070 (720 required; 494 existing and proposed and recommended by the Traffic and Transportation Manager) 2. That the parking study indicates that peak parking demand for off - street parking spaces is substantially lower than the quantity provided for the uses on the site. 3. That the proposed project will not increase or compete for on- street parking because its parking lot has more than adequate parking to accommodate both the center and the proposed banquet facility's peak parking demands. 4. That the parking study indicates the business campus parking lot is physically separated from other adjacent development. Furthermore, there is no reason to encroach into other parking facilities because the campus's parking lot provides ample parking as indicated in the parking analysis. 5. That the project will not cause increased traffic congestion within off - street parking areas of the site because, based on the applicant's parking study, the supply of parking spaces is almost double the anticipated project peak parking demand. Cr \PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- 6. That the business campus is physically separated from the adjacent private properties. Therefore, there will be no impeding of the traffic access into or out of adjacent parking lots. 7. That the banquet hall with on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages as conditioned herein and with the operational restrictions stipulated by the applicant including security, adequate lighting and compliance with State alcoholic beverage regulations will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; 8. 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 provided that security is employed to deter any unlawful conduct and to prevent disturbance to adjacent land uses; 9. 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 10. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 11. 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 banquet hall with on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages with wavier of minimum number of parking spaces; 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 this conditional use permit shall expire two (2) years from the date of this resolution, on June 1, 2007. 2. That a valid business license shall be obtained from the City of Anaheim, Business License Division. 3. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 4. That any tree and /or landscaping planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and /or dead. 5. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 6. That any proposed roof - mounted equipment shall be screened from view in accordance with the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.38.170 pertaining to the C -G (General Commercial) Zone. 7. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the property owner's expense -2- PC2005- That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or abandonments of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through the Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. That final sign plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval as to number, size, placement, design and materials. Any decision by staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. 10. That 4 -foot high address numbers shall be displayed on the roof in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible from the view of the street or adjacent properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Police Department, Community Services Division approval. 11. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department 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 from adjacent streets. 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 Streets and Sanitation Division approval. 12. That the project shall provide for truck deliveries on -site. Such information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Planning Services Division approval. 13. That adequate lighting of parking lots, driveways, circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and vehicles on -site. Said lighting shall be decorative and complementary to the architecture of the building. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Police Department, Community Services Division approval. 14. That an Emergency Listing Card, Form ADP -281 shall be completed and submitted in a completed form to the Anaheim Police Department. In addition, the operator shall provide the Community Services Division with a contact name and phone number in the event a complaint is received. 15. That the permitted events and activities shall not create sound levels which violate any ordinance of the City of Anaheim. 16. That at all times during assembly, security measures provided shall be adequate to deter unlawful conduct on the part of employees or patrons, or to promote the safe and orderly assembly and movement of persons and vehicles, or to prevent disturbance of the neighborhood by excessive noise created by patrons entering or leaving the premises. The security measures implemented for each event, including the number of security guards shall be subject to review and approval by the Police Department. 17. 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. 18. That the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises shall be prohibited. 19. That the number of persons attending the event shall not exceed the maximum occupancy load as determined by the Anaheim Fire Department. Signs indicating the occupant load shall be posted in a conspicuous place on an approved sign near the main exit from the room. -3- PC2005- 20. That the doors shall remain closed but unlocked at all times that entertainment is permitted, except during times of entry or exit, emergencies and deliveries. 21. That all employees shall be clothed in such a way as to not expose "specified anatomical areas" as described in Section 7.16.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 22. That no minor under the age of sixteen (16) years shall be allowed , unless accompanied by a parent or guardian. 23. That the business shall not 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. 24. That there shall be at least one meal of a substantial nature in conjunction with an event as described in Section 4.16.050.030 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 25. That the floor space provided for dancing shall be free of any furniture or partitions and maintained in a smooth and safe condition. 26. That there shall be no amusement machines, video game devices, or pool tables maintained upon the premises. 27. That no "happy hour" type of reduced price alcoholic beverage promotion shall be permitted. 28. That no alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on any property adjacent to the licensed premises under the control of the licensee(s). 29. That there shall be no admission fee, cover charge nor minimum purchase required for admittance. 30. That the applicant(s) shall ensure that on -site security police the area under their control in an effort to prevent the loitering of persons about the premises. 31. That the applicant shall not share any profits, or pay any percentage or commission to a promoter or any other person, based upon monies collected as a door charge, cover charge, or any other form of admission charge, including minimum drink orders, or the sale of drinks. 32. That the hours of operation shall be limited to 5 p.m. to 12 a.m. (midnight) Friday through Sunday. 33. That a kitchen shall be installed within the banquet hall in order to comply with requirements of ABC (Alcoholic Beverage Control). Such information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Planning Services Division approval. 34. That subject property shall be developed and maintained 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. 35. That prior to the commencement of this activity or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 2, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 33 and 34, 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. 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. -4- PC2005- THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 1, 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 ATTEST: 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 June 1, 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 Attachment - Item No. 7 To: Amy Vazquez Planning Department From: A /Sergeant J. Kirkpatrick Vice Detail CC: Date: May 12, 2005 RE: CUP 2005 -04981 Banquet Facility 313 W. Cerritos Avenue Bldg 1 A24 Anaheim, CA 92805 The Police Department has received an I.D.C. Route Sheet for CUP - 2005- 04981. The applicant is requesting to permit a banquet facility with the sale and service of a Type 47(on -sale general- eating place) alcoholic beverage license. The location is within Reporting District 2025, which has a Crime Rate of 188 percent above average. It is also within Census Tract Number 874.03 which has a population of 3,735. This population allows for 3 off sale Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses and there are presently 5 licenses in the tract. It also allows for 4 on sale licenses and there are presently 4 in the tract. The census tract boundaries are: North Ball Rd South 5 Freeway East Haster Ave West 5 Freeway Off sale licenses in the immediate vicinity of the applicant: 116 -18 Winston Rd 333 W. Ball Rd 1459 S. Anaheim Blvd 1221 S. Anaheim Blvd 1200 S. Harbor Blvd Anaheim Police Dept. 425 S. Harbor Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 TEL: 714.765.1401 FAX: 714.765.1665 Attachment - Item No. 7 Memorandum Amy Vazquez Banquet Facility On sale licenses in the vicinity of the applicant 1215'/2 S. Anaheim Blvd 317 -321 W. Cerritos Ave 1221 S. Harbor Blvd 1490 S. Anaheim Blvd The census tracts surrounding this location are as follows: North — 874.05 population 6,649 On Sale allowed 7 /active 5 Off Sale allowed 4 /active 5 South — 875.01 population 5,950 On Sale allowed 7 /active 32 Off Sale allowed 4 /active 12 West — 875.01 population 5,950 On Sale allowed 7 /active 32 Off Sale allowed 4 /active 12 East — 863.03 population 4,532 On Sale allowed 5 /active 19 Off Sale allowed 3 /active 5 Additional Census Tract information: North West — 871.06. population 4,990 On Sale allowed 6 /active 3 Off Sale allowed 3 /active 3 pend 2 pend North East — 874.05 population 6,649 On Sale allowed 7 /active 5 Off Sale allowed 4 /active 5 South West — 875.01 population 5,950 On Sale allowed 7 /active 32 Off Sale allowed 4 /active 12 South East — 875.04 population 8,248 On Sale allowed 9 /active 4 Off Sale allowed 5 /active 2 pend 1 pend 1 The Police Department has not responded to this industrial business location within the last year. No reports have been taken. The Reporting District north of the location is 1925; it has a crime rate of 129 percent above average. The Reporting District east is 2026; it has a crime rate of 52 percent above average. West is 2024; with a rate of 68 percent below average, and south of the location is 2125, with a crime rate of 136 percent above average. Page 2 Attachment - Item No. 7 Memorandum Amy Vazquez Banquet Facility The Police Department opposes this request due to the high crime rate and over concentration of licenses in this area. This establishment does not have a kitchen at this time. In order for them to obtain an ABC License they will need to have a full kitchen and prepare the food for the banquets at this location. They will not meet the criteria for a license otherwise. The crime statistics have been run for their current business location, and there was only one call for a drunk in a car. The applicant will have to apply for Public Convenience or Necessity with the Department of Alcoholic Beverage and Control. If PC or N is granted the Police Department requests that the following conditions be placed on the Conditional Use Permit: The permitted event or activity shall not create sound levels which violate any ordinance of the City of Anaheim. (Section 4.16.100.010 Anaheim Municipal Code) 2. At all times that dancing is being permitted, security measures provided shall be adequate to deter unlawful conduct on the part of employees or patrons, or to promote the safe and orderly assembly and movement of persons and vehicles, or to prevent disturbance of the neighborhood by excessive noise created by patrons entering or leaving the premises. (Section 4.16.070 Anaheim Municipal Code) 3. 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) 4. The operation of any business under this permit, shall not be in violation of any provision of the Anaheim Municipal Code, State or County ordinance. (Section 4.16.100.010 Anaheim Municipal Code) 5. The sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises shall be prohibited. 6. The number of persons attending the event shall not exceed the maximum occupancy load as determined by the Anaheim Fire Department. Signs indicating the occupant load shall be posted in a conspicuous place on an approved sign near the main exit from the room. (Section 25.114(a) Uniform Fire Code) 7. The doors shall remain closed at all times that entertainment is permitted, except during times of entry or exit, emergencies and deliveries. (Section 4.18.110 Anaheim Municipal Code) Page 3 Attachment - Item No. 7 Memorandum Amy Vazquez Banquet Facility 8. The business shall not be operated in such a way as to be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. (Section 4.16.100.010 Anaheim Municipal Code) 9. All employees shall be clothed in such a way as to not expose "specified anatomical areas" as described in Section 7.16.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code 10. There shall be no admission fee, cover charge, nor minimum purchase required. (Section 4.16.030.010 Anaheim Municipal Code) 11. No minor under the age of sixteen (16) years shall be allowed to attend the dance, unless accompanied by a parent or guardian. (Section 4.16.060.010 Anaheim Municipal Code) 12. The business shall not 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. (Section 24200.5 Alcoholic Beverage Control Act) 13. There must be served at least one meal of a substantial nature as described in Section 4.16.050.030 Anaheim Municipal Code. 14. The floor space provided for dancing shall be free of any furniture or partitions and maintained in a smooth and safe condition. (Section 4.16.050.010 Anaheim Municipal Code) 15. The business shall be maintained as a legitimate restaurant as defined in Section 18.01.190 Anaheim Municipal Code, and contains an area designed and utilized for food preparation which constitutes not less than twenty -five percent (25 %) of the gross floor area of the establishment. (Section 4.16.050.030 Anaheim Municipal Code) 16. Any violation of the application, or any attached conditions, shall be sufficient grounds to revoke the permit. (Section 4.16.100.010 Anaheim Municipal Code) 17. There shall be no amusement machines, video game devices, or pool tables maintained upon the premises without issuance of proper permits as required by the Anaheim Municipal Code. 18. No "happy hour type of reduced price alcoholic beverage promotion shall be allowed. Page 4 Attachment - Item No. 7 Memorandum Amy Vazquez Banquet Facility 19. No alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on any property adjacent to the licensed premises under the control of the licensee(s). 20. Petitioner(s) shall police the area under their control in an effort to prevent the loitering of persons about the premises. 21. Petitioner shall not share any profits, or pay any percentage or commission to a promoter or any other person, based upon monies collected as a door charge, cover charge, or any other form of admission charge, including minimum drink orders, or the sale of drinks. 22. No alcohol shall be allowed in the patio area. Signs must be posted at doors stating "No alcohol beyond this point ". Please contact me at extension 1455 if you require further information in regards to this matter. f: \home \mmirwin \2005 -04981 CUP Banquet Facility 313 W Cerritos.doc Page 5 N � April 4, 2005 4 DICII (A Mr. Oscar Ramirez 175 W. Cerritos Avenue Anaheim, CA Subject: Prefile No. 2005 -00013 Dear Mr. Ramirez: 1. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS • TRAFFIC SAFETY ENGINEERS, INC. TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION �1 RECOMMEND BY APPROVAL COMMENTS: DATE: 4 `sx ` ° This report summarizes our traffic parking study for the proposed banquet facility to be located at 7j5 W� . Cerritos Avenue, Anaheim. We trust that the findings of this parking study will be of assistance to you and the City of Anaheim. The project is to be located within the Anaheim Business Campus at the southwest corner of Cerritos Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard in Anaheim. The Business Campus consists of eight buildings. A total of 494 parking spaces are available for the business center. West Cerritos Avenue is a cul -de -sac street with a curb -to -curb width ofeet. It can accommodate approximately in s aces on both sides of the street. A copy of the Business Campus site plan is shown in Exhi it `A ". Existing "The Place Banquet Hall" facility is located at 1383 Gene Autry Way, Anaheim. The project proposes to relocate this banquet facility to the Anaheim Business Campus. It will occupy Suites 167 and 1 75 of Building No. 2 for a total floor area o15.1 73 square feet. The banquet facility proposes a total of.;Zdining tables for a maximum seating capacity of (X ersorls. A total of 6 cerverg will be employed. The facility proposes to open only on Saturdays, from 5 nl-n-ciaidniaht for banquet use. Once a month, the banquet facility may be opened, depending on demands, to the public on Friday and Sunday evenings. Cup NQ 2005 - 0 4 9 8 1 Suite Number and Use Square Feet Code Parking Requirement Per 1,000 square feet of GFA Parking Required Building One 305 - 513/325/329/337 /353 Office & Industrial 14,98 (7,691 excess office) 1.55 plus 4 spaces for office area in excess of 10% of total GFA for office area 42.3 317 -321 Moose Lodge 3,462 Per parking study analysis 28 333 Industrial 1,728 1.55 2.7 355 Office 2,853 4 11.4 Building Two 125 -157 Adult Daycare 13,650 1 space per employee plus 1 space per 10 clients' 32 159/163 Office /Industrial 3,460 (776 excess office) 1.55 plus 4 spaces for office area in excess of 10% of total GFA for office area and 1.55 for industrial area 7.3 167 -175 Proposed Banquet facility 5,173 29 for assembly area 150 Building Three 100 /110 /120 Office 9,126 4 36.4 Building Four 150/160 Office 16,564 4 66.2 Building Five 190/194/198Office 8,257 4 33 196 Office /Industrial 1,733 (691 excess office) 1.55 plus 4 spaces for office area in excess of 10% of total GFA for office area and 1.55 for industrial area 2.2 Building Six 210- 228/232 - 240/254/260 Office /Industrial 22,086 (excess office 9,104) 1.55 plus 4 spaces for office area in excess of 10% of total GFA for office area and 1.55 for industrial area 56.5 Building Seven 300 Medical Officeer 1,156 6 7 302/304/308/310 362- 392,394 Offices 26,409 4 105.6 300B,Vacant 4,217 4 17 354, Vacant 2,613 4 10.5 306 -312, Vacant 5,629 4 22.5 Building Eight 201 Office 2,359 4 9.4 209 Restaurant 1,144 8 9.1 217 - 225/229/233/245 /251- 255/259/263/271 /285/287 289/291 /293/295/299 Offices 17,617 4 70.5 TOTAL X721 Page 2 2. PARKING CODE REQUIREMENTS • • Based on the City of Anaheim's Parking Code requirements, a total of 720 parking spaces are required for the Anaheim Business Campus. Detailed breakdown of site uses is shown below: CUP Np, 2005 - 0 4 9 8 1 Time of Day Highest Number of Parked Vehicles Observed 3 -25 -2005 (Friday) 3 -26 -2005 (Saturday) 3 -27 -2005 (Sunday) 5:00 PM 106 62 51 7:00 PM 61 52 45 Page 3 3. PARKING UTILIZATION SURVEYS Parking utilization surveys conducted for Friday, Saturday and Sunday at various peak parking demand periods for the Anaheim Business Campus are tabulated below: 4. PARKING ANALYSIS The existing banquet hall is located at 1380 Gene Autry Way in Anaheim. It is a banquet/meeting facility with a total seating capacity of 300 persons. Parking lot survey conducted on March 26, 2005 around 7:30 pm for a banquet event indicates the following: Number of parked vehicles: 36 Number of persons attending banquet: 126 Derived parking rate = 126 persons = 3.5 36 vehicles • • Based on the above derived parking rate of 3.5 persons per vehicle, the peak parking demand for the proposed banquet facility at the Anaheim Business Campus is calculated as follows: 300 persons = 86 parking spaces 3.5 persons per parking space C 3 �+ z.r 5. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS c IZ0 dame Our parking utilization surveys indicated that oq Fridav, Saturdav a s, almost all of the business and industrial uses of the Anaheim Business Campus are closed when the proposed banquet facility opens for dining and parties. The 4. parking spaces provided for the business center can adequately serve the banquet facility's peak parking demands of 86 spaces for patrons plus 6 spaces for employees plus 106 spaces from the Business Campus, totaling 198 spaces. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude the existing 494 parking spaces provided for the Business Campus are more than adequate to serve the peak parking demands of the entire Business Campus including the proposed banquet facility. CUP Na 2005 - 0 4 9 P 1 Page 4 Section 18.06.080 of the Anaheim Parking Ordinance requires certain findings to be made before parking waivers can be granted by the Planning Commission. On the basis of this report, five findings must be made. The findings and specific responses are provided as follows: A. That the variance, 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 reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. Response: The parking study indicates that the peak parking demand for off - street parking spaces is substantially lower than the quantity provided for the Business Campus including the proposed banquet facility. B. That the variance, 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. Response: Response: The Business Campus will not increase or compete for on- street parking because its parking lot has more than adequate parking to accommodate both the center and proposed banquet facility's peak parking demands. C. That the variance, 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 the Code) The Business Campus parking lot is physically separated from other adjacent development. Furthermore, there is no reason to encroach other parking facilities because the Campus's parking lot provides ample parking as indicated in the parking analysis. D. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such uses. CUP pp. 2005 - 0 4 9 8 1 Page 5 Response: Traffic and parking congestion will not occur because the supply of parking spaces is almost double the anticipated project peak parking demand. E. That the variance, 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. Response: The Business Campus is physically separated from the adjacent private properties. Therefore, there will be no impeding of traffic access into or out of adjacent parking lots. Should you need additional information or clarification of this parking study, please feel free to call us at any time. Very truly yours, C. Hui Lai, P.E. Traffic Engineer • • CUP NO. 2005 - 0 4 9 8 1 /2005 17:20 111111111 FROM: • ANAHEIM BOULEVARD P PP sP EXHIBIT "a" 17149741043 P. J The information contained herein was chained from thin) parties. and it has not been independently verified by the real w ate broken: Buyer /tenants should have the eapr"a of their choice inspect the property and verify all information. Real estate broken arc not qualified to act as or select eaprrts with respect to legal, tat environmental, building construction, sods-drainage or other such matters Be Rd Genoa Ave. t l Wells Ave. State College Shoe Orange Fwy. f 57 Gorden Grove Fury. (22) Metsun Su mem I /2005 17:20 111111111 FROM: • ANAHEIM BOULEVARD P PP sP EXHIBIT "a" 17149741043 P. J The information contained herein was chained from thin) parties. and it has not been independently verified by the real w ate broken: Buyer /tenants should have the eapr"a of their choice inspect the property and verify all information. Real estate broken arc not qualified to act as or select eaprrts with respect to legal, tat environmental, building construction, sods-drainage or other such matters ITEM N0. 8 11 RCL 73 -7441 94 -1 SMALL INDUSTRIAL N SP 94 -1 RCL 70 -71 -47 (22) RCL 70 -71 -46 SCE DA 2 I I SP 94 -1 RCL 70 -71 -47 (22) RCL 70 -71 -46 T -CUP 2001 -04390 RCL 65-66 -17 X CUP 2000 -04272 J RCL 70 - 71 - 47 (22) RS -2 CUP 3749 SP 94 -1 RCL 70 -71 -46 :UP 2002 - 04581 CUP 2377 RCL 70 -71 -47 (18) Q RCL 65 - 66 - 17 CALIBER MOTORS RCL 70 -71 -46 DA 2 :UP 2002 -04535 DA 2 U.S. POSTAL SERVICE 1 DU EACH w LU PROCESSING & DIST. UP 2001 -04355 C-G RCL 70 -7147 (22) CENTER RCL 70 -71 -46 RCL 70 -71-46 DA 2 CUP 3984 COMMERCIAL T -CUP 2001 -04390 CUP 2000 - 04272 COMM. LIGHTING I j 0 U VAR 3612 RETAIL CENTER CUP 2377 W CN LU U o Z .- O � U ORANG '�J ORPE AVENUE SP 94 -1 RCL 70 -71 -47 (18) RCL 70 -71 -46 VAR 4187 CLOTHESTIME . Ne Ka an SP 94 -1 SP 94 -1 p RCL 70 -71 -46 SMALL INDUSTRIAL o dip RCL 70 -71 -47 (22) FIRMS M CUP 2005 -04971 SMALL INDUSTRIA HUNTER AVENUE I7-W 320 Few a °r d SP 94 -1 RCL 70 -71 -47 (22) RCL 70 -71 -46 PACIFIC TRANSFORMER DA 2 SP 94 -1 SMALL INDUSTRIAL SP 94 -1 VAR 3667 FIRMS SP 94 -1 RCL 70 -71 -47 (22) RCL 70 -71 -46 SCE DA 2 w w U) SP 94 -1 RCL 70 -71 -47 (22) RCL 70 -71 -46 T -CUP 2001 -04390 SP 94 -1 X CUP 2000 -04272 RCL 70 - 71 - 47 (22) w CUP 3749 SP 94 -1 RCL 70 -71 -46 CUP 2377 RCL 70 -71 -47 (18) ENVIROFLEX CALIBER MOTORS RCL 70 -71 -46 DA 2 DA 2 U.S. POSTAL SERVICE SP 94 -1 m PROCESSING & DIST. RCL 70 -71 -47 (22) RCL 70 -7147 (22) CENTER RCL 70 -71 -46 RCL 70 -71-46 DA 2 CUP 2940 T -CUP 2001 -04390 CUP 2000 - 04272 COMM. LIGHTING CUP 3749 DA 2 CUP 2377 RS -3 CL 70 -71 -55 CL 65 -66 -17 CUP 1500 VAR 2655 1 DU 2 - U- 6 W IY _C�D_ D � J J O Z Y Q SNOW V 0 RCL' RC RENAI SP 94 -1 RCL 70 -71 -4 RCL 70 -71 T -CUP 2003 CUP 2000 -0 T -CUP 2000 CUP 41 (CUP 33C Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04971 Subject Property Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: HIDCO INC. Q.S. No. 177 REQUEST TO PERMIT AN INDOOR PRIVATE RECREATION FACILITY. 5395 East Hunter Avenue - Pump It Up 1824 Item No. 2 4 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04971 Subject Property Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: HIDCO INC. Q.S. No. 177 REQUEST TO PERMIT AN INDOOR PRIVATE RECREATION FACILITY. 5395 East Hunter Avenue - Pump It Up 1824 y r � Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 8 8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion) 8b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04971 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 2.1 -acre property has a frontage of 320 feet on the north side of Hunter Avenue, a maximum depth of 302 feet and is located 110 feet north of the centerline of Brasher Street (5395 East Hunter Avenue — Pump It Up). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of conditional use permit under authority of Code Section No. 18.120.070.050.0529 to permit an indoor private recreation facility. BACKGROUND: (3) This property is developed with a two - tenant industrial building and is zoned SP94 -1, DA 2 (SC) (Northeast Area Specific Plan, Expanded Industrial Area — Scenic Corridor Overlay). The Anaheim General Plan designates this property and properties on the east, west, and south sides for Industrial land uses. Properties to the north across the railroad tracks and Orangethorpe Avenue are designated for Low Density Residential land uses. (4) There are no prior zoning actions pertaining to this property. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (5) The applicant requests a conditional use permit to establish an indoor children's playground facility with interactive inflatable attractions. (6) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates an existing two -unit, two - story, industrial building. The site plan indicates a shared land use with Cristek Interconnects, an electronic manufacturing business. The floor plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates the subject facility is located in the rear (easterly) tenant space facing Hunter Avenue. (7) Vehicular access is provided via two driveways on Hunter Avenue. Code requires land uses without a specified parking ratio to comply with requirements determined to be reasonably necessary by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager through a parking demand study. Based upon comparable businesses in surrounding cities, the City Traffic and Transportation Manager has determined that the proposed land use in conjunction with an industrial land use would require a minimum of 85parking spaces for weekday and weekend operation hours, 41 spaces for the industrial use and 44 spaces for the proposed use. The site plan indicates a total of 126 on -site parking spaces including handicapped spaces. Srcup2005 -04971 klw.doc Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 8 (8) The floor plan (Exhibit Nos. 2 and 3) indicates an approximately 35,000 square foot facility containing two - units, one currently occupied by an industrial use. Plans indicate the current industrial use of approximately 24,500 square foot has a parts assembly area, machine shop, laboratory and engineering facility, cafeteria, training hall, recreation center, and offices. The proposed commercial recreation facility would occupy a 10,500 square foot suite containing two (2) party rooms, two (2) offices, two (2) restrooms, and two (2) activity rooms. Each special event would occupy one (1) party room and one (1) activity room. (9) Photographs indicate an existing two -story tilt -up concrete building. Entryway doors for the proposed facility are located along the east elevation facing the parking lot. No exterior modifications are proposed as part of this application. View of the building from the north facing Hunter Avenue (10) No sign or landscape plans were submitted with this application. Pictures and staff inspections of the site indicate there are currently four (4) trees within the front setback of the property. Code requires a minimum of sixteen (16) trees - one (1) tree for every twenty (20) linear feet of street frontage (320 feet /20 feet = 16 trees) within the setback along Hunter Avenue. (11) The submitted letter of operation indicates the proposed recreation facility will host private parties by appointment only for a total of two (2) hours, comprised of ninety (90) minutes in the activity center and thirty (30) minutes in the party room for each special event. Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 8 Operating hours will be from 9:30 AM to 10 PM daily with parties on weekdays between 3:30 PM and 10 PM and the entire day on the weekends. From Monday through Thursday, each party will host a maximum of fifteen (15) children and from Friday through Sunday each party will host a maximum of twenty -five (25) children. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (12) 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 a significant effect on the environment. EVALUATION: (13) Code permits indoor children's playground facilities with interactive inflatable attractions in the SP94 -1, DA2 (SC) zone subject to approval of a conditional use permit. (14) One of the two units within the industrial building is currently occupied with an existing industrial use. Staff is concerned with compatibility issues associated with locating a children's party facility within a multi- tenant industrial building. In addition to the existing industrial business that currently occupies the majority of the building, other permitted industrial businesses could occupy the building in the future, without discretionary review by the Planning Commission. Moreover, operational issues inherent in industrial uses such as loading, storage, large equipment movement, noise, vibration and odors are a cause for concern due to the lack of a buffer between the proposed facility and the existing industrial business. (15) The proposed use may result in potential equity issues as existing industrial businesses find themselves restricted from expanding because of the establishment of children related facilities. Therefore, the proposed use may adversely affect the adjoining land use or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located. It is necessary to maintain an appropriate balance of land uses to ensure that the community's residential, recreational, educational, spiritual, retail, business, and employment needs are met. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the request for indoor commercial recreation facility. FINDINGS• (16) 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 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 18.66.010 (Approval Authority); Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 8 (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 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 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 will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. RECOMMENDATION: (17) 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 deny this request to permit an indoor private recreation facility based on the findings contained in the attached resolution. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SUBMITTED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS, ACTING AS AN INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE AND ARE RECOMMENDED FOR ADOPTION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN THE EVENT THAT THIS PERMIT IS APPROVED. 1. That subject use permit shall expire one (1) year from the date of this resolution, on June 1, 2006. 2. That trash storage areas shall be refurbished to comply with approved plans on file with the Public Works Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division approval. 3. That if an alarm system is installed, a Burglary /Robbery Alarm Permit application, Form APD 516, shall be completed and submitted to the Police Department prior to initial alarm activation. This form is available at the Police Department front counter. 4. That four (4) foot high rooftop address numbers shall be painted flat on the roof in contrasting color to the rooftop material and shall not be visible from ground level. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 5. That a Fire Emergency Listing Card, Form APD -281, shall be completed and submitted to Police Department. The form is available at the Police Department front counter. 6. That a landscape and irrigation plan for subject property shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. Plans shall reflect the addition of twelve (12) minimum 24 -inch box sized evergreen trees within the front setback along Hunter Avenue for a total of sixteen (16) trees as required by Code. Any decision by City staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 8 7. That sign plans for this unit shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. Any decision by City staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. 8. 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. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted Police Department, Community Services Division approval. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. That existing gates must remain open during business hours to make all parking spaces accessible. 12. That all doors serving the subject indoor recreation facility 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. 13. That at all times when the premises is open for business, the premises shall be maintained as a bona fide indoor recreation facility that is engaged primarily in children's parties. 14. That no outdoor uses and /or assembly shall occur on this property. 15. That the hours of operation shall be limited to 9:30 a.m. to 10 p.m., daily. 16. 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, 2 and 3, and as conditioned herein. 17. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution, or within one (1) year from the date of this resolution whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 16 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. 18. 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 5 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04971 BE DENIED 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: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 3 AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 179, PAGES 5 AND 6 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, SHOWN AS PARCEL 2 ON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 84- 237234, OFFICIAL RECORDS. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 1, 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 use, to permit a children's indoor private recreation facility, is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.120.070.050.0529. 2. That the proposed children's indoor private recreation facility would adversely affect the adjoining industrial land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is located 3. That the proximity of the proposed children's indoor private recreation facility to the adjacent industrial uses (including sharing the same building and premises) would create incompatible issues due to lack of control over the operation of adjacent industrial businesses resulting in potentially detrimental effects to the health and safety of the area. 4. That the close proximity of the adjacent industrial use does not allow a buffer from elements such as noise, vibration, and odors. 5. 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 children's indoor private recreation facility 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 deny subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, on the basis of the aforementioned findings. CR \PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 1, 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 ATTEST: 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 June 1, 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 -2- PC2005- PROJECT DESCRIPTION BUSINESS DESCRIPTION - GENERAL Definition of terms: • • PROJECT DESCRIPTION PUMP IT UP ANAHEIM HILLS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION MARCH 1, 2005 Pump It Up Inflatable Party Zone is a safe and fun indoor children's activity center for private parties and special occasions (primarily children's birthday parties). The activity center will house interactive inflatable attractions, i.e. bounce house, obstacle courses, etc. to be used by a private party of up to 25 children per "arena ". Key points to consider for zoning clarification: • Pump It Up does not produce any food on the premises. • The pizza and soda are an optional added convenience, and the customers do not need to purchase it in order to have a party at Pump It Up. • Approximately one -half of the customers request soda and pizza for the functions. • If ordered, the pizza is delivered to the site by a local pizza vendor that Pump It Up has under contract. • When classifying Pump It Up, most cities have determined that the facility is most closely linked to a gymnastics studio, ballet studio or karate facility. This is because the facilities are never open to the general public (on a "drop -in basis ") and are only open by appointment. Interactive Inflatable - industrial -grade vinyl and rubber structure inflated with forced air (not compressed air) provided by a "squirrel cage" blower unit. The inflatables are similar to hot -air balloons, in that their construction prevents them from "popping" or becoming excessively inflated. Passive, one -way exit air flaps open when a set inflation is reached thereby maintaining the optimum level of inflation. Once the blower is turned off, the inflatables self- deflate completely in less than 3 minutes. Blower Unit- a 2'x2'x2' metal box housing a 15 -amp electric motor and a squirrel cage fan that forces air into the Interactive Inflatable through a 10" diameter flexible duct. Activity Area (Arena) - the largest section of the facility. This is the area that will house the inflatables and blowers. Party Room - an area adjoining the Activity Area to be used by the party guests for refreshments and gifts. Arena Supervisor- a staff member who remains on the floor of the Activity Area during a party to maintain safety and assist guests. CUP $Q - 2005 -04971 Pump It Up Anaheim Hills Conditional Use Permit Application March 1, 2005 Page 2 Hours of Operation: Each party will be required to secure advanced date reservations. At no time will the facility be open to the general public on a drop - in basis. Reservations for parties will be accepted for dates Sunday thru Saturday, with the earliest party beginning at 9:30 A.M. and the last party ending not later than 10:00 P.M. Each party will be limited to 2 hours total time (up to 90 minutes in the Activity Centers with the balance in the Party Room). Please note that 90 of the parties are held when the surrounding businesses are closed. (e.g. on the weekends or "after hours" during the week). Physical Set -Up: Party guests will enter the facility at the front entrance of the building into the Lobby Area. From the Lobby Area, the group will move to one of the two Activity Areas. From the Activity Areas the group will move to the Party Room, then back to the Lobby to exit the building. Parking and Traffic: • • At no time will Pump It Up be open to the public for drop -in visitors. There are currently 126 parking spaces for the building, including the existing handicapped parking. Of these, Pump It Up is guaranteed up to 20 stalls in their lease agreement with the landlord. Including employees, there should not be more than 17 cars at any given time, as it has been Pump It Up's experience at their other facilities that a majority of parents drop off their children at parties, then pick -up at the end. The data for 17 cars were derived from the attached parking counts from existing facilities, and represents the highest number of parking stalls used at the Lake Forest facility (17 stalls between 5:00 pm and 7:00 pm on Tuesday, April 29, 2003). Attached please find an Excel spreadsheet that outlines the parking demands at three different Pump It Up facilities in California. These include two "single arena" facilities in Lake Forest and Concord, along with a "double arena" facility in the City of Pleasanton. These data clearly demonstrate that the 20 parking stalls to be assigned to Pump It Up on -site will be more than sufficient to service the needs of Pump It Up. Additionally, a letter from Pump It Up's Director of Construction is attached which outlines how the parking tabulations and calculations were completed. CUP Na 2005 -04971 Pump It Up Anaheim Hills Conditional Use Permit Application March 1, 2005 Page 3 • • In addition to the Excel spreadsheet, attached is also a letter dated July 30, 2003 from the Shruti Patel, Contract Planner with the City of Lake Forest to Ms. Shirley Barney, the Community Development Director in Plymouth, Michigan. The letter states that the Pump It Up facility operating in the City of Lake Forest "only utilizes a maximum of 10 parking spaces since most of the parents usually drop off and pick up their children at the facility." This demonstrates Pump It Up's assertion that many, if not the majority of parents drop their children off or consolidate into a few vehicles when bringing guests to the facility. The proposed Pump It Up facility will operate in a very controlled manner. Each party will be required to secure advanced date reservations. At no time will the facility be open to the general public on a drop -in basis. Reservations for parties will be accepted for dates Sunday thru Saturday, with the earliest party beginning at 9:30 am and the last party ending not later than 10:00 pm. Each party will be limited to 2 hours total time (up to 90 minutes in the Activity Centers and the balance in the Party Room). Please note that 90% of the parties are held when the surrounding businesses are closed (e.g. on the weekends or "after hours" during the week). The data included with this letter clearly indicate that the maximum possible parking demand during the Monday through Friday workweek would be 17 stalls. The data for 17 cars were derived from the attached parking counts from the Lake Forest facility, and represents the highest number of parking stalls used at that facility (17 stalls between 5:00 pm and 7:00 pm on Tuesday, April 29, 2003). As can clearly be seen in the attached spreadsheets, the parking for the facility will be more than adequate, especially given the fact that the Pump It Up facility has a peak demand when many of the surrounding businesses in the area will be closed (weekends, and weekday evenings). Cristek Interconnects, Inc owns the building. Using approximately 28,000 square feet of the building, Cristek manufactures and assembles cabling in a "clean room" environment for both the aerospace and medical industries. There are essentially no odors or emissions from the operations of the manufacturing / assembly area. It is not an open warehouse type of space. Because of the need for the "clean room" area, there will be a full height wall separating the Pump It Up lease area from the rest of the building. They do not own or operate a forklift. They operate two manufacturing /assembly shifts, the first being from 5 am to 1 pm, and the second from 2 pm to 10 pm. It should be noted that the second shift has many fewer employees working than the first shift, and that the vast majority of those individuals employed with the second shift carpool, ride the bus, or are dropped off at the building. The majority of the office and administrative staff work from 9 am to 5 pm Monday through CUP 1, 2005 - 04971 Pump It Up Anaheim Hills Conditional Use Permit Application March 1, 2005 Page 4 Food and Drinks: • • Friday. Based on this information, the peak parking demand for Cristek is between the hours of 5 am and 1 pm, when their largest manufacturing/ assembly shift is working. It should be noted that approximately 12,000 square feet of currently vacant space on the second floor is set aside for future office space expansion by the owner. Given the facts outlined above, both the Pump It Up facility and Cristek Interconnects, Inc., will have more than sufficient parking on -site. Finally, it should be noted that there is an agreement between Pump It Up and Cristek that states Pump It Up has the right to use any vacant on -site parking stalls available after 1 pm, agreement available upon request. The uses surrounding the proposed project property are all industrial in nature. There are no sensitive land uses adjacent to the site, with the closest residential use located north of the project site, across both the adjacent railroad tracks and East Orangethorpe Avenue. Many of the surrounding buildings are used by automobile - related companies, due to the proximity to the auto dealers located along East La Palma Avenue. Based on these factors, we do not believe there is any potential for land use conflict between the proposed project and the surrounding business and uses. Pump It Up will not produce or prepare any food or meals whatsoever. Depending on city, county and state codes, Pump It Up will have restaurant - prepared pizza delivered with canned or bottled sodas. Birthday cakes and desserts, if any, must be provided by the party host. Pump It Up will provide a refrigerator for the customer's use during the party. Environmental Concerns: Hazardous Materials: There are no hazardous materials, emissions, runoff or waste associated with the use of inflatables. Small quantities of janitorial supplies will be stored on site. Noise: The 15 -amp electric blowers, the high volume of moving air and excited children will combine to create noise levels. With the huge Activity Area having tall ceilings, and the fact that the building is located in an industrial area of the City, we do not anticipate these noise levels exceeding any health or zoning code. Pump It Up has experienced no noise related complaints in any of their 80 existing facilities nationwide. CUP NQ 2005 -04971 Pump It Up Anaheim Hills Conditional Use Permit Application March 1, 2005 Page 5 • • Trash: We estimate each party will generate not more than two 33- gallon trash bags filled mostly with paper plates, cups and food waste. There is an existing dumpster location on -site for refuse disposal. Electrical /Water Consumption: No industrial -level equipment will be used in this business. Five 15 -amp blowers will be in use for the inflatables in addition to the listed office equipment, appliances and lighting. Water consumption will be limited to lavatory and water fountain use only. Business /Party Operations As guests arrive, they will be allowed to sit in the reception lobby until the balance of their group arrives. When the group has assembled, the Arena Supervisor will escort them into the Activity Area where they will see the interactive inflatables. The Arena Supervisor will direct the group to a seating area where they can remove and store their shoes while listening to instructions, general behavior and safety rules on DVD. At the completion of the talk, the group will be allowed to enter the Activity Area and enjoy the inflatables. The Arena Supervisor will remain on the floor to monitor the Activity Area and render assistance where needed. At no time will this area be unsupervised during a party. After not more than 90 minutes, the Arena Supervisor will indicate time is up and to get shoes on to go to the Party Room for the balance of the party. The Supervisor will escort the group to the Party Room and provide any assistance the party host requires, but will then leave the room to prepare for the next group, if any. Another staff member will then assist the party with further needs. After a total of 2 hours, the host will be advised time is up and direct the group back to the lobby to wait for rides and parents. At no time, may the party host leave before all party members have been picked up. EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS Interactive Inflatables: are made of industrial -grade vinyl and rubber and are inflated with blown air (not compressed air) provided by a squirrel cage blower unit. The blower unit must remain on as long as the inflatable is in use to provide a constant flow of air. The inflatables are similar to hot -air balloons, in that their construction prevents them from "popping" or becoming excessively inflated. Passive, one -way exit air flaps open when a set inflation is reached thereby maintaining the optimum level of CUP NQ. 2005 -04971 • Pump It Up Anaheim Hills Conditional Use Permit Application March 1, 2005 Page 6 inflation. Once the blower is turned off, the inflatables self- deflate completely in less than 3 minutes. Surfacing: all parts of the Activity Area floor used for foot traffic will be covered with a padded, indoor /outdoor grade carpet approved for this facility. Electronic: a standard suite of office equipment such as PC's and peripheral equipment. Appliances: a refrigerator for sodas and customer - supplied cakes brought in during the party. Furniture: standard office furniture, lobby seating, conference tables and chairs in the Party Room. Special /Unique Equipment: each inflatable requires a squirrel cage blower unit that is rated at 15 amps /110V -AC with a start -up draw of 20 amps. These units are self - contained and UL- approved devices for both indoor and outdoor use. CUP NQ 2005 -04971 1. Executive Summary • • HOUSE OF BOUNCE PARTIES Business Plan House of Bounce Parties will a be fun place to have children's birthday parties marketing kindergarten through 6th graders as an alternative to the traditional backyard birthday party. This concept will allow parents to enjoy and participate in the fun of their children's special day instead of the busyness in preparing for the party, serving food and then cleaning up the mess. In additional parents will not have the worry of young children running through their home and causing unintentional damage nor lingering family and guess after the busy day. Overall making a more enjoyable party in shorter time that will cost less than doing it yourself. Due to the never - ending cycle of birthdays along with families becoming busier than ever and the location within high- income region, this business is expected to have instant and lasting success. 11. Organization Plan: The Business: • This business is a commercial recreation business to provide a fun and very interactive place for children birthday parties. Each party will be 2 '/2 hours in length broken into 2 parts. First all the children from one party and their parents will be placed in a very large private room containing a 30 ft. by 45 ft. inflatable. This inflatable contains several stations for play. There is a 15 ft high slide, zip line, obstacle course, 35 ft. winding tunnel to crawl through and large jumping areas for free play. After 90 minutes the children along with parents move to their private party room for eating pizza, punch cake and ice cream along with opening of presents and singing to the birthday child. As the party moves from the playroom to the party room, another party has been prepared and is ready to enter the playroom. Parties will stagger approximately 90 minutes apart as to not allow the parties to "interrhingle" providing safety and a sense of individual importance to each party • Expected bookings and; growth for first month following 3 month per - opening marketing blitz: !t is believed that bookings will be at 60% full as we open 8 -1 -05 (being slimmer) followed by a 4% growth per month for 6 months before leveling off and becoming steady. CUP No. 2005 - 04985 Business Proposal Page 2 Operation: • Hours of operation will be daily from 11:00 am to 9:30 pm Monday through Saturday and Sunday from 11:00 am through 8:30 pm. Management: • The business is a start up business held as a sole - proprietorship in the early years. There are limited personnel required to run the operation. The principles (married couple) own and operate a chiropractic business since August 1994. The growth of that office has allowed the principles to become more overseers and less involved in daily routines. In the initial phase of current start-up business, the principles will use their experience to run day to day operations from marketing to accounting /banking to daily operating the business. There will be younger adults (high school to early college) hired on a per party basis form the local churches and schools. This will keep employee cost in line with number of parties thus revenue. 111. Market Plan: Industry: • This is a relatively new concept with only 2 other like business know. The first Scooter's Jungle in Placentia approximately 3 miles away from our location and has been operating for 1 ''A years and currently has a 3 to 4 month waiting list. The other is Artic Zone approximately 15 miles away and opened 6 months ago. This is a much smaller operation with limited hours however is currently booked 1 to 2 months ahead for weekend parties. Overall there has been a great push on birthday parties that differ format he traditional backyard format. In speaking with many other parents with small children, they would much rather pay $250.00 to have a party where they can have the kids entertained in a creative and interactive manner, served food including cake and ice cream and cleaned -up without having to do so themselves. In other words they would simply rather enjoy their child's birthday instead of being so busy with other things that they miss the fun. Location: • 4771 Hunter Street in the City of Anaheim. Building is located within an industrial park bordering Anaheim Hills and Yorba Linda. CUP Na 2005 - 04985 Business Proposal Page 3 Marketing Strategy: • • • Within 2 miles is Friends Christian School. This is a private school with age group from pre - school through 8 grade. Current enrollment is 1,300 children. All 3 of my kids have attended this school with currently one in 2 grade and the other in kindergarten. My wife is extremely active with this school and has spoken with the teacher and principle. They have happily agreed to allow flyers for the business to go home with the kids directly be passed out by the teachers. Additional marketing will be with the girls scouts and other clubs the kids are active in along with our Friends Church family consisting of 9,000 members in Yorba Linda and surrounding areas of which we are very active, recognized and take lead in several ministries. • High school students from the church will be hired to place 2,000 door hangers in the adjacent neighborhoods 2 to 3 months prior to opening day. This will like allow us to have several weeks booked in advance of the opening day. • The facility will be offered to local church youth and high school ministries at significant discounts for less busy hours in the early stages to allow for exposure of the business. In addition, the facility will be open to "Mommy and Me" as well as "M.O.P.S. (mother of pre - schoolers)" program once again allowing exposure of the facility to mothers of young kids. Many of these mothers have other children of school age as well as introducing the facility their younger ones in the future. • Advertising will be place in O.C. Parent magazine that is highly read by parents of target marketing group. • Lastly built -in word -of -mouth advertising automatically develops when the parents of the invited children attend the parties. Special emphasize will be focused on these attending parents in terms of discounts for same day bookings. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me directly. Sincerely, William Randy Edwards CUP NO. 2005 - 0 4 9 8 5 ITEM NO. 9 IHNGLEWOOD AVE ORANGETHORPE AVENUE ATCH /SON TOPE{4 &SANTA F R AILROAD SP 94-1 RRC6 0 RCL 68 6(9 C) IND. BLDGS (Res of Intent to L 68 -69 -93 L) rn o rn co z IND. BLDG � M (: 0 SP 94_ RCL 65-66-24 (2 RCL 6 5-66 13 rug VAR 2878 RCL 'U-71 94 -1 U N VAR 3505 RCL 70 - 05 (2) d r MD. BLDG. 71 -0 ui o mo €' w aaz N HUNTER AVENUE �-5 P 4iary `. a •-o �� RC 70 1(SC rn o o I ND 70 7 04 2) J Q 0 ^Z BLDGS. 16' Q �JUJ HUNTER AVENUE LL RCL 7 0-71-05 (2) RCL 70- SP 94_ ( 71_p4 W R RCL 56 24 29 66 -13 ) N WESLEY DRIVE j NISSEI AMERICA RCL 65 66- 4 INC C 9 Y ORPORATED RCL 65 -gs_1( ) RCL 70 1 (SC) U VAR 4032 RCL 7p 1 -004 5 (2) O VAR 2878 71 U Z 2 RD SMALL INDUSTRIAL SP RD VAR 4359 FIRMS (ALL PARCELS) RCL 6 94-1 SC 65 -66- AMANO SP 94_1 RCL 65- 66 CINCINNATI RCL 70- 71(SC - 05)(2) VAR 2878 RCL 70 -71 -04 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005- 04985 Subject Property Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: ROBERT J. RICCI Q.S. No. 165 REQUEST TO PERMIT AN INDOOR RECREATION FACILITY. 4771 East Hunter Avenue - House of Bounce 1825 Item No. 2 I NGL D ? P N sF Lwdl FMMMmii&&&M�o Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04985 Requested By: ROBERT J. RICCI REQUEST TO PERMIT AN INDOOR RECREATION FACILITY. 4771 East Hunter Avenue - House of Bounce Subject Property Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Q.S. No. 165 1825 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 9 9a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion) 9b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04985 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 0.63 -acre property is located at the northwesterly terminus of Hunter Avenue, having a frontage of 16 feet on the curvilinear portion of Hunter Avenue and a maximum depth of 238 feet (4771 East Hunter Avenue - House of Bounce). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit under authority of Code Section 18.120.070.050.0529 to permit an indoor recreation facility. BACKGROUND: (3) This property is currently developed with a one -story industrial building, and is zoned SP94 -1, DA 2 (SC) (Northeast Area Specific Plan — Expanded Industrial Area, Scenic Corridor Overlay). The Anaheim General Plan designates this property and surrounding properties for Industrial land uses. (4) There are no previous zoning actions pertaining to this property. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL (5) The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to establish a children's indoor recreational facility within an existing 8,868 square foot, single -story free - standing industrial building. The property contains a single building and the proposed facility would occupy the entire building. (6) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates an existing one -story industrial building on the northeast portion of the property with parking, loading and unloading areas located around the perimeter of the building. (7) The floor plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates a large inflatable toy bouncer room that would contain a 15 -foot high slide, zip line, obstacle course, 35 -foot long winding tunnel and a large jumping area for free play. There will also be two (2) party rooms, a preparation room, storage room, two (2) offices, reception area and restrooms. (8) Vehicular access to the site would be provided by an existing driveway from Hunter Avenue. The site plan indicates a total of 29 parking spaces available for this recreational facility. Code requires land uses without a specified Code - required parking ratio to comply with requirements determined to be reasonably necessary by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager through a parking demand study. Based upon comparable businesses in surrounding cities, the City Traffic and Transportation Manager has determined that the proposed facility would require a minimum of 20 spaces on weekdays and 22 spaces on weekends. sr -CU P2005- 04985jn.doc Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 9 (9) The submitted photographs indicate the existing industrial building is constructed with stucco siding and glass storefront windows. There are three entrances to the interior of the building; and two (2) roll -up doors located in the rear of the building. There are no proposed modifications to the exterior of the building with this request. View of the proposed facility from Hunter Ave. (10) The applicant is not requesting signage for this facility at this time. Code allows wall signs for advertising, provided that the total area of any such sign shall not exceed ten percent (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. Staff is recommending a condition of approval that any future freestanding or wall signs be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of sign permits. (11) Staff inspections confirmed that the landscaping is in compliance with Code and is being well maintained. The applicant is not proposing any new landscaping in conjunction with this request. (12) The applicant has submitted a letter of operation indicating the proposed use would be for children's birthday parties that would be approximately 2.5 hours in length. The party would start in the large recreation room for 90 minutes and adjourn to another designated room for refreshments and gifts. There would be a 2 -hour period between the ending of the first party and the beginning of the next party in order to avoid any parking shortages. The hours of sr -CU P2005- 04985jn.doc Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 9 operation would be from 11:00a.m. to 9:30 p.m., Monday through Saturday and 11:00am to 8:30 p.m. on Sunday, with three employees per shift. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (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 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 a significant effect on the environment. FVAI HATIC)N (14) Code permits indoor children's recreation facility in the SP94 -1, DA -2 (SC) zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (15) The proposed indoor children's private recreation facility requires a parking demand study to determine the required number of parking spaces. The applicant submitted a study dated April 15, 2005, prepared by Katz, Okitsu & Associates, Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners. The parking study was conducted at three (3) sites that offered comparable services in similar light industrial /manufacturing zones, with adjustments for operational characteristics and building sizes. The maximum parking demand per this analysis would be 20 stalls on the weekdays and 22 stalls on weekends. The site plan indicates 29 parking stalls would be provided. The City Traffic and Transportation Manager has reviewed this study and has determined that subject to the condition pertaining to the hours of operation, 29 parking spaces would be adequate for the proposed use. (16) Staff believes that the applicant has demonstrated, subject to operational restrictions, that sufficient parking would be available for customers of the facility without impacting surrounding businesses. The property is not developed with a multi- tenant industrial park and as such, functions independently of other industrial properties. Therefore, although the proposed facility would be located adjacent to other industrial properties, the potential for operational conflicts is reduced because no other tenants would occupy the property. In order to reduce the potential for future compatibility issues, staff has included a condition of approval requiring the applicant to obtain Planning Commission approval to modify and /or reduce the floor area devoted to the facility. This would provide staff and the Commission an opportunity to review any changes to the use resulting from more than one business occupying the property. sr -CU P2005- 04985jn.doc Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 9 FINDINGS: (17) 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; (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: (18) 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 and conditions of approval contained therein. sr -CU P2005- 04985jn.doc Page 4 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005- A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04985 BE GRANTED (4771 EAST HUNTER AVENUE) 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, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 229, PAGES 46 TO 48 INCLUSIVE, OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY 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 June 1, 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 indoor children's private recreation facility is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.120.070.050.0529. 2. That the proposed indoor children's private recreation facility as conditioned herein, would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is located because the site functions independently from the adjacent industrial properties and as such, reduces the potential for operational conflicts. 3. That the traffic generated by the indoor recreation facility would not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and as demonstrated by the parking study dated April 15, 2005, prepared by Katz, Okitsu & Associates, Traffic Engineers and Transportation Planners, the peak parking demand would be 20 stalls on the weekdays and 22 stalls on weekends, and the site plan indicates 29 spaces. 4. That granting of this conditional use permit, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 5. That no one 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 a children's indoor private recreation facility 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. Cr \PC2005- -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 health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim: That no admission fee or any other type of public entrance fee shall be permitted for this facility. 2. That due to the change in use and /or occupancy of the building, plans shall be submitted to the Building Division showing compliance with the minimum standards of the City of Anaheim, including the Uniform Building, Plumbing, Electrical, Mechanical and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of Anaheim. 3. That the hours of operation shall be limited to: Monday through Saturday 11 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. Sunday 11 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. 4. That only one party shall be conducted at a time per the approved parking study dated April 15, 2005. That all doors serving the facility 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 at all times when the premises is open for business, the premises shall be maintained as a indoor recreation facility that is engaged primarily in children's parties. 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 information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted to the Police Department, Community Services Division for approval. 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. 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. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division approval. 10. 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. 11. That no outdoor uses and /or assembly shall occur on this property. 12. That if an alarm system is installed, a Burglary/Robbery Alarm Permit application, Form APD 516, shall be completed and submitted to the Police Department prior to initial alarm activation. This form is available at the Police Department front counter. 13. That four (4) foot high rooftop address numbers shall be painted flat on the roof in contrasting color to the rooftop material and shall not be visible from ground level. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 14. That a Fire Emergency Listing Card, Form APD -281, shall be completed and submitted to Police Department. The form is available at the Police Department front counter. -2- PC2005- 15. That sign plans for this unit shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. Any decision by City staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. 16. That a two -hour time period shall be established between parties to prevent any parking shortages. 17. 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. 18. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution, or within one (1) year from the date of this resolution whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 2, 7, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 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. 19. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 17, above mentioned shall be complied with. 20. 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 June 1, 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. ATTEST: CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -3- 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 June 1, 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 1 2005. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2005- ITEM NO. 10 RCL S 0ILP Sp RCL 1 RCL CUf LINCOLN AUTO C -G "� RCL 96 -97 -11 c C Gn " RCL 84 -85 -12 RCL 75 -76 -13 0 RCL 96 -97 -11 CUP 2636 RCL 74 -75 -21 1 O co T -VAR 2002 -04511 ' T -CUP 2005 -04984 VAR 2001 -04461 S o RCL 74 -75 -20 ANAHEIM MAZDA T -CUP 2004 -04880 0F, HYUNDAI CUP 3235 VAR 4053 S (CUP 2762) n (CUP 2448) HARDIN HONDA ) 1 DU EACH f ��,,,� �' f1 350 1,400'to_ the centerline -„ of Phoenix Club Drive v AUTO CENTER DRIVE �Q C -G C -G RCL 91 -92 -19 RCL 91 -92 -19 41 C-G RCL 74 -75 -21 (5) CUP 3625 40 RCL 91-92-19 RCL 74 -75 -20 (2) RCL 74 -75 -20 ( CUP 2001 -04448 C UP 3625 SATURN CUP 3625 MITSUBISHI Vi� AUTO DEALER HARDIN HONDA AUTO DEALER Q SANDERSON AVENUE � Subject Property Conditional Use Permit No. 3235 TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04984 Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: HARDIN HONDA Q.S. No. 126 REQUEST TO AMEND OR DELETE A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO SIGNAGE TO ADD THREE ADDITIONAL WALL SIGNS IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING AUTOMOTIVE SALES AND REPAIR FACILITY. 1381 East Auto Center Drive - Hardin Honda 1865 Item No. 2 ► e dl F r L - i t s I r M sw 0 L' J� f r t � its kz r ) ERSON- AVENUE r4 d Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 3235 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04984 Date: June 1, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: HARDIN HONDA Q.S. No. 126 REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE PERTAINING TO SIGNAGE TO RETAIN TWO UNPERMITTED WALL SIGNS IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING AUTOMOTIVE SALES AND REPAIR FACILITY. 1381 East Auto Center Drive - Hardin Honda 1820 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 1, 2005 Item No. 10 10a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED) 10b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3235 (Motion for Withdrawal) (TRACKING NO. CUP2005- 04984) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 2.34 -acre property is located north of the westerly terminus of Auto Center Drive, has a frontage of 350 feet on the north side of Auto Center Drive, a maximum depth of 463 feet, and is located 670 feet west of the centerline of Phoenix Club Drive (1381 East Auto Center Drive —Hardin Honda) REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests to amend or delete a condition of approval pertaining to signage to add three additional wall signs in conjunction with an existing automotive sales and repair facility with waiver of the maximum number of wall signs under authority of Code Sections 18.60.190.020. BACKGROUND: (3) This site is developed with an automobile sales and repair facility and is zoned C -G (General Commercial). The Anaheim General Plan designates the site for General Commercial land uses. The General Plan Land Use designations for surrounding properties is also General Commercial. (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 3235 (to permit an automotive sale and service center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces, minimum structural setback and required improvement of parking areas) was approved by the Planning Commission on January 29, 1990. (5) Since the application was submitted, the applicant has revised the proposed sign plan which is now being processed as a request for substantial conformance as a "Reports and Recommendations" item on this agenda. RECOMMENDATION: (6) That the Planning Commission, by motion, accept the applicant's request for withdrawal Srcup2005- 04984 - withdrawal - kw.doc Page 1 051 20:04 4900304 HARDIN:GM PAGE 01 Flardin 1321 Auto CenTeir Drive, Aanahei n, Ca. 92806 (714) 635 -2020 Kimberly Wong City Plaluling Office May 17, 2005 Dear Kimberly Wong, Please accept this letter as my request to withdraw from the public hearing process our application for additional signage at our Honda store located at 1381 Auto Center Drive. Instead please process that request through reports and recommendations procedure per our conversation of May 17, 2005. Thank you very much in advance for all your help with this process, Please feel flee to call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Walter Cadman General Manager Cclfile we CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOZ