Loading...
PC 2005/10/03Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda Monday, October 3, 2005 Council Chamber, City Hall 200 South Anaheim Boulevard. Anaheim. California Chairman: Gail Eastman Chairman Pro - Tempore: Cecilia Flores Commissioners: Kelly Buffa, Joseph Karaki, Ed Perez, Panky Romero, Pat Velasquez . Call To Order Preliminary Plan Review 1:00 P.M. • Staff update to Commission on various City developments and issues (As requested by Planning Commission) • Preliminary Plan Review for items on the October 3, 2005 agenda • Presentation by the Public Works Department on the Streetscape Master Plan for the Anaheim Resort Expansion Area. Recess To Afternoon Public Hearing Session • Reconvene To Public Hearing 2:30 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 (g)anaheim.net H: \docs \clerical\agendas \100305).doc 10/03/05 Page 1 Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 2:30 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. 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. 7A. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of August 8, 2005. (Motion) Continued from the August 22, September 7 and 19, 2005, Planning Commission meetings. 7B. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Request for Meeting of September 7, 2005. (Motion) continuance to October 31, 2005 Continued from the September 19, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. 7C. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Request for Meeting of September 19, 2005 (Motion) continuance to October 31, 2005 H: \docs \clerical \agendas \100305).doc 10/03/05 Page 2 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2005 -00163 2c. VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04653 2d. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2006 -132 2e. WAIVER OF COUNCIL POLICY NO. 642 Owner: Evart C. Fountain, 1432 Roberta Avenue, Fullerton, CA 92833 Agent: Alan Nguyen, 15401 Firmona Avenue, Lawndale, CA 90260 Location: 1400 East Burton Street. Property consists of two parcels. Parcel 1: Property is an irregularly- shaped parcel having a frontage of 133 feet on the south side of Burton Street and is located 889 feet west of the centerline of Acacia Street. Parcel 2: Property is an irregularly- shaped parcel having a frontage of 26 feet on the south side of Burton Street and is located 1022 feet west of the centerline of Acacia Street. Reclassification No. 2005 -00163 - Request reclassification of the property from the T (Transition) zone to the RS -2 (Residential, Single - Family) zone, or a less intense zone. Variance No. 2005 -04653 - Request waivers of (a) minimum lot width and (b) minimum lot area to construct four single - family residences. Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -132- Request to establish a 4 -lot, 4- unit detached single family subdivision. Waiver of Council Policy No. 542 - Request to waive Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects. Continued from the June 27, July 25, and September 7 2005, Planning Commission meetings. Project Planner: (cflores @anaheim. net) Reclassification Resolution No. Q.S 91 Variance Resolution No. H: \docs \clerical \agendas \100305).doc 10/03/05 Page 3 3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED 3b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2090 (TRACKING NO. CUP2005- 050271: Owner: Paul Nikolau, 1160 North Kraemer Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92806 Agent: Juan M. Reynoso, Xalos Restaurant and Bar, 1160 North Kraemer Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Location: 1160 North Kraemer Boulevard: Property is approximately 0.9 -acre, having a frontage of 175 feet on the east side of Kraemer Boulevard and is located 242 feet south of the centerline of Coronado Street. Request for reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved on September 20, 2004 to expire August 27, 2005) to retain public entertainment in conjunction with a previously- approved restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- Project Planner: premises consumption ( Xalos Restaurant). (avazquez @anaheim.net) Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Q.S. 140 4a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED) Request for continuance to 4b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 4c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3902 November 14, 2005 (TRACKING NO. CUP2005. 05022) Owner: Bhupinder S. Mac, 20021 Ventura Boulevard, Woodland Hills, CA 91368 Agent: Andrew Paszterko, 2055 North Alvarado Street, Los Angeles, CA 90039 Location: 1200 South Harbor Boulevard: Property is approximately 0.98 -acre, and is located at the southeast corner of Harbor Boulevard and Ball Road. Request to construct a coffee shop and to establish an office in conjunction with an existing service station with accessory convenience market with beer and wine for off - premises consumption and a 2,000 square foot drive - through fast food restaurant, and with waivers of (a) minimum landscape and structural setback and (b) minimum number of Project Planner: parking spaces. apramirez @anaheim.net) Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Q. S. 86 H: \docs \clerical \agendas \100305).doc 10/03/05 Page 4 Sa. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 1 Sb. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006.05029 Owner: Raymond Spehar, 6937 East Avenida De Santiago, Anaheim, CA 92807 Agent: Lorentz P. Moy, 5781 East La Palma Avenue, Anaheim Hills, CA 92807 Location: 5781 East La Palma Avenue Property is approximately 7.9 acres, and is located north and east of the northeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Imperial Highway. Project Planner: Request to permit massage services within an existing day spa. Qnixon @anaheim.net) Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Q.S. 184 6a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 1 6b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-04434 (TRACKING NO. CUP2005- 05024) Owner: Ronald Lushing, 9399 Wilshire Boulevard, #109, Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Agent: Richard Marion, Mesa Roofing Corporation, 2550 East Miraloma Way, Anaheim, CA 92806 Location: 2550 East Miraloma Way: Property is approximately 0.87 - acre, and is accessed via a 20 -foot wide access easement on the south side of Miraloma Way and is located 190 feet west of the centerline of Lawrence Avenue. Request for reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved on Project Planner: September 10, 2001 to expire September 10, 2005) to retain a (dherrick @anaheim.net) contractor's storage yard. Q.S. 121 Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. H: \docs \clerical \agendas \100305).doc 10/03/05 Page 5 7a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 3 7b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006.05030 Owner: Southern California Edison, 14799 Chestnut Street, Westminster, CA 92683 Agent: Terry Teeple, Pacific -Teal Development, LLC, 22691 Lambert Street, Suite 1, Lake Forest, CA 92630 Location: 1500 South State College Boulevard Property is approximately 2.1 acres, and is located at the southeast corner of State College Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue. Request to permit accessory retail sales in conjunction with a plant Re q p ry ) p Project Planner: (kwong2 @anaheim. net) nursery. Q.S. 117 Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 8a. SUBSEQUENT EIR NO. 332 (PREVIOUSLY- CERTIFIED) AND Request for ADDENDUM AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 138 -A continuance to October 31, 2005 8b. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16859 Agent: Lennar Platinum Triangle LLC, 25 Enterprise, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Location: The Platinum Triangle. The ° Lennar A -Town Project" encompasses an approximate 41.4 -acre project site is generally located between Katella Avenue and Gene Autry Way, extending from State College Boulevard to just west of South Betmor Lane in an area of the City of Anaheim known as The Platinum Triangle. The project site is further identified as Sites 1 and 2 on the map below. Site 1 encompasses 31 acres located at 1200 -1558, 1700, and 1800 East Katella Avenue; 1301 -1395 and 1551 Gene Autry Way; 1870, 1871, 1880, 1881, 1890, 1891, 1900, and 1901 South Chris Lane; 1833 and 1841 South State College Boulevard; 1800 and 1801 East Talbot Way. Site 2 encompasses 10.4 acres located at 1871, 1881, 1891 1901, 1870, 1880, 1890 1900 and 1910 South Betmor Lane and 1100 East Katella Avenue. The project site also encompasses portions of South Chris Lane and South Betmor Lane as indicated in the vicinity map. Request to establish a 19 -lot (including four lettered lots) subdivision for Project Planner: Lennar's "A- Town ", a master planned community, with up to 2,681 (cflores @anaheim.net) residential units, two public parks and associated public facilities and infrastructure (identified as Site 1 and Site 2). Q.S. 108 H: \docs \clerical \agendas \100305).doc 10/03/05 Page 6 Adjourn To Monday, October 31, 2005 at 1:00 P.M. for Preliminary Plan Review and a presentation by the Orange County Water District on the Groundwater Replenishment Program. CERTIFICATION OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at 3:30 p.m. September 29, 2005 (TIME) (DATE) LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK SIGNED: (Original Signed by Danielle C. Masciel) 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. I _ 10 F-11 0 . I g h L 1:11 F _10 1 10110 1 Eel K * ] LIFA ILL 1101-11 Eel 0 1 1 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: \docs \clerical \agendas \100305).doc 10/03/05 Page 7 SCHEDULE 2005 October 17 October 31 November 14 November 28 December 12 11 December 28 (Wed) 11 H: \docs \clencal \agendas \100305)Am 10/03/05 Page 8 ITEM NO. 2 w z z BLOSSOM UN T O�P� RCL 75 -76 -32 (Res. of Int. to RS -7200) RS -2 RCL 2005 -00163 O Q� RM-4 VAR 2005 -04653 R 67 - 6& - 85 TPM 32 0 CUP 10 8 � 15 DU CANT VACANT OQ �" 1 DU U EACH / 26 ' �� 133 - 889'to the centerlirre _ greet �— BURTON ST BURTON ST N ofA er M 775T-76T32 RS-2 FULLERTON CITY LIMITS N rvm RCL- 1 D EACH in (Res of Intent to RS -7200) RCL 56 -57- 1 :] r ANA HEIM CITY, LIMITS RIVERSIDE FREEWAY (SR -91) RS -2 1 DU EACH =: ROSEWOOD AVE RS -2 1 DU EACH RS-2 p 1 DU EACH O O 2 RS-2 RS-2 = J 1 DU EACH 1 DU EACH N U a Gen :5 PINEWOOD AVE MERONA PL ° N V Reclassification No. 2005 -00163 Subject Property Variance No. 2005 -04653 Date: October 3, 2005 Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -132 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: EVART C. FOUNTAIN Q.S. No. 91 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2005 -00163 - REQUEST RECLASSIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY FROM THE T (TRANSITION) ZONE TO THE RS -2 (RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE - FAMILY) ZONE, OR LESS INTENSE ZONE. VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04653 - REQUESTS WAIVERS OF: (A) MINIMUM LOT WIDTH (B) MINIMUM LOT AREA TO CONSTRUCT FOUR SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCES. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2005 -132 - REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A4 -LOT, 4 -UNIT DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION. 1400 East Burton Street 1869 ITEM NO. 2 J Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Reclassification No. 2005 -00163 Subject Property Variance No. 2005 -04653 Date: October 3, 2005 Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -132 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: EVART C. FOUNTAIN Q.S. No. 91 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2005 -00163 - REQUEST RECLASSIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY FROM THE T (TRANSITION) ZONE TO THE RS -2 (RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE - FAMILY) ZONE, OR LESS INTENSE ZONE. VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04653 - REQUESTS WAIVERS OF: (A) MINIMUM LOT WIDTH (B) MINIMUM LOT AREA TO CONSTRUCT FOUR SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCES. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2005 -132 - REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A4 -LOT, 4 -UNIT DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION. 1400 East Burton Street 1869 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 2 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion) 2b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2005 -00163 (Resolution) 2c. VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04653 (Resolution) 2d. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2005 -132 (Motion) 2e. WAIVER OF COUNCIL POLICY NO. 542 - SOUND ATTENUATION OF RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS (Motion) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped 0.8 -acre property consists of two parcels. Parcel 1 is an irregularly - shaped parcel having a frontage of 133 feet on the south side of Burton Street, a maximum depth of 129 feet and is located 889 feet west of the centerline of Acacia Street. Parcel 2 is an irregularly- shaped parcel having a frontage of 26 feet on the south side of Burton Street, a maximum depth of 129 feet and is located 1,022 feet west of the centerline of Acacia Street (1400 East Burton Street). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of the following: Reclassification No. 2005 -00163 — to reclassify this property from the T (Transition) Zone to the RS -2 (Residential, Single - Family) Zone, or less intense zone. Variance No. 2005 -04653 — waivers of the following under authority of Code Section No.18.74.040.010 to construct four single - family residences: (a) SECTION NO. 18.04.050 Minimum lot width (?D feet required along Burton Street; 37 to 50 feet proposed) (b) SECTION NO. 18.04.040 Minimum lot area (7 200 square feet required; 5 025 to 5 588 square feet proposed on Lots 1, 2 and 3) Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -132 — to establish a 4 -lot, 4 -unit detached single - family residential subdivision. (3) The applicant also requests approval to waive Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects- BACKGROUND (4) At the request of the applicant, this item was continued from the September 7, June 27, and July 25, 2005, Commission meetings to allow time for the applicant to revise exhibits to reflect articulated exteriors and reconfigured driveways as recommended by staff and due to the applicant's subsequent request for continuance to today's meeting. SR RCL2005- 00163cf.doc Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 2 (5) This property is currently vacant resulting from the SR -91 (Riverside) freeway improvements The General Plan designates this property for Low Density Residential land uses. Surrounding General Plan land use designations are Low Density Residential in all directions. The applicant states the property was developed with a single - family residence surrounded by other single - family homes and apartments prior to freeway improvements. An existing apartment complex is located on the north side of Burton Street directly across from this property. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS (6) There are no prior zoning actions pertaining to this property. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (7) The applicant proposes to develop a 4 -lot single - family residential subdivision. Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -132 indicates four lots ranging in area from 5,025 square feet to 19,182 square feet, all fronting on Burton Street and rearing onto the SR -91 (Riverside) Freeway. (8) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the proposed lots would require waivers of two development standards of the RS -2 Zone; minimum lot width and minimum lot area as shown in the table below. Code Requirement Proposed Minimum Lot Width — 70 feet 50 feet/Lot 1 50 feet/Lot 2 38 feet/Lot 3 37 feet/Lot 4 Minimum Lot Area — 7,200 s.f. 5,314 s.f. /Lot 1 5,025 s.f. /Lot 2 5,588 s.f. /Lot 3 19,182 s.f. /Lot 4 (9) The floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 2, 3, 4, and 5) indicate two -story residences with four different models ranging from 2,912 s.f. to 3,611 s.f. Floor plans indicate three models with similar floor plans for a 4- bedroom/3 -bath home with a 2 -car garage and one model with 5- bedrooms/4 baths and a 3 -car garage. (10) Elevation drawings indicate four different elevations with stucco exteriors, tile roofs and structural heights up to 26'4"_ The elevations feature articulated elevations with Spanish style architecture to complement an existing 1920's Spanish style home to the east. (11) The tentative parcel map indicates an existing 15 -foot high Caltrans sound wall along the majority of the southerly property line adjacent to the SR -91 Freeway and a proposed 10 -foot high masonry sound wall (at the back of a 5 -foot wide landscaped setback) overlapping and extending from the Caltrans wall to the westerly property line of Lot 4 continuing north to the Orange County Flood Control District property line. A 6 -foot high wood fence is proposed adjacent to the northwesterly property line of Lot 4 to screen the view of the channel. Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 2 View of south property abutting the SR -91 (Riverside) freeway 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 Commission that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment- EVALUATION (13) The applicant is requesting a reclassification to the RS -2 zone. This zone classification implements the property's General Plan designation of Low Density Residential. This designation permits up to 6.5 dwelling units per acre and this proposal has a density of 5 units per acre; therefore, the reclassification and proposed subdivision are consistent with the General Plan. (14) Waiver (a) pertains to minimum lot width. Code requires a lot width of 70 feet measured from the 25 -foot setback line of a curvilinear or cul -de -sac street. Waiver (b) pertains to minimum lot area. The table in paragraph (8) above indicates the proposed lot widths and lot size per parcel. Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 2 (15) The applicant has submitted the attached Justification of Waiver forms to justify the above - mentioned waivers. The justification is based upon the irregular shape of the property combined with its location on the curved portion of a cul -de -sac and also abutting the SR -91 (Riverside) Freeway. There are also special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply to other identically zoned property in the same vicinity. The irregular configuration of the property concentrates a disproportionate amount of lot area in Lot 4. If the lot had more proportioned dimensions, all of the lots would meet the minimum lot area requirements. (16) The applicant requests approval of a waiver of Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects. This policy states the following: "it is the policy of the City Council that a noise level analysis shall be performed for any proposed residential development located within 600 feet of any existing or adopted freeway, expressway, major arterial highway, primary arterial highway or railroad and that the Planning Commission be authorized to waive specific requirements, subject to appeal to the City Council. The following noise attenuation features shall be incorporated in these residential developments as required to reduce the noise levels as indicated. In single- family residential developments located within six hundred (600) feet of any existing or adopted freeway, expressway, major arterial highway, or primary arterial highway there shall be a sound barrier capable of reducing the sound of motor vehicles to a maximum of 65 dB CNEL at any point six (6) feet above ground level within the development. The sound barrier shall consist of an earth berm, a masonry wall or a combination thereof, provided that a masonry wall which is used as a sound barrier shall not exceed six (6) feet in height. Where vehicular or pedestrian access through the barrier is permitted gates or baffles may be provided, however, said access shall be designed to minimize sound transmission. (17) As indicated in the preliminary noise analysis summary, all four single - family homes within this subdivision are proposed to be within 600 feet of the SR -91 Freeway. The studies conclude that with the existing Caltrans sound wall, "the noise levels inside the lot where the proposed houses are to be constructed ranged from 63.1 to 71.1 dBA." The study recommends the construction of a 10 foot high sound barrier wall around the large irregular yard area of Parcel 4, to absorb and reflect sound from the freeway. The location of the proposed sound barrier wall is depicted on the plan below. The noise study indicates a 10 foot high sound barrier wall should be sufficient to reduce noise levels on the property consistent with the Council Policy but would exceed the maximum sound barrier height of 6 feet contained in the policy and therefore, a waiver is being requested.. Staff recommends a condition of approval requiring a final noise analysis prior to construction of the sound barrier wall or prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the first dwelling unit, whichever occurs first, to ensure compliance with noise attenuation standards Page 4 N, c 0 N N N 0 0EO , O N p U M N o m o Z c o E 6 u�iaO N O) t6 a Proposed 10 -foot high sound barrier wall. Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 2 (18) A majority of the future housing opportunity sites in the City, as identified in the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan, would be located adjacent to major arterials, railroad tracks, and freeways. To apply more appropriate noise standards to these future housing projects, Planning Services Division staff is in the process of drafting an amendment to this Council Policy pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects. This amendment will be agendized for Planning Commission review in the near future- FINDINGS (19) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the Zoning Code, a modification may be granted for the purpose of assuring that no property, because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose of any variance is to prevent discrimination and none shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other similar properties. Therefore, before any variance is granted by the Commission, it shall be shown: (a) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity; and (b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. (20) "The State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code, Section 66473.5) makes it mandatory to include in all motions approving, or recommending approval of a tentative parcel map, a specific finding that the proposed Subdivision together with its design and improvement is consistent with the City's General Plan. Further, the law requires that the Zoning Administrator make any of the following findings when denying or recommending denial of a parcel map: 1. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. 2. 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." Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 2 RECOMMENDATION: (21) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, that the Planning Commission approve the petitioner's request by taking the following actions: (a) By motion, aoorove a Negative Declaration for the project. (b) By resolution, aoorove reclassification No. 2005 -00163 to reclassify this property from the T (Transition) Zone to the RS -2 (Residential, Single - Family) Zone by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. (c) By resolution, approve Variance No. 2005 -04653 for waiver of minimum lot width and lot area to construct four single - family residences by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. (d) By motion, approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -132 to establish a 4 -lot, 4 -unit detached single - family subdivision based upon the attached conditions of approval and that the design and improvement of the subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. (e) By motion, approve a waiver of Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects adjacent to a freeway, as recommended by staff, to allow a sound barrier up to 10 feet in height based upon the finding of the noise study that the sound attenuation provided by the existing freeway sound wall together with the proposed wall would comply with the sound attenuation requirement of 65 dB CNEL. Page 7 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2005 -00163 BE GRANTED WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified petition for Reclassification for real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as follows: PARCEL A: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, DISTANT SOUTH 89° 03' 42" EAST 300.00 FEET FROM THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH 0 11' 18" WEST 140.43 FEET; PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF LAND DESCRIBED IN A DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED JUNE 7, 1955, IN BOOK 3093 PAGE 319, OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE, THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES: NORTH 89 47' 33" EAST 120.83 FEET, NORTH 89° 01' 45" EAST 15.45 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 11' 18" EAST 137.50 FEET PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER ; THENCE NORTH 89 03' 42" WEST ALONG SAID LINE 13625 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF THE FRACTIONAL WEST HALF OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO SAN JUAN CAJON DE SANTA ANA, PARTLY WITHIN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, AND PARTLY WITHIN THE CITY OF FULLERTON, AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 10, MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 27, 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 reclassification and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and that said public hearing was continued to the July 25, September 7, and October 3, 2005, Planning Commission meetings. 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 petitioner proposes reclassification of subject property from the T (Transition) zone to the RS -2 (Residential, Single - Family) zone, or a less intense zone. 2. That the Anaheim General Plan designates the property for Low Density Residential land uses. 3. That the proposed reclassification of subject property is necessary and/or desirable for the orderly and proper development of the community. CR \PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- 4. That the proposed reclassification of subject property does properly relate to the zones and their permitted uses locally established in close proximity to subject property and to the zones and their permitted uses generally established throughout the community. 5. That the proposed reclassification of subject property requires the dedication and improvement of abutting streets and alleys in accordance with the Circulation Element of the General Plan, due to the anticipated increase in traffic which will be generated by the intensification of land use. 6. That * ** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to reclassify the property from the T (Transition) zone to the RS -2 (Residential, Single - Family) zone, or a less intense zone; 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 approve the subject Petition for Reclassification to authorize an amendment to the Zoning Map of the Anaheim Municipal Code to exclude the above - described property from the T (Transition) Zone and to incorporate said described property into the RS -2 (Residential, Single - Family) Zone upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of subject property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: That prior to introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, a preliminary title report shall be furnished to the Planning Services Division showing the legal vesting of title, a legal description and containing a map of the property. 2. That prior to placement of an ordinance rezoning subject property on an agenda for City Council consideration, Condition No. 1, above - mentioned, shall be completed. The City Council may approve or disapprove a zoning ordinance at its discretion. If the ordinance is disapproved, the procedure set forth in Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.60.140 shall apply. The provisions or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of the Planning Commission unless said conditions are complied with within one (1) year from the date of this resolution, or such further time as the Planning Commission may grant. 3. 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 conditions, 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 this resolution shall not constitute a rezoning of, or a commitment by the City to rezone, the subject property; any such rezoning shall require an ordinance of the City Council, which shall be a legislative act, which may be approved or denied by the City Council at its sole discretion- -2- PC2005- THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 3, 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 Ip\1111Ix.9i SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on October 3, 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- [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 -*'" A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04653 BE GRANTED WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Variance for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California described as: PARCEL& THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER, DISTANT SOUTH 89° 03' 42" EAST 300.00 FEET FROM THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH 0 11' 18" WEST 140.43 FEET; PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF LAND DESCRIBED IN A DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED JUNE 7, 1955, IN BOOK 3093, PAGE 319, OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE, THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES: NORTH 89 47' 33" EAST 120.83 FEET, NORTH 89 01' 45" EAST 15.45 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 11' 18" EAST 137.50 FEET PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER ; THENCE NORTH 89 03'42" WEST ALONG SAID LINE 13625 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF THE FRACTIONAL WEST HALF OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO SAN JUAN CAJON DE SANTA ANA, PARTLY WITHIN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, AND PARTLY WITHIN THE CITY OF FULLERTON, AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 10, MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 27, 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 variance and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and that said pubic hearing was continued to the July 25, September 7, and October 3, 2005, 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: residences: That the petitioner proposes waivers of the following to construct four single - family (a) SECTION NO. 18.04.050 Minimum lot width (70 feet required along Burton Street; 37 to 50 feet proposed) CR \PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- (b) SECTION NO. 18.04.040 Minimum lot area (7 200 square feet required; 5 025 to 5 588 square feet proposed on Lots 1, 2 and 3 proposed) 2. That the above - mentioned waivers (a) pertaining to minimum lot width and (b) pertaining to minimum lot area are hereby granted based upon the irregular shape of the property combined with its location on the curved portion of a cul -de -sac and also abutting the SR -91 (Riverside) Freeway, and further on the basis that there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply to other identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of the density enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity. The property frontage is approximately 175 feet, allowing only two lots per Code requirement, each with a minimum lot width of 70 feet. The size of the two lots would be 17,554 square feet each, far greater than other single - family lots in the vicinity that are approximately 7,200 square feet each. 3. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to the property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone. 4. That the requested variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in question. 5. That the requested variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health or safety or to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. 6. That * * ** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to request waivers of (a) minimum lot width and (b) minimum lot area to construct four single - family residences; 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 Variance, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: That prior to the issuance of the first building permit, any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. That landscape and/or hardscape screening of all pad- mounted equipment shall be required and shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 2. That roll -up garage doors shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. Said doors shall be installed and maintained as shown on submitted plans. 3. That the driveways on Burton Street shall be reconstructed with 10 -foot radius curb cut 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- -2- PC2005- 4. That plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval showing conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436 and 470 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 5. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. 6. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through the Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. 7. That Variance No. 2005 -04653 is hereby granted subject to the approval and recordation of Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -132, now pending. 8. That prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the first dwelling unit or prior to the issuance of a building permit for the noise barrier wall, whichever occurs first, the property owner /developer shall submit a final noise analysis to the Planning Services Division of the Planning Department indicating compliance with the noise levels of Council Policy 542 or other regulation in effect at the time of the issuance of building permits. That if substantiated by the final noise analysis, a 10 foot high sound barrier wall, or other height as determined necessary by the study, shall be constructed in the location shown on the approved site plan. 9. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 5, and as conditioned herein. 10. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, 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. 11. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 9, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 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 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 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice prior to issuance of a building permit or prior to commencement of the activity, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in the revocation of the approval of this application- -3- PC2005- THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 3, 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 ) 1, 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 October 3, 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 -4- PC2005- October 3, 2005 Alan Nguyen Nam Nguyen 15401 Firmona Avenue Lawndale, CA 90260 Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of October 3, 2005. 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2005 -00163 2c. VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04653 2d. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2005 -132 2e. WAIVER OF COUNCIL POLICY NO. 542 Owner: Nam Van Nguyen and Alan Nguyen, 15401 Firmona Avenue, Lawndale, CA 90260 Agent: Nam Van Nguyen and Alan Nguyen, 15401 Firmona Avenue, Lawndale, CA 90260 Location: 1400 East Burton Street. Property consists of two parcels. Parcel 1: Property is an irregularly- shaped parcel having a frontage of 133 feet on the south side of Burton Street and is located 889 feet west of the centerline of Acacia Street. Parcel 2: Property is an irregularly- shaped parcel having a frontage of 26 feet on the south side of Burton Street and is located 1022 feet west of the centerline of Acacia Street. Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -132- Request to establish a 4 -lot, 4 -unit detached single family subdivision. Continued from the June 27, July 25, and September 7, 2005, Planning Commission meetings. ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission 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. Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -132 (to establish a 4 -lot, 4 -unit detached single - family residential subdivision) subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. That the final parcel 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). 2. 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 (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. 3. That the property owner /developer 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. 4. That all residences units shall be assigned addresses by the Building Division. 5. That the property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate, on the final parcel map, to the City of Anaheim, an easement for road, public utility and other public purposes for the Burton Street cul -de -sac. 6. That Orange Flood Control District (OCFCD) approval for the modifications to the driveway approach and gate are required. 7. That Parcel Map approval shall be conditioned upon the City's abandonment of any portion of City right -of -way lying within the boundaries of said Parcel Map. The property owner shall make an application to the City for said abandonment and the City shall consider this application in due course. The City is not and cannot be obligated to approve the street abandonment; this will require the approval of the Anaheim City Council. 8. That prior to final parcel map approval, Condition Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5 6, and 7 above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Sincerely, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary Anaheim Planning Commission TPM2005- 132_Excerpt Attachment - Item No. 2 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE /CODE WAIVER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER) REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: PERTAINING TO: �_� �,,t/, �i�� (A separate statement is required for each Code waiver) ®sJa iNrO r19 Sections 18.03.040.030 and 18.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code waiver may be granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown: 1. 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; and 2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages. I . Are there special c' umstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings? Ye —No. If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: _ "� L. t 3, ti (A S-I- 6 bJ tJ 6 tJ 6Y es --?2 ae0 Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the same zone as your property? X' Yes _ No If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different: i- 3. Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone? K Yes No If your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances: 4. Were the speci rcumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property owners)? __ _ No EXPLAIN: l<S A ¢Sty t ® r - The sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone which is nAoe se expressly authorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted. Signature n r or Authorized Agent Date 37625\DECEMBER 12, 2000 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO. d y1oS'� Justification Waiver. dot Attachment - Item No. 2 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE /CODE WAIVER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER) REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: OZ cOV 0 (A separate statement is required for each Code waiver) PERTAINING TO: 1Nid i1X (1 Al / ®Z ,rP&✓ Sections 18.03.040.030 and 18.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code waiver maybe granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown: 1. 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; and 2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages. 1. Are there special c' mstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings? Yes _ No. If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: Q f - -4 2 2 > U fYS s ON Wf, PIZbP� t1 t.- P� 4f"hV iL ref0 T_It tC-cf t-t St)V�fl-� rN t`7 ovs�I 2oc� c �, J zs d-pOUIVO , -I �cJ r P a st1 tt�s tz f� st�p�P+ P�4 Shtn t..c.. i AJ A_a-E4�- AS 2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the same zone as your property? _Y_ Yes _ No If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different: Sim ; TaciT -emu es 'U g-ArTf SFV ) gir@ i c) t? t7 Std °�tF't 3. Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone? Yes No If your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances: f d 31I 4. Were the spec' rcumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property owners)? _ (Yes) — No X � e EXPLAIN: T7 ` iT a_A -r( C4_ o A-S 'Ok- mcul Jim / The sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone which is not othe Ise expressly authorizad by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted. Signature of Property erWr Authorized Agent Date 37625\DECEMBER 12, 2000 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE NO. 2 YgG 5°3 Justification Waiver. dot ITEM NO. 2 SP g4.14 SP 6.14 F \RM 6 62,638 66 R SP 6 4 6 269 \ -1 PO BLD O SMPLL \ND Qp2 M \ND 2 1 Res W P, D 3 SP g ytlE\ -\' 0 S j RG �y1 -6 6 1.62' DP1 .�REE Rc\- NEPp'G \pN ONPO GORP DpP GO R SP 94 -1 DA 3 '[t \� SP gj 14 T -RCL 2005 -05027 T 2003 / \ R�G\,6p3_pq'(11 T- CUP2002- 045711 SP - 62-6A N GUP 26 36 T -CUP 2001 -04413 R - Dp 3 N 0? T -CUP 2001 -04326 S P 94--A 4 O p3 RCL 66 -67 -14 SP g4691461 RO\'6621 -9 4,61 216 RCL 61 -62-61 CUP 0- A4 16 TE RRGI P 348 CUP 1 \46 pll S � p OPE G UP 1614 7 (T -CUP 2004- 04890) SER EN�aP1 G SM�RG \P\- RESTAURANT � RESTAURANT GO SDOPS O g %A G SP 94 62'6 9 g4.1 RS O6� to MO) SP 9467A4 mG CP61- 62'6ML ?- 6 \on to GPIP lk 6a.59- G166 110 7 R o {\onto l Res RP \pN ��OFF ?,GA - SMS R_ R 1 1� lReoF \R�Pg - PNP HE \MP I UP \NOF \RMS CRSSGO SP A-6 OA DP 94- l`5 y9 -A'o 'V R S? 661- e1 C,0 o1 E Y SO DA (� SP 9 62.69 ?,G\- P 361'( 01 Ro , to 11 0� C\3? ST es RG�59 DOOR SMP FOP1 \NS �p1 CP g414 66- ' l9 SMPRRCa 5QP \P 6 F \RMS S P � N 6 R US'GR\P \- 36 P DP 2M SP g 61 62 , \ ALL PROPERTIES ARE WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ALPHA (NORTHEAST AREA) Conditional Use Permit 2090 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -05027 Date: October 3, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: PAUL NIKOLAU Q.S. No. 140 REQUESTS REINSTATEMENT OF THIS PERMIT BY THE MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO A TIME LIMITATION (APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 20, 2004 TO EXPIRE AUGUST 27, 2005) TO RETAIN PUBLIC ENTERTAINMENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED RESTAURANT WITH SALES OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR ON- PREMISES CONSUMPTION. 1160 North Kraemer Boulevard - Xalos Restaurant 2005 J Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit 2090 TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -05027 Subject Property Date: October 3, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: PAUL NIKOLAU Q.S. No. 140 REQUESTS REINSTATEMENT OF THIS PERMIT BY THE MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO A TIME LIMITATION (APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 20, 2004 TO EXPIRE AUGUST 27, 2005) TO RETAIN PUBLIC ENTERTAINMENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED RESTAURANT WITH SALES OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR ON- PREMISES CONSUMPTION. 1160 North Kraemer Boulevard - Xalos Restaurant 2005 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 3 3a. 3b. (Motion) (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 0.9 -acre property has a frontage of 175 feet on the east side of Kraemer Boulevard, has a maximum depth of 216 feet, and is located 242 feet south of the centerline of Coronado Street (1160 North Kraemer Boulevard —Xalos Restaurant). 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 September 20, 2004 to expire August 27, 2005) to retain public entertainment in conjunction with a previously- approved restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption under authority of Code Sections 18.60.180 and 18.60.190. BACKGROUND: (3) The property is developed with a restaurant with public entertainment and is zoned SP94 -1 (DA 3) (Northeast Area Specific Plan, La Palma Core Area). This property is located within the Merged Anaheim Redevelopment Area. The General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property and surrounding properties for Industrial land uses. (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 (to permit a public dance hall in conjunction with a restaurant was approved by the Commission in 1980, for one (1) year. Subsequent amendments to conditions of approval pertaining to time limitations /reinstatements have been granted with the latest expiring on August 27, 2005. DISCUSSION: (5) The Commission granted a one (1) year reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 on September 20, 2004. Resolution No. PC2004 -109 (copy attached) included the following conditions of approval pertaining to time limitation for the accessory public entertainment "l - That the accessory public entertainment shall expire on August 27, 2005" . (6) Juan Reynoso, the restaurant owner, requests a 3 -year reinstatement (to match the lease agreement) or deletion of time limitation to continue operating the accessory public entertainment in conjunction with the restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption. He has submitted the attached Justification of Reinstatement (copy attached), indicating that since the most recent reinstatement, the surrounding land uses have not changed, the restaurant has been operating with accessory entertainment for over twenty years, and that all conditions have been complied with. (7) Community Preservation Division staff has submitted the attached memorandum dated September 16, 2005, which states that the business is in compliance with the conditions of approval. Records also indicate no citizen complaints have been received regarding the operation of this business for the past year. srC U P2090(C U P2005- 05027)a kv Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 3 LA View of interior of restaurant (8) Staff has received a financial statement from the petitioner's certified public accountant to demonstrate compliance with Condition No. 18 of Resolution No. PC2004 -109, which states that the sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed 40 percent of the gross sales of all retail sales during any three -month period. This information indicates that the business complies with this condition, as sales of alcohol were 39 percent of the total revenue generated by this business. (9) The Anaheim Police Department submitted the attached memorandum dated September 15, 2005. The memorandum indicates that this location is within Reporting District No. 1432, which has a crime rate of 76 percent above average. From September 1, 2004 through September 12, 2005 this location had 57 calls for service. The calls consist of: 3 fights 10 battery 10 disturbance 6 problem solving 2 bar -check 1 suspicious circumstances 10 burglary alarm 2 AMC violations 2 car stops 3 fire department 1 ABC check 2 recover lost or stolen property 1 lost property 2 stolen vehicles 1 vandalism, traffic accident w /medical aid 1 crime scene investigator call out Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 3 Of the 57 calls for service there were 24 reports taken. The Police Department has also indicated that the utilization of police services has decreased substantially. In the past, there were also many citizen complaints (that may not have generated a call for service) for this business. There have been no complaints this past year and the Police Department is supportive of the applicant's request to reinstate this permit for three (3) years. (10) Staff recommends approval of approval of this reinstatement for three (3) years since the public entertainment portion of this request has not resulted in any serious crimes this past year and the business is operating in compliance with the conditions of approval. Additionally, the property is being well maintained and the business is operating in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Staff believes that this is an appropriate location for nightclub -type activities since there are no residences in the immediate area. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (11) Staff has reviewed the request for reinstatement and finds no significant adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- approved Negative Declaration in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 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 previously - approved 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 (12) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit or a major amendment to an existing conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by this code, or is an unlisted use as defined in subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); (b) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to health and safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 3 (13) Section 18.60.180.030 of the Anaheim Municipal Code provides 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) That the facts necessary to support each and every finding 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 it can be determined that, due to changed circumstances, the use is consistent with the City's long -term plans for the area- RECOMMENDATION (14) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the hearing, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission approve the applicant's request by taking the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the previously- approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. (b) By resolution, approve the reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 to retain public entertainment in conjunction with a previously- approved restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption for a period of three (3) years to expire August 27, 2008, adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. Page 4 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION REINSTATING AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2090, AND AMENDING CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. PC2004 -109, ADOPTED THEREWITH WHEREAS, on September 20, 2004, the Anaheim Planning Commission, by Resolution No. PC2004 -109 approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 to retain public entertainment in conjunction with a previously approved restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption at 1160 North Kraemer Boulevard (Xalos Restaurant); and WHEREAS, said Resolution No. PC2004 -109 includes the following condition of approval: " 1. That the accessory public entertainment shall expire on August 27, 2005" . WHEREAS, this property is currently developed with a restaurant with public entertainment, the underlying zoning is SP94 -1 (DA 3) (Northeast Area Specific Plan, La Palma Core Area); the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Industrial land uses; and this property is located within the Merged Anaheim Redevelopment Area; and PORTION OF LOT 15, BLOCK K, KRAEMER TRACT, CITY OF FULLERTON, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 12 PAGES 87 AND 88 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 15, WHICH IS DISTANT NORTHERLY 242.10 FEET FROM THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE SOUTHERLY HALF OF THE SOUTHERLY HALF OF SAID LOT 15; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG LINE PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT NORTHERLY 242.10 FEET MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SOUTHERLY HALF OF THE SOUTHERLY HALF, A DISTANCE OF 269.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY AND PARALLEL WITH WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 15, A DISTANCE OF 175.00 FEET; SOUTHERLY HALF OF THE SOUTHERLY HALF, A DISTANCE OF 269.00 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 15; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 175.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. WHEREAS, the petitioner has requested reinstatement of this conditional use permit to retain public entertainment in conjunction with a previously- approved restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption 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 October 3, 2005, at 2:30 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 18.60 "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 proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code. Cr1PC2005- -1- PC2005- 2. That the proposal, as amended, will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is located since the business is in compliance with all of the conditions of approval and is being well maintained. 3. That the size and shape of the site is adequate to allow full development of the use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety and general welfare. 4. That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. 5. That granting this reinstatement, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim since no serious crimes have occurred at this location over the past year. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. 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 retain public entertainment in conjunction with a previously approved restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption; and does hereby find that the Negative Declaration previously approved in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 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 approve reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 to allow public entertainment in conjunction with a previously- approved restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption by incorporating the conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. PC2004 -109 into a new resolution to read as follows 1 . That the accessory public entertainment shall expire on August 27, 2008. 2. That the outdoor patio area may be used by patrons for seating and smoking purposes only. That no other outdoor activities, including but not limited to dining, drinking, entertainment, dancing, etc., shall be permitted in the patio area. 3. That the number of persons attending any event at this property shall not exceed the maximum occupancy load as determined by the Anaheim Fire Department. Signs indicating the maximum occupancy shall be prominently displayed within the premises. 4. That the property owner shall provide any new business operator /owner with the conditions of approval contained in this resolution. 5. That the sales of any type of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises shall be prohibited. 6. That there shall be no live entertainment, amplified music or dancing permitted on the premises at any time without issuance of proper permits as required by the Anaheim Municipal Code- -2- PC2005- 7. That the activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to surrounding properties and shall conform to the City of Anaheim Noise Ordinance. 8. That all doors serving subject establishment shall comply with the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and shall be kept closed and unlocked at all times during hours of operation except for ingress /egress, deliveries and in cases of emergency. 9. That at all times when entertainment or dancing is permitted, uniformed security guards shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department to deter unlawful conduct on the part of employees or patrons, and promote the safe and orderly assembly and movement of persons and vehicles, and prevent disturbance to the neighborhood by excessive noise created by patrons entering or leaving the premises. 10. 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. 11. That there shall be no pool tables, amusement devices or games maintained within subject establishment without issuance of proper permits as required by the Anaheim Municipal Code. 12. That the business operator shall comply with Section 24200.5 of the Business and Professions Code so as not to employ or permit any persons to solicit or encourage others, directly or indirectly, to buy them drinks in the licensed premises under any commission, percentage, salary, or other profit- sharing plan, scheme or conspiracy. 13. That there shall be no public telephones on the premises located outside the building. 14. That this establishment shall be operated as a "Bona Fide Public Eating Place" as defined by Section 23038 of the California Business and Professions Code. 15. That there shall be no bar or lounge maintained on the property unless licensed by Alcoholic Beverage Control and approved by the City of Anaheim. 16. That food service with a full meal shall be available from opening time until either 10:00 p.m. or closing time, whichever occurs first, on each day of operation. 17. That subject alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a public premises (bar) type license nor shall the establishment be operated as a `public premises' as defined in Section 23039 of the California Business and Professions Code. 18. That the sales of any type of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed forty percent (40 %) of the gross sales of all retail sales during any three (3) month period. The applicant shall maintain records on a quarterly basis indicating the separate amounts of sales of any type of alcoholic beverages and other items. These records shall be made available, subject to audit and, when requested, inspection by any City of Anaheim official during reasonable business hours. 19. That there shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. 20. That the operator of subject facility shall pay for the cost of any Community Preservation Division inspections which may be required to address Code violations or violations of these conditions of approval. 21. That there shall be no direct pedestrian access to the outdoor patio area from outside the building. All access to this area shall be solely through the restaurant. Further, that a sign shall be posted at the entrance to the patio stating that this area shall be used for seating and smoking purposes only and that no dining, drinking or dancing shall be permitted in the patio. 22. 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- -3- PC2005- 23. That the proposal shall comply with all signing requirements of Development Area 3 (La Palma Core Area) of the Northeast Area Specific Plan (SP94 -1) unless a variance allowing sign waivers is approved by the Planning Commission or City Council. 24. That a valid business license shall be maintained for this business from the City of Anaheim Business License Division of the Finance Department. 25. That this resolution shall be permanently posted in an obvious location within the employee work area to serve as a reminder of the conditions of approval contained herein. 26. That three (3) foot high address numbers shall be maintained and displayed on the building roof in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible to the adjacent street or properties. 27. That the on -site landscaping and irrigation system shall be maintained in compliance with City standards. 28. That all existing mature landscaping shall be maintained and immediately replaced in the event that it becomes diseased or dies. 29. 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 area(s) shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage area(s) shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plants such as minimum one (1) gallon sized clinging vines planted on maximum three (3) foot centers or tall shrubbery. 30. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2, and as conditioned herein. 31. That the petitioner shall not share any profits or pay any percentage or commission to a promoter or any other person based upon the monies collected as a door charge, cover charge or any other charge, including the sale of drinks. 32. That no happy hour -type or reduced price promotion shall be permitted at any time. 33. That one security officer shall be posted in the patio area at all times. 34. 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 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 15 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- -4- PC2005- THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 3, 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 ) 1, 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 October 3, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: K111Ir7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -5- PC2005- 0 RESOLUTION NO. PC2004 -109 41 Attachment - Item No. 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION REINSTATING AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2090, AND AMENDING CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. PC2003 -129, ADOPTED THEREWITH (1160 NORTH KRAEMER BOULEVARD) WHEREAS, on June 2, 1980, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did, by its Resolution No. PC80 -92, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 to permit a public dancing facility in conjunction with a restaurant at 1160 North Kraemer Boulevard in the ML (Limited Industrial) Zone; that Condition No. 5 of said resolution specified that the use was granted for one year subject to reviews for possible extensions of time; and that extensions of time were subsequently granted by motion and by resolution; and WHEREAS, on July 24, 1995, the Planning Commission did, by its Resolution No. PC95 -87, amend certain conditions of approval adopted in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2090, including granting a retroactive extension of time and amending Condition No. 5 to permit the use until August 26, 1997; and WHEREAS, on September 12, 1995, the Anaheim City Council adopted an ordinance reclassifying a large area including subject property from the ML Zone to Development Area 3 (La Palma Core Area) of the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94 -1 (SP94 -1); and that the Zoning and Development standards were also adopted for the Development Areas in Specific Plan No. 94 -1; and WHEREAS, on September 30, 1996, the Planning Commission did, by its Resolution No. PC96 -101, amend the conditions of approved adopted in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2090, including Condition No. 10 which specified that the use would expire on August 27, 1997; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission subsequently adopted six resolutions (Nos. PC98 -118, PC99 -141, PC2000 -12, PC2001 -30, PC2001 -126, PC2002 -114 and PC2003 -129) to reinstate the accessory public entertainment for additional periods of time in connection with an existing restaurant with sale of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption; and that the most recent resolution (PC2003 -129) includes the following conditions of approval: 1. That the accessory public entertainment shall expire on August 27, 2004. 31. That subject property shall be developed 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, and as conditioned herein." WHEREAS, the property is developed with a restaurant/public dance hall (Xalos Restaurant); that the underlying zoning is Development Area 3 (La Palma Core Area) of the Northeast Area Specific Plan (SP94 -1); that the Anaheim General Plan designates the property for Industrial land uses; and that the property is located in the Alpha Northeast Redevelopment Project constituent sub -area of the Anaheim Redevelopment Area; and is situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: PORTION OF LOT 15, BLOCK K, KRAEMER TRACT, CITY OF FULLERTON, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 12 PAGES 87 AND 88 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 15, WHICH IS DISTANT NORTHERLY 242.10 FEET FROM THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE SOUTHERLY HALF OF THE SOUTHERLY HALF OF SAID LOT 15; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG LINE PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT NORTHERLY 242.10 FEET MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SOUTHERLY HALF OF THE SOUTHERLY HALF, A DISTANCE OF 269.00 C R \PC2004 -109 1- PC2004 -109 0 0 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY AND PARALLEL WITH WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 15, A DISTANCE OF 175.00 FEET; SOUTHERLY HALF OF THE SOUTHERLY HALF, A DISTANCE OF 269.00 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 15; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 175.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. WHEREAS, under authority of Code Sections 18.60.180 and 18.60.190, the petitioner has requested a 5 -year reinstatement to retain the accessory public entertainment in conjunction with the restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption (to match the lease agreement) or deletion Condition No. 1 (which specifies that the accessory public entertainment shall expire on August 27, 2004) to eliminate any time limitation; and that the petitioner has also requested modification to Condition No. 31 to amend the previously approved exhibits; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on September 20, 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 18.60, 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 use, as proposed to be amended, is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code. 2. That the use, as proposed to be amended, 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 use, as proposed to be amended, is adequate to allow full development of the use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety and general welfare. 4. That the traffic generated by the use, as proposed to be amended, will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. 5. That granting this reinstatement, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 6. That this conditional use permit is being exercised in substantially the same manner and in substantial conformance with all conditions and stipulations previously approved by the Planning Commission. 7. 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; that the accessory public entertainment is primarily conducted in the evenings when most of the surrounding industrial businesses are closed; and that recent inspections by Code Enforcement Division staff indicate that the property is currently demonstrating compliance with all the conditions of approval except for the requested modifications to the floor plan. 8. That no one indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to retain accessory public entertainment in connection with an existing restaurant with sale of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption, and to amend or delete certain conditions adopted therewith and does hereby find that the Negative Declaration previously approved in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 is adequate to serve as the required environmental -2- PC2004 -109 0 0 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 City Planning Commission does reinstate and approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2090, to retain the accessory public entertainment in connection with an existing restaurant with the sale of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption and to amend the previously approved exhibits; and BE IT FURTHER RESOVED that the conditions of approval in Resolution No. PC2003 -129, adopted in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 as previously amended, are hereby amended in their entirety to read as follows: 1. That the accessory public entertainment shall expire on August 27, 2005. 2. That the outdoor patio area may be used by patrons for seating and smoking purposes only. That no other outdoor activities, including but not limited to dining, drinking, entertainment, dancing, etc., shall be permitted in the patio area. The unpermitted modifications to the patio wall shall be removed and the wall returned to it's original condition. 3. That the number of persons attending any event at this property shall not exceed the maximum occupancy load as determined by the Anaheim Fire Department. Signs indicating the maximum occupancy shall be prominently displayed within the premises. 4. That the property owner shall provide any new business operator /owner with the conditions of approval contained in this resolution. 5. That the sales of any type of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises shall be prohibited. 6. That there shall be no live entertainment, amplified music or dancing permitted on the premises at any time without issuance of proper permits as required by the Anaheim Municipal Code. 7. That the activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to surrounding properties and shall conform to the City of Anaheim Noise Ordinance. 8. That all doors serving subject establishment shall comply with the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and shall be kept closed and unlocked at all times during hours of operation except for ingress /egress, deliveries and in cases of emergency. 9. That at all times when entertainment or dancing is permitted, uniformed security guards shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department to deter unlawful conduct on the part of employees or patrons, and promote the safe and orderly assembly and movement of persons and vehicles, and prevent disturbance to the neighborhood by excessive noise created by patrons entering or leaving the premises. 10. 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. 11. That there shall be no pool tables, amusement devices or games maintained within subject establishment without issuance of proper permits as required by the Anaheim Municipal Code. 12. That the business operator shall comply with Section 24200.5 of the Business and Professions Code so as not to employ or permit any persons to solicit or encourage others, directly or indirectly, to buy them drinks in the licensed premises under any commission, percentage, salary, or other profit- sharing plan, scheme or conspiracy. -3- PC2004 -109 9 r 13. That there shall be no public telephones on the premises located outside the building. 14. That this establishment shall be operated as a "Bona Fide Public Eating Place" as defined by Section 23038 of the California Business and Professions Code. 15. That there shall be no bar or lounge maintained on the property unless licensed by Alcoholic Beverage Control and approved by the City of Anaheim. 16. That food service with a full meal shall be available from opening time until either 10:00 p.m. or closing time, whichever occurs first, on each day of operation. 17. That subject alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a public premises (bar) type license nor shall the establishment be operated as a'public premises' as defined in Section 23039 of the California Business and Professions Code. 18. That the sales of any type of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed forty percent (40 %) of the gross sales of all retail sales during any three (3) month period. The applicant shall maintain records on a quarterly basis indicating the separate amounts of sales of any type of alcoholic beverages and other items. These records shall be made available, subject to audit and, when requested, inspection by any City of Anaheim official during reasonable business hours. 19. That there shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. 20. That the operator of subject facility shall pay for the cost of any Code Enforcement inspections which may be required to address Code violations or violations of these conditions of approval. 21. That there shall be no direct pedestrian access to the outdoor patio area from outside the building. All access to this area shall be solely through the restaurant. Further, that a sign shall be posted at the entrance to the patio stating that this area shall be used for seating and smoking purposes only and that no dining, drinking or dancing shall be permitted in the patio. 22. 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. 23. That the proposal shall comply with all signing requirements of Development Area 3 (La Palma Core Area) of the Northeast Area Specific Plan (SP94 -1) unless a variance allowing sign waivers is approved by the Planning Commission or City Council. 24. That a valid business license shall be maintained for this business from the City of Anaheim Business License Division of the Finance Department. 25. That this resolution shall be permanently posted in an obvious location within the employee work area to serve as a reminder of the conditions of approval contained herein. 26. That three (3) foot high address numbers shall be maintained and displayed on the building roof in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible to the adjacent street or properties. 27. That the on -site landscaping and irrigation system shall be maintained in compliance with City standards. 28. That all existing mature landscaping shall be maintained and immediately replaced in the event that it becomes diseased or dies. 29. That trash storage area(s) shall be provided and maintained in location(s) acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file with -4- PC2004 -109 0 0 said Department. Said storage area(s) shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage area(s) shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plants such as minimum one (1) gallon sized clinging vines planted on maximum three (3) foot centers or tall shrubbery. 30. That within sixty (60) days plans shall be submitted to the Building Division and permits obtained for the unpermitted modification to the interior of the restaurant. 31. 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. 32. That Condition Nos. 2 and 31, above - mentioned, shall be completed within a period of sixty (60) days from the date of this resolution. 33. 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. 34. That no happy hour -type or reduced price promotion shall be permitted at any time. 35. That one security officer shall be posted in the patio area at all times. 36. That the petitioner shall not share any profits or pay any percentage or commission to a promoter or any other person based upon the monies collected as a door charge, cover charge or any other charge, including the sale of drinks. 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 September 20, 2004. 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. (ORIGINAL SIGNED BY GAIL EASTMAN) CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: !ORIGINAL SIGNED BY PAT CHANDLERI SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -5- PC2004 -109 0 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) E 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 20, 2004, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BUFFA, EASTMAN, FLORES, O'CONNELL, ROMERO, VANDERBILT - LINARES VELASQUEZ NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of , 2004. (ORIGINAL SIGNED BY PAT CHANDLER) SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -6- PC2004 -109 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT 0 Attachment - Item No. 3 JW Is 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 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: .020.1 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 space is needed. C (over) CASE N0. 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? ry 2. 3. Has any aspect of the nature of the operation changed since the issuance of this use permit or variance? ., r 1 .. to 4. Are the conditions of approval pertaining to the use permit or variance being complied with? U 5. The applicant for this request is: ❑ Property Owner %Authorized Agent NW C_ Date ee-jr\ Reinstatement application.doc Revised 9/13/04 Have the land uses in the immediate vicinity changed since the issuance his use permit or variance? If you are requesting a deletion of the time limitation, is this deletion necessary for the continued operation of this use or variance? . '—' - • c-71 City of Anaheim POLICE DEPARTMENT Special Operations Division F -AM .711TiT711i4117R1MM To: Amy Vazquez Planning Department From: Sergeant Mike Lozeau Vice Detail Date: September 15, 2005 RE: CUP 2005- 05027- Tracking Case # CUP2004 -02090 Xalos 1160 N. Kraemer Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92807 The Police Department has received an I.D.C. Route Sheet for CUP 2005 - 05027. The request by the applicant is to reinstate and retain public entertainment in conjunction with a previously- approved restaurant. The location is within Reporting District 1432, which has a Crime Rate of 76 percent above average. The Reporting District to the North is 1332 and has a crime rate of 87 percent below average. The Reporting District to the South is the City of Orange. The Reporting District to the West is 1431 and has a crime rate of 54 percent below average. The Reporting District to the East is 1333/1433. The crime rate for Reporting District 1333 is 65 percent below average. The crime rate for Reporting District 1433 is 65 percent below average. From September 1, 2004 through September 12, 2005 this location had 57 calls for service. The calls consist of: 3 fights, 10 battery, 10 disturbance, 6 problem solving, 2 bar - check, 1 suspicious circumstances, 10 burglary alarm, 2 AMC violations, 2 car stops, 3 fire department, 1 ABC check, 2 recover lost or stolen property, 1 lost property, 2 stolen vehicles, 1 vandalism, traffic accident w /medical aid, 1 crime scene investigator call out. Of the 57 calls for service there were 24 reports taken. They consist of: 1 fight, 6 battery, 2 AMC violation, 2 disturbance, 2 stolen vehicle, 3 fire department, 1 vandalism, 1 traffic accident/medical aid, 1 assist other department, 1 recover stolen property, 1 lost property, 3 officer initiated. The Police Department does not oppose this request. The calls for service have remained about the same, but the man hours needed to keep this restaurant in compliance have gone down significantly. Anaheim Police Dept. 425 S. Harbor Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 TEL 714.765.1401 FAX 714.765.1665 Memorandum Amy Vazquez Xalos We would be in favor of a 3 year time limitation on their Conditional Use Permit. We request that all previous conditions apply: 1) At all times when the premise is open for business, the premise shall be maintained as a bona fide restaurant and shall provide a menu containing an assortment of foods normally offered in such restaurant. 2) There shall be no pool tables or amusement devices maintained upon the premises at any time unless the proper permits have been obtained from the City of Anaheim. 3) The gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed 40 percent of the gross sales of all retail sales during any three (3) month period. The applicant shall maintain records on a quarterly basis indicating the separate amounts of sales of alcoholic beverages and other items. These records shall be made available for inspection by any City of Anaheim official when requested. 4) There shall be no live entertainment, amplified music or dancing permitted on the premise at any time unless the proper permits have been obtained from the City of Anaheim. 5) The sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premise shall be prohibited. 6) There shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. 7) The activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to surrounding properties. 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. 9) There shall be no public telephones on the property that are located outside the building and within the control of the applicant. Page 2 Memorandum Amy Vazquez Xalos 10) That the business operator shall comply with Section 24200.5 of the Business and Profession Code so as not to employ or permit any persons to solicit or encourage others, directly or indirectly, to buy them drinks in the licensed premises under any commission, percentage, salary, or other profit- sharing plan, scheme or conspiracy. 11) At all times that entertainment or dancing is permitted, security measures shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department to deter unlawful conduct on the part of employees or patrons, and promote the safe and orderly assembly and movement of persons and vehicles, and to prevent disturbance to the neighborhood by excessive noise created by patrons entering or leaving the premises. 12) 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) 13) That all doors serving subject restaurant shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and shall be kept closed at all times during the operation of the premises except for ingress /egress, permit deliveries and in cases of emergency. 14) No "happy hour" type of reduced price alcoholic beverage promotion shall be allowed at any time. 15) Signs shall be posted at all exits of the premises including out to the patio area notifying patrons of the prohibition of alcoholic beverages from leaving the confines of the establishment. 16) 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. 17) One security officer must be posted in the patio area at all times. 18) There shall be no food or alcohol served in the patio area. If you have any further questions you may contact me at ext. 1451. f. \home \mmirwin \CUP 2005 -05027 Xalos 3.dm Page 3 Item No. 3 July t 8, 2005 CITY OF ANAHEIM Attn: To Whom It May Concern C.U.P EXTENTION REQUEST Re: Xalos Restaurant & Bar at 1160 N. Kraemer Blvd, Anaheim, Ca 92806 This letter is to request a 3 -year extension for our C.U.P entertainment and dance hall permit. My name is Juan Manuel Reynoso, and I am the owner of Xalos Restaurant and Bar, located at 1160 N. Kraemer Blvd, Anaheim, Ca 92806. We have been doing business at this location for the past 30 months and I feel that we have accomplished our goal of improving the appearance of the location as well as decreased the crime rate. We have done everything to the best of our knowledge to operate within our Conditional Use Permit and regulations. I hope to have my petition granted and I look forward to continue working together with the city of Anaheim. Please don't hesitate to call me if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you for your time. Owner (714) 620 -5192 ITEM NO. 2 ur Gip 12 SP 92 -2 CUP 31 SHEL n Ss . .` THE ANAHEIM RESORT SP 92 -2 RCL 66 -67 -61 (93) RCL 66 -67 -61 (54) VAR 3842 HOLIDAY INN ANAHEIM AT THE PARK 2� �n T I*=ni�T1- 100-MOETTiini0G�c�!I�Y] TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -05022 Requested By: MAC S. BHUPINDER REQUEST TO CONSTRUCTA COFFEE SHOPAND TO ESTABLISH AN OFFICE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A SERVICE STATION WITH ACCESSORY CONVENIENCE MARKET WITH ACCESSORY SALES OF BEER AND WINE FOR OFF - PREMISES CONSUMPTION AND 2,000 SQUARE FOOT DRIVE -THRU FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH WAIVERS OF: (A) MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES (B) MINIMUM LANDSCAPE AND STRUCTURAL SETBACK 1200 South Harbor Boulevard 2007 S 94 g� -23 G� 119 RCL 90-91-23 RG�- 58 - 1838 RCL 58 -59 -121 GUP 1593 RCL 53 -541 GUP STORE 1 SP92 -2 I I SP92-2 1CL%L91 -23 RCL% VAR 1918 S RCL ]2 -]1: VAR 5125 CUP2573 AUTO I VACANT SHOP SP 9 g� -23 FiG� 90'Sg -119 RG� 5P 1 838 cu? A51,3 OR�D 'CRP�RV PPRK SP 92 -2 RCL 90 -91 -23 RCL 58 -59 -119 CUP 1838 CUP 1573 BALL ROAD THE ANAHEIM RESORT 170' y� 1 RCL N-39 CG O-L RCL 5 5154 M -11 G RCL 9 &W -3 �C UP 13'q T 1 RCL6fi RCL 67-68- 5502 2 RC 11 COU TES LU CUP 3905022 CUP 11 L 1 CUP 390 N UP 130 1 LG 1 VAR 684 M ANAHEIM RCL 6]fi8 -39 W m VAR 381 MOTEL RCL 5154 -11 J 1 VAR 228 CUP1386 PCN Y% h CUP 106] SERVICE GJ 1 srSTATION Co e�S BERRYAVE Of I e O 1 Co 1 RS -2 Q 1 = 1 1 1 1 BOYSE N AVE 1 1 RS -2 1 PN N 1 1 1 1 1 Subject Property Date: October 3, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' RCL666781 (171 VAR 2925 S VAR 28]2 VAR 2158 SP 92 -2 RCL66-67E1 (17 CUP 31 SHEL n Ss . .` THE ANAHEIM RESORT SP 92 -2 RCL 66 -67 -61 (93) RCL 66 -67 -61 (54) VAR 3842 HOLIDAY INN ANAHEIM AT THE PARK 2� �n T I*=ni�T1- 100-MOETTiini0G�c�!I�Y] TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -05022 Requested By: MAC S. BHUPINDER REQUEST TO CONSTRUCTA COFFEE SHOPAND TO ESTABLISH AN OFFICE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A SERVICE STATION WITH ACCESSORY CONVENIENCE MARKET WITH ACCESSORY SALES OF BEER AND WINE FOR OFF - PREMISES CONSUMPTION AND 2,000 SQUARE FOOT DRIVE -THRU FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH WAIVERS OF: (A) MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES (B) MINIMUM LANDSCAPE AND STRUCTURAL SETBACK 1200 South Harbor Boulevard 2007 S 94 g� -23 G� 119 RCL 90-91-23 RG�- 58 - 1838 RCL 58 -59 -121 GUP 1593 RCL 53 -541 GUP STORE 1 SP92 -2 I I SP92-2 1CL%L91 -23 RCL% VAR 1918 S RCL ]2 -]1: VAR 5125 CUP2573 AUTO I VACANT SHOP SP 9 g� -23 FiG� 90'Sg -119 RG� 5P 1 838 cu? A51,3 OR�D 'CRP�RV PPRK SP 92 -2 RCL 90 -91 -23 RCL 58 -59 -119 CUP 1838 CUP 1573 BALL ROAD THE ANAHEIM RESORT 170' y� 1 RCL N-39 CG O-L RCL 5 5154 M -11 G RCL 9 &W -3 �C UP 13'q T 1 RCL6fi RCL 67-68- 5502 2 RC 11 COU TES LU CUP 3905022 CUP 11 L 1 CUP 390 N UP 130 1 LG 1 VAR 684 M ANAHEIM RCL 6]fi8 -39 W m VAR 381 MOTEL RCL 5154 -11 J 1 VAR 228 CUP1386 PCN Y% h CUP 106] SERVICE GJ 1 srSTATION Co e�S BERRYAVE Of I e O 1 Co 1 RS -2 Q 1 = 1 1 1 1 BOYSE N AVE 1 1 RS -2 1 PN N 1 1 1 1 1 Subject Property Date: October 3, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 4 4a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED) (Motion for continuance) 4b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 4c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3902 ( TRACKING NO. CUP2005- 05022 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 0.95 -acre property is located at the southeast corner of Harbor Boulevard and Ball Road having 310 feet on the east side of Harbor Boulevard and 170 feet on the south side of Ball Road (1200 South Harbor Boulevard). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests to construct a coffee shop and to establish an office in conjunction with an existing service station with accessory convenience market with beer and wine for off - premises consumption and a 2,000 square foot drive - through fast food restaurant under authority of Code Section 18.08.030.010, and with waiver of the following: (a) SECTION NOS. 18.08.060.010.0101 and 18.08.060.010.0102 Minimum structural and landscape setback (10 feet required along Palm Street; 5 feet proposed) (b) SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 BACKGROUND Minimum number of parking spaces (67 required; 35 proposed) (3) This property is developed with a service station with accessory convenience market with beer and wine for off - premises consumption, a 2,000 square foot drive - through fast food restaurant and is zoned C -G (General Commercial). The Anaheim General Plan designates this property for General Commercial land uses. The General Plan further designates properties to the north and west for Commercial Recreation land uses, properties to the east for Office -Low land uses, and properties to the south for Low Density Residential land uses. (4) The applicant, Andrew Paszterko, has submitted the attached letter dated September 27, 2005, requesting a continuance to the November 14, 2005, Commission meeting in order make modifications to the plans and for the request to be readvertised to include a commercial retail center. SR- CUP3902(cont)jpr Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 4 PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (5) Conditional Use Permit No. 3902 (to permit service station with accessory convenience market with beer and wine for off - premises consumption and a 2,000 square foot drive - through fast food restaurant with waiver of maximum wall height, minimum number of parking spaces, minimum structural and landscaped setback adjacent to a local street, required site screening, and minimum landscaped setback adjacent to a residential zone boundary ) was approved, in part, by the Planning Commission on February 3, 1997. Because requests for a general plan amendment and reclassification were submitted in conjunction with the request for the service station, the City Council heard and approved the request, in its entirety, on February 25, 1997. RECOMMENDATION: (6) That the Commission, by motion, continue this item to the November 14, 2005, Planning Commission meeting. Page 2 file: / //HI/ REPORTS / Planning %2OCommission /PC %2OOctobeN /x203,% 202... 20Hubor %2OContinumce %2ORequest %20 " /o2OCity %2Oofl/o2OAnabeim.txt Subject: FW: CUP3902 @ Ball and Harbor - City of Anaheim From: gazretail [mailto:andy@gazretail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 7:51 AM To: John Ramirez Subject: RE: CUP3902 @ Ball and Harbor - City of Anaheim F- A MMITiT7' MIMI1 r-M! DEAR JOHN I would like to request the continuation of the subject CUP application from the Planning Commission meeting of Oct 3rd 2005, to the meeting on Nov 14th 2005, due to the conflict in scheduling that I am facing. RESPECTFULLY, ANDREW PASZTERKO, Architect file: / //HI/ REPORTS / Planning %20Conui smion/ PC% 20October ...20Continuance %2ORequest %20 " /o2OCity%2Oof%2OAnaheim.bct9 /29/2005 12:32:09 AM Item No.5 Vintage Skin & Spa Lorentz P. Moy (714) 970 -9991 5781 E. La Palma Ave Anaheim Hills, CA 92807 Email: vintaeeskinspagaol.com August 10, 2005 To: Whom It May Concern: RE: LETTER OF OPERATION This letter of operation is to provide description of the nature of my present business. I'm currently renting a building with 900 square footage of leaseable space to provide beauty services for the day spa within the Canyon Village Plaza (located in the Albertson's shopping center) located in Anaheim Hills, which includes the following Microdermabrasion, Chemical Peel, Waxing, Massage (Coming), Facials, Permanent Cosmetic Artistry, Make -Up Application & Lessons/Airbrushing, Ear Piercing, Lash Extension/Perm, Gift Certificates Available The Days and Hours of Operation are: Sunday & Monday: CLOSED (Appt. Available) Tuesday - Friday: LOAM -5PM (5 -7PM By Appt. Only) Saturday: 9: 3 OAM -5 :3 OPM The amount of parking required will be a minim of 3, however the entire shopping plaza parking space is available and provided for clients' usage. In addition, at least minim of twi independent contractor: 1 Esthetician & 1 Massage Therapist will be per shift if not including the owner, which is myself. Sincerely, Lorentz P. Moy Owner CL'? 0.2005 -0 5029 RM6 5121 56- kA RU EPGN RRG 6f\6 io 2 3DV AQUE �: R .4 GN 4� RM g69 A QU EP ITEM NO. 2 Z \� 4 D EPG RPCE ST y P\ PY 3DU "CE QD ADU ADU �\ M \RP�'� / RCL ADJ07 69(47) U C VAN EKERT / n DU \ ENGINEERING Ut �4 U Y Q L D Conditional Use Permit No. 2001 -04434 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -05024 Date: October 3, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: RONALD LUSHING Q.S. No. 121 REQUESTS REINSTATEMENT OF THIS PERMIT BY THE MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO A TIME LIMITATION (APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2001 TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 10, 2005) TO RETAIN A CONTRACTOR'S YARD. 2550 East Miraloma Way M. wr ' M :4 r INN Y ,R?L�ai PY � ap rt s` Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2001 -04434 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -05024 Date: October 3, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: RONALD LUSHING Q.S. No. 121 REQUESTS REINSTATEMENT OF THIS PERMIT BY THE MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO A TIME LIMITATION (APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2001 TO EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 10, 2005) TO RETAIN A CONTRACTOR'S YARD. 2550 East Miraloma Way 2006 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 6 6a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION — CLASS 1 (Motion) 6b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001 -04434 (Resolution) (Tracking No. CUP2005- 05024) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 0.87 -acre property is accessed via a 20 -foot wide access easement on the south side of Miraloma Way, has a maximum depth of 355 feet, and is located 190 feet west of the centerline of Lawrence Avenue (2550 East Miraloma Way). 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 September 10, 2001 to expire September 10, 2005) to retain a contractor's storage yard under authority of Code Sections Nos. 18.10.030.040.0403 and 18.38200. BACKGROUND: (3) This property is developed with an 8,000 square foot office and industrial building and outdoor storage yard for a roofing contractor and is zoned "I" Industrial. The Anaheim General Plan designates this property and surrounding properties for General Industrial land uses. (4) (4) Conditional Use Permit No2001 -04434 to permit an outdoor contractor's yard was approved by the Planning Commission on September 10, 2001, for a period of four (4) years to expire on September 10, 2005. The applicant has submitted a letter requesting reinstatement of the permit within the required 180 -day period. Resolution No. PC2001 -133 adopted in conjunction with approval of this permit contains the following condition of approval: "1. That subject use permit shall expire four (4) years from the date of this resolution, on September 10, 2005" . DISCUSSION (5) Richard Marion, Vice President of Mesa Roofing Corporation has submitted a letter of request to retain the roofing contractor yard for an additional four (4) years. (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 is being exercised in a manner not detrimental to the particular area and surrounding land uses. (7) The Community Preservation Division has submitted the attached memorandum dated September 12, 2005, which indicated that the property was in compliance with all conditions of approval except for condition nos. 5 and 14. The applicant is requesting to modify these conditions as follows: Condition No. 5 — "That no outdoor display ef er work on, vehicles or asphalt tankers or vehicular parts, shall be permitted. Outdoor storage shall be limited to asphalt tanker trucks incidental to the business" (This modification would allow the business to store Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 6 asphalt in tankers for use by the roofing trucks transporting asphalt to the individual job sites.) Condition No. 14 — `That trash storage area(s) shall be provided and maintained in location(s) acceptable to the Public Works Department, Street Sweeping and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage area(s) shall be designed located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable from adiacent streets or hiohways. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Zoning Division and Streets and Sanitation Division approval. "(The trash enclosure is within an area not visible to surrounding streets or the SR -91 Freeway and as such, would not be a prime target for graffiti. Therefore, the planting of vines to prevent graffiti is not as critical.) (8) Staff supports the requested modifications to conditions of approval because it allows for the reasonable operation of the facility while maintaining the intent of the requirement. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (9) Staff has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15302, Class 1 (Existing Facilities), as defined in the CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation- 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; Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 6 (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 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 take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section under Section No. 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities). (b) By resolution, approve the reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 2001- 04434 to retain a contractor's storage yard for a period of four (4) years to expire September 10, 2009, by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. Page 3 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION REINSTATING AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001 -04434 AND AMENDING CERTAIN CONDITONS OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. PC2001 -133, ADOPTED IN CONJUNCTION THEREWITH (2550 EAST MIRALOMA WAY) WHEREAS, on September 10, 2001, the Anaheim Planning Commission, by Resolution No. PC2001 -133 approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2001 -04434 to permit an outdoor contractor's yard; and WHEREAS, said Resolution No. PC2001 -133 includes the following condition of approval: 1- That subject use permit shall expire four (4) years from the date of this resolution, on September 10, 2005" . WHEREAS, the property is currently developed with an outdoor contractor's yard and is zoned (Industrial) and the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for General Industrial land uses; and WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: THAT PORTION OF LOT 2 IN BLOCK 10 OF THE GOLDEN STATE TRACT, IN THE RANCHO SAN JUAN DE SANTA ANA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK 4, PAGES 66 AND 67 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 2786, PAGE 260 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT, (FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS DESCRIPTION, SAID NORTHERLY LINE IS ALSO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF ANAHEIM ROAD AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP), NORTH 74° 00' 46" EAST 4.11 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 61 52'32" EAST 289.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 61 48' 55" EAST 290.16 FEET TO THE TRUE PINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 61 48'55" EAST 90.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 31 08 EAST 77.73 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44 04' 19" EAST 259.64 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45 05' 18" EAST 17.92 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 45' 56" WEST 265.02 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0 14' 04" WEST 135.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 28 11' 05" WEST 100.00 FEET TO THE SAID TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. WHEREAS, the applicant has requested reinstatement of this conditional use permit to retain an outdoor contractor's yard and modifications to conditions of approval pursuant to Code Section 18.60 of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on October 3, 2005, at 2:30 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 18.60, 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: Cr1PC2005- -1- PC2005- 1. That the applicant's proposal to retain a contractor's storage yard is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Sections Nos. 18.10.030.040.0403 and 18.38200. 2. That the proposed reinstatement of the outdoor contractor's yard would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is currently located. 3. That the facts necessary to support each and every required showing for the original approval of the entitlement exist; and that an inspection conducted by the Community Preservation Division of the Planning Department revealed that the use is operating in compliance with the conditions of approval imposed on the original permit except for conditions nos. 5 and 14 which have herein been modified. 4. 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. 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 it has been determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15302, Class 1 (Existing Facilities), as defined in the CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does herby approve the reinstatement of this permit and further, incorporates the conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. PC2001 -133 into a new resolution with the following conditions of approval: 1. That subject use permit shall expire on September 10, 2009. 2. That three (3) foot high street address numbers on the roof of the building shall be maintained in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible to adjacent streets or properties or freeways. 3. That no outdoor display of, or work on, vehicles or asphalt tankers or vehicular parts, shall be permitted. Outdoor storage shall be limited to asphalt tanker trucks incidental to the business. 4. That an eight (8) foot high masonry block wall shall be maintained along the south and southeast property lines adjacent to the SR -91 (Riverside Freeway and clinging vines shall be maintained to eliminate graffiti opportunities adjacent to both sides of the block wall, on maximum five (5) foot centers. The landscaping shall be irrigated, and both the block wall and landscaping shall be maintained. 5. That all landscaping and irrigation for the existing landscaped areas shall be maintained in accordance with submitted plans. 6. 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. 7. That no signage shall be permitted for the proposed business on this site unless such signage is first submitted to the Planning Commission for review and approval as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. 8. That the property shall be maintained in compliance with the most current versions of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436, 601 and 602 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. 9. That an on -site trash truck turn - around area shall be maintained in accordance with Engineering Standard Detail No. 610 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. Said turn - around areas shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Streets and Sanitation Division approval- -2- PC2005- 10. That trash storage area(s) shall be provided and maintained in location(s) acceptable to the Public Works Department, Street Sweeping and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage area(s) shall be designed located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. 11. That the outdoor storage of materials and equipment shall not exceed the height of the perimeter fencing and shall not be visible to any adjacent public right-of-way- 12 That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Development Services Division of the Planning Department marked Exhibit No. 1, and as conditioned herein. 13. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable, ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT 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 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice prior to issuance of a building permit or prior to commencement of the activity, whichever occurs first. 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 October 3, 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 -3- PC2005- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) 1, 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 October 3, 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 4- PC2005- Attachment - Item No. 6 MEMORANDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Community Preservation Division DATE: September 12, 2005 TO: Della Herrick, Associate Planner FROM: Mayo Salazar, Community Preservation Officer SUBJECT: C.U.P Inspection for 2550 E. Miraloma Way. On September 9, 2005 at approximately 1100 hours, I conducted an inspection at the above listed property. During my inspection I observed required conditions of approval #5 and #14 were not in compliance. A letter will be mailed to the property owner of record for the aforementioned required actions. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at ext. 4403. • PETITIONER'S STATEMENT 4 1ttachment - Item No. 6 S 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 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 lorig -lerm 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. 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 X❑ (over) CASE CUP No. 2001 -04434 2. Have the land uses in theOmediate vicinity changed since the issuan0of this use permit or variance? Yes ❑ No X❑ 3. Has any aspect of the nature of the operation changed since the issuance of this use permit or variance? Yes ❑ No X❑ Exoiain: 4. Are the conditions of approval pertaining to the use permit or variance being complied with? Yes X❑ No ❑ Explain: 5. If you are requesting a deletion of the time limitation, is this deletion necessary for the continued operation of this use or variance? Yes[_] No ❑X Explain: The applicant for this request is: ❑X Property Owner ❑Authorized Agent NEXT MEETING OUT 0 3 2005 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Richard Marion Name of Property Owner or Authorized Agent (Please Print) of Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date Reinstatement application.doc Revised 9/13164 0 Mesa Roofing 2550 E. Mira Loma Way, Anaheim, Ca 92806 Telephone 714- 632.6929, Fax 714 -632 -2784 License 564151 C -39 rmnrinnatmasamofing mm August 4, 2005 City of Anaheim Planning Department Planning Services Division 200 S. Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, Ca 92805 To Whom It May Concern: Corporation We at Mesa Roofing Corporation are requesting the renewal of our Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) #3862 for another four -year term. `/y3 , t It has been a pleasurable experience the last four years of conducting business in the City of Anaheim. From completing projects in the City of Anaheim to giving our employee's the opportunity to reside in a community with such high regards to a family environment. Currently nine employees have changed their residing residence to Anaheim. As one of the owners of Mesa Roofing Corporation and our entire staff thank the City of Anaheim for the last four fruitful years and hope many more to follow. Sincerely, Mesa Roofin Corporation n Vice President CUP No. 2001 -04431+ 0 0 Attachment - Item No. 6 RESOLUTION NO. PC2001 -133 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001 -04434 BE GRANTED FOR A PERIOD OF FOUR (4) YEARS TO EXPIRE ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2005 WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: THAT PORTION OF LOT 2 IN BLOCK 10 OF THE GOLDEN STATE TRACT, IN THE RANCHO SAN JUAN DE SANTA ANA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK 4, PAGES 66 AND 67 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN LAND CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 2786, PAGE 260 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT, (FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS DESCRIPTION, SAID NORTHERLY LINE IS ALSO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF ANAHEIM ROAD AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP), NORTH 74 DEG. 00'46" EAST 4.11 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 61 DEG. 52'32" EAST 289.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 61 DEG. 48'55" EAST 290.16 FEET TO THE TRUE PINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 61 DEG. 48'55" EAST 90.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 31 DEG. 08'18" EAST 77.73 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44 DEG. 04' 19" EAST 259.64 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45 DEG. 05'18" EAST 17.92 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEG. 45'56" WEST 265.02 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEG. 14'04" WEST 135.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 28 DEG. 11' 05" WEST 100.00 FEET TO THE SAID TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on September 10, 2001 at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.61.050.502 to permit an outdoor contractor's yard. 2. That the proposed use, under the conditions imposed, will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located. 3. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use 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. 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. 5. That granting of this conditional use permit, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. CR5191 PK.DOC -1- PC2001 -133 Irl • 0 6. 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 The Planning Director's authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 1, as defined in the State of California Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR ") Guidelines and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: 1. That subject use permit shall expire four (4) years from the date of this resolution, on September 10, 2005. 2. That the owner of subject property shall submit a letter to the Zoning Division requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 3862 (to permit an automobile wholesale /auction facility). 3. That prior to commencing operation of this business, a valid business license shall be obtained from the Business License Division of the City of Anaheim Finance Department. 4. That a plan shall be submitted to the Police Department, Community Services Division, for review and approval showing three (3) foot high street address numbers on the roof of the building in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible to adjacent streets or properties or freeways. 5. That no outdoor display of, or work on, vehicles or asphalt tankers or vehicular parts, shall be permitted. 6. That a plan shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval showing an eight (8) foot high masonry block wall shall be constructed and maintained along the south and southeast property lines adjacent to the SR -91 (Riverside Freeway); provided, however, that the City Traffic and Transportation Manager shall have the authority to reduce the height of the wall to protect visual lines -of -sight where pedestrian and/or vehicle circulation intersect. Clinging vines to eliminate graffiti opportunities shall be planted adjacent to both sides of the block wall, on maximum five (5) foot centers. The landscaping shall be irrigated, and both the block wall and landscaping shall be maintained. Following approved, said block wall shall be constructed in accordance with said plan. That a landscaping and irrigation plan for the refurbishment of the existing landscaped areas shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval. Any decision made by the Zoning Division regarding said plan may be appealed to the Planning Commission and /or City Council. Following approved, said landscaping shall be planted and maintained in accordance with said plan. 8. 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. 9. That no signage shall be permitted for the proposed business on this site unless such signage is first submitted to the Planning Commission for review and approval as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. -2- PC2001 -133 10. That prior to commencement of activity herein approved, the developer shall submit a water quality management plan (WQMP) specifically identifying the best management practices that will be used on -site to control predictable pollutants from storm water runoff. The WQMP shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division, for review and approval. 11. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and approval showing conformance with the most current versions of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436, 601 and 602 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 12. That the driveway on Miraloma Way shall be reconstructed to accommodate ten (10) foot radius curb returns in conformance with Engineering Department Standard No. 137. 13. That an on -site trash truck turn around area shall be provided in accordance with Engineering Standard Detail No. 610 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. Said turn - around area shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Streets and Sanitation Division approval. 14. That trash storage area(s) shall be provided and maintained in location(s) acceptable to the Public Works Department, Street Sweeping and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage area(s) shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum one (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 Zoning Division and Streets and Sanitation Division approval. 15. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. 16. Proposed Condition No. 16 was deleted because it was the same as Condition No. 13, above. 17. That the outdoor storage of materials and equipment shall not exceed the height of the perimeter fencing and shall not be visible to any adjacent public right -of -way. 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 No. 1, and as conditioned herein. 19. That within a period of three (3) months from the date of this resolution or prior to commencement of the activity authorized herein, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 2, 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 18, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 20. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. -3- PC2001 -133 . I • THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of September 10, 2001. (Original signed by J. Vanderbilt) CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: (Original signed by Eleanor Fernandes) SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Fernandes, 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 10, 2001, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ARNOLD. BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, EASTMAN, KOOS, VANDERBILT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of .2001. (Original signed by Eleanor Fernandes) SECRETARY. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 10 PC2001 -133 Item No. 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 10, 2001 Item No. 14 REVISED 14a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION — CLASS 1 14b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001 -04434 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (Motion) (Resolution) (1) This irregularly- shaped, 0.87 -acre property is accessed via a 20 -foot wide access easement from Miraloma Way and is located 200 feet south of Miraloma Way, has a maximum depth of 355 feet, and is located 190 feet west of the centerline of Lawrence Avenue (2550 East Miraloma Way). REQUEST: (2) Section r 18 03 030 and 18 61.050 050 to permit a permit outdoor contractor's yard• BACKGROUND: (3) The property is developed with an 8,000 square foot office building and outdoor storage yard (for an automotive auction facility) and is zoned ML (Limited Industrial). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this site for General Industrial land uses. (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 3862 (to permit an automobile wholesale /auction facility) was approved by the Planning Commission on September 4, 1996. The facility is currently in operation. View from southbound Miraloma Avenue sr8083kb.doc Page 1 t/ • REVISED (5) Surrounding land uses are as follows: 0 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 10, 2001 Item No. 14 Direction ' Land Use Zoning General Plan ` Designation ;North Industrial Building ML General Industrial North across Miraloma Apartment Complexes RM -1200 Medium l nsity Avenue (CalTrans and Metropolitan water Resid nti Way Southeast across Industrial Building ML General Industrial Miraloma Avenue South SR -91 (Riverside Freeway) N/A Freeway West Industrial Building ML General Industrial DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (6) The petitioner proposes to establish a contractor's yard in conjunction with a roofing company. The roofing business would use the office building for administrative office purposes and some indoor storage of materials; however, the property would also be used for outdoor storage (approximately 6,100 square feet of outdoor area) of vehicles, materials and two tanker /trailers that contain asphalt for roofing. While no new buildings are proposed in connection with this request, the petitioner indicates that a new 8 -foot high block wall would be constructed adjacent to the south property line abutting the Riverside Freeway right -of -way. (7) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the following site characteristics: Direction : Existing `Building Setbacks Required Setbacks- for the ML Zone Existing 'Landscaping North adjacent to an industrial 0 to 10 feet None None existing building Southeast adjacent to Miraloma 55 feet 50 feet None existing Avenue (CalTrans and Metropolitan water District Easements) South adjacent to SR -91 (Riverside 180 to 215 feet 25 feet o with l 5 area Palm Trees Freeway) existing West adjacent to an industrial 24 to 30 feet None None existing building (8) The floor plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates an 8,000 square -foot, 2 -story office building with 4,000 square feet of floor area for the first and second floors. The plan indicates, that the first floor consists entirely of office area, and the second floor consists of 2,000 square feet of office area (including a 100 square foot kitchen area) and the remaining 2,000 square feet is designated for storage. Page 2 • REVISED 0 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 10, 2001 Item No. 14 (9) The site plan indicates a 30 -foot wide access easement providing vehicular access from Miraloma Way. The plans further indicate a total of 30 parking spaces available on site. Code requires a minimum of 30 parking spaces based on the following: Use Area (Square Feet)' ' Parking'Ratio "" Required.Number of Spaces , Office 6,000 s.f. 4.0 spaces per 1,000 s.f. 24.0 Indoor Storage 2,000 s.f. 1.55 spaces per 1,000 s.f. 3.1 Outdoor Storage I 6,100 S.T. 1 space per 2,500 s.f. 2.4 Total 30 spaces (10) The submitted photographs indicate that the existing two -story office building is constructed of masonry blocks (painted white and gray) with decorative dividers separating the windows shown on the south building elevation. The remaining building elevations are blank, flat wall surfaces, with an exterior stairwell located on the west building elevation providing secondary access to the second floor. No changes are proposed to the exterior of the building. The site plan does indicate a future metal building to be constructed adjacent to the east office building elevation; however, no plans were submitted regarding this future metal building. (11) The site plan and photographs indicates an existing 25 -foot wide landscaped area adjacent to the south property line abutting the Riverside Freeway. The landscape area includes five (5) existing 14 -foot high palm trees with groundcover consisting primarily of grass. Code would require a minimum of 1 tree per 20 feet of street frontage for a total of five (5) trees to be planted adjacent to the south property line (90 feet of freeway frontage divided by 20 feet = 5 trees). The petitioner also states that vines would be planted on both sides (one side of the wall would face the Riverside Freeway) of the proposed 8 -foot high block wall. Code requires that outdoor storage areas be screened from view such that the outdoor storage does not exceed the height of the enclosure. Code further requires vines and /or shrubs to be planted adjacent to block walls to prevent graffiti opportunities. (12) No sign plans were submitted with this application, and the petitioner states that no signs are proposed in connection with this request. Currently, there is no signage advertising this facility to the public other than a real estate sign offering the premises for sale or lease. Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 10, 2001 Item No. 14 REVISED (13) The submitted letter of operation indicates that the roofing business would operate Monday through Friday, from 5 a.m. to 7 p.m. with 50 to 70 employees. The business would store two (2) mobile asphalt tankers (50 and 60 tons each), eight jobsite tankers (10 tons each), two dump trucks, three 2 -ton trucks, five tractors for towing the tankers, seven forklifts and six kettles (tar pots) on the premises. The large mobile tankers would actually remain in place and would be used for storage of asphalt on the premises, with the jobsite tankers being filled on -site, then transported to the necessary construction site. The large asphalt tankers are filled three times a week, and the jobsite tankers are filled daily. The petitioner further states that there are 15 crew trucks; however, these trucks are driven daily by the employees and are not stored on the premises. Commission may wish to note that commercial trucks are not permitted to be stored in residential areas in the City of Anaheim. View from intersection of Miraloma Avenue and Sunshine Way Page 4 • REVISED Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 10, 2001 Item No. 14 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (14) The Planning Director's authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities), as defined in the CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: (15) The proposed project has been reviewed by affected City departments to determine whether it conforms with the City's Growth Management Element adopted by the City Council on March 17, 1992. Based on City staff review of the proposed project, it has been determined that this project does not fit within the scope necessary to require a Growth Management Element analysis, therefore, no analysis has been performed. EVALUATION: (16) Outdoor contractor's yards are permitted within the ML Zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (17) Staff is concerned with the topography of this site in conjunction with the outdoor storage of materials, vehicles and asphalt tankers for this roofing business. The property is located below the elevation of Miraloma Avenue (to the southeast of the subject property) was well as below portions of the SR -91 (Riverside) and SR -57 (Orange) freeways. While the petitioner has submitted photographs showing the site not visible to the freeways, staff has conducted a field inspection and determined that the site is visible to the public traveling south on Miraloma Avenue (towards La Palma Avenue) and from the carpool transition ramp from the north bound Orange Freeway to the west bound Riverside Freeway. The petitioner states and the plans indicate that vehicles, materials and tankers containing the asphalt and tar for the roofing business would be stored outdoors. The outdoor storage yard area would be visible from Miraloma Avenue and from the Riverside Freeway. Currently, the outdoor activities and stored vehicles for the current automotive wholesale /auction facility are visible to the public from Miraloma Avenue and the Riverside Freeway. Staff believes that the additional visual clutter along the major arterial highways and freeway will have a cumulative negative aesthetic affect to the surrounding area and is contrary to the goals of the City of Anaheim to improve the visual aesthetics of the freeway corridors throughout the city. Therefore, staff recommends denial of this request. FINDINGS: (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 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; Page 5 0 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 10, 2001 Item No. 14 REVISED (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. RECOMMENDATION: (19) 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 project is Categorically Exempt under Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines. (b) By resolution, deny Conditional Use Permit No. 2001 -04434 (to permit an outdoor contractor's yard) based on the following: (i) That the proposed outdoor contractor's yard is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code; however, the proposed contractor's yard will not be able to comply with Code requirements for the screening of materials and vehicles from the surrounding public view. (ii) That the proposed outdoor contractor's yard will adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located by allowing additional clutter along the Riverside Freeway and Miraloma Avenue (a major arterial highway). (iii) That the size, shape and topography of the site for the proposed outdoor contractor's yard is inadequate to allow the full development of the proposed use since the site is depressed below the elevation of the surrounding arterial highway ( Miraloma Avenue) and freeway (Riverside Freeway), and the additional visual clutter of the materials stored outdoors will be detrimental to the particular area's peace, health, safety, and general welfare. (iv) That the granting of Conditional Use Permit No. 2001- 04434, even under the conditions imposed, will be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Page 6 0 0 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 10, 2001 Item No. 14 REVISED CONDITIONS CITY 1. That subject use permit shall expire in one (1) year from the date of this resolution, on September 10, 2002. 2. That the owner of subject property shall submit a letter requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 3862 (to permit an automobile wholesale /auction facility) to the Zoning Division. 3. That prior to the operation of this business, a valid business license shall be obtained from the City of Anaheim, Business License Division of the Finance Department. 4. That a plan shall be submitted to the Police Department, Community Services Division, for review and approval showing 3 -foot high address numbers 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. 5. That no outdoor display of, or work on vehicles or vehicular parts or asphalt tankers shall be permitted. 6. That a plan shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval showing an eight (8) -foot high masonry block wall to be constructed and maintained along the south and southeast property lines adjacent to the SR -91 (Riverside Freeway); provided, however, that the City Traffic and Transportation Manager shall have the authority to reduce the height of the wall to protect visual lines -of -sight where pedestrian and /or vehicular circulation intersect. Clinging vines to eliminate graffiti opportunities shall be planted on both sides of the wall, on maximum 5 -foot centers, irrigated and maintained, adjacent to said wall. Once approved, said wall shall be constructed in accordance with said plan. 7. That a landscape and irrigation plan for the refurbishment of the existing landscape areas shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approval. Any decision made by the Zoning Division regarding said plan may be appealed to the Planning Commission and /or City Council. Once approved, said landscaping shall be installed and maintained in accordance with said plan. 8. 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. 9. That no signage for subject facility shall be permitted for the proposed business. Any proposed signage shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. 10. That prior to commencement of activity, the developer shall submit a water quality management plan (WQMP) specifically identifying best management practices that will be used on -site to control predictable pollutants from storm water runoff. The WQMP shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division for review and approval. 11. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval showing conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436, 601 and 602 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. Page 7 0 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 10, 2001 Item No. 14 REVISED 12. That the driveway on Miraloma Way shall be reconstructed to accommodate ten (10) foot radius curb returns in conformance with Engineering Department Standard No. 137. 13. That an on -site trash truck turn around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard *Detail No. 610 and shown on plans as required by the Department of Public Works, Street Sweeping and Sanitation Division. 14. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. 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. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for Zoning Division and Streets and Sanitation Division approval. 15. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. 16. That the outdoor storage of materials and equipment shall not exceed the height of the perimeter fencing and shall not be visible to any adjacent public right -of -way. 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 No. 1, and as conditioned herein. 18. That prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution, or 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, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15, 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. 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. Page 8 F PRK J a Q w tP a G s g ea y =o � s G 9N C x Z ML 1 61 -62- 69(47) AA N0. 172 ML SMALL IND. FIRMS 1A� 0 Rµ,1 RCN A OU Y ZER�i DU I RS -7200 RS -7200 VAC. VAC. 1 DU ROMNEYA DRIVE RS -7200 1 DU E4CH7 } TT IMP N0. 7 3 70 -71 -10 (Res. of InG to RS -5000 CUP 1407 V -2255 N CHURCH Y Z 7 N Conditional Use Permit No. 2001 -04434 9 c^ Requested By: 2550 MIRALOMA COMPANY TO PERMIT AN OUTDOOR CONTRACTOR'S YARD. 2550 East Miroloma Way i 0 El Subject Property Date: September 10, 2001 Scale: 1" = 200' Q.S. No. 121 l� x ITEM NO. 2 I RCL 54 -55-42 1 CUP 1817 RCL 56 -57 -76 (2) T VAR 2850 IND. FIRMS NEVILLE CHEMICAL VAR 2625 COMMAND. SHOPS RCL 56 -57 -76 (2) I RCL 54 -55-42 CUP 2140 I IND. FIRMS OFFICE BLDG. sOU 1 N ER111 EA sf T EoJsoN RCL 66 -67 -36 NURSERY RCL 60 -61 -113 EDISON CO. PROPERTY CERRITOS AVENUE 909 .54 -55-42 E 66 -67 -36 Q RCL 66 -67 -36 RCL 60 -61 -113 g G RCL 59 -60 -23 CO. EA L 66 -67 -14 m m RCL 66 -67 -14 VAR 1798 AD 60-61 -113 W CUP 2005 -05030 RA L R IFI RCL L 55 -56 -19 L 5 - 55 - 2 1H RN P USE (ReRCI 0151 O� SO TRIANGLES IX ZON RCL , D J m --HE PLATT aVERLAY R I W C7 I J J RCL 99 -00-15 VACANT 3 DAY BLINDS (Res. of Int. to SE) "14 C) RCL 66 -67 -14 56'01 55 "50" RCL 590-23 5 639 W SHERIFF COMMISSARY 200 0 4y15 H 0 004411 00A H 4 Wb I 11.- MILBANK WEST BABBI (t , (Res 0166-61 o S) I RCL MARMOL, INC. (Res. of nt �o SE) aC� RCL 59 -60-23 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05030 © Subject Property Date: October 3, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON Q.S. No. 117 TO PERMIT A PLANT NURSERY WITH A MODULAR BUILDING AND ACCESSORY RETAIL SALES. 1500 South State College Boulevard 2004 1 1 CERRITOS AVENUE T' 4 i { � 'Rii� iii •.� /f /.. .:- Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05030 Subject Property Date: October 3, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON Q.S. No. 117 TO PERMIT A PLANT NURSERY WITH A MODULAR BUILDING AND ACCESSORY RETAIL SALES. 1500 South State College Boulevard zooa Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 7 7a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION — CLASS 3 (Motion) 7b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -05030 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 2.1 -acre property is located at the southeast corner of State College Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue having frontages of 193 feet on the east side of State College Boulevard and 909 feet on the south side of Cerritos Avenue (1500 South State College Boulevard). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests to permit accessory retail sales in conjunction with a plant nursery under authority of Code Section No. 18.10.030.010.0402. BACKGROUND (3) The property is located within a Southern California Edison electrical transmission easement and is currently used by Edison as a storage yard and is zoned I (Industrial). The Anaheim General Plan designates this property and property to the west for Open Space land uses. Properties to the north, south, and east are designated for Industrial land uses. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (4) The applicant is requesting accessory retail sales of plants and pottery in conjunction with a wholesale plant nursery. The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the applicant's primary operation as wholesale plant nursery (fronting Cerritos Avenue) would occur at the eastern portion of the property. The proposed accessory retail sales of plants and pottery would be limited to the western portion of the site adjacent to State College Boulevard. The site plan further indicates a paved parking area in the middle of the property and a 2,000 square -foot modular office and sales building located five (5) feet from the south property line adjacent to the railroad right of way. Two (2) existing Southern California Edison electrical transmission towers are located on the eastern portion of the property within the area primarily designated for the wholesale plant nursery. (5) Vehicular access to the site would be provided via an existing driveway on Cerritos Avenue. The plan indicates a proposed wrought iron gate along the driveway that would be open during business hours. A total of 28 parking spaces would be provided on site. Code requires a minimum of 28 spaces based on the following: Land Use Square-footage Re uired Parking Total Outdoor Storage 35,280 s.f. .4 spaces/1 000 s.f. of gfa 14.1 Outdoor Display 34 s.f. .4 spaces/1000 s.f. of qfa 13.6 Office" 2000 s.f. N/A 0 Total 28 Srcu p2005- 05030k1w.doc ** Outdoor use — retail sales- outdoor no office Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 7 (6) The following table indicates the required and proposed street setbacks along State College Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue for the proposed storage and display areas and office building: Direction Code Required /Proposed Building Setback Code Required /Proposed Landscape Setback North (adjacent to Cerritos Avenue) 50 feet / 110 feet 20 feet / 20 feet East 0 feet / 0 feet 0 feet / 0 feet South 0 feet / 5 feet 0 feet / 0 feet West (adjacent to State College Boulevard 50 feet / 170 feet 20 feet / 20 feet (7) Although the petitioner did not submit floor plans, they have indicated the accessory office would be used to process sales and serve as a customer service point of contact, account for inventory, and provide restroom facilities for employees and customers. (8) No elevation plans were submitted for the proposed office building. The letter of operation indicates the office design and construction has not been finalized, however, the office would have a trellis canopy shade structure for customers being served on the site. (9) The site plan indicates a proposed 20 -foot wide fully landscaped setback along State College Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue to be planted with trees, shrubs, and groundcover. No specific information as to the size, type, or location of proposed landscaping has been provided. Code requires one (1) evergreen tree for every 20 lineal feet of street frontage to be planted in the setback area (10 trees on State College Boulevard and 45 trees on Cerritos Avenue) with a minimum size of 24 -inch box. Code further requires at least one (1) tree per 3,000 square feet of parking area and /or vehicular access ways to be distributed throughout the parking area (9,400 square foot parking lot, minimum of 3 trees). No trees are proposed within the parking area. (10) The petitioner proposes to install a six (6) foot high wrought iron fence directly behind the landscaped setback along State College Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue and a six (6) foot high chain link fence along the interior property line bordering the railroad right of way. Code permits a six (6) foot high decorative wrought iron fence to be located outside the minimum landscape setback. Furthermore, Code permits chain link fencing abutting any railroad right -of -way, provided the fencing is entirely interwoven with PVC or simulated wood slats and view - screened with fast - growing vines and /or shrubbery. (11) The site plan indicates the conceptual location of a monument sign located at the northwest corner of the site adjacent to the intersection of State College Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue. Code allows a total of three (3) freestanding or monument signs for the site based on both street frontages. All freestanding and monument signs shall be located within a landscaped planter and include the numeric street address of the property upon which it is located. Code further requires the exterior finish, color and materials of the sign and sign cabinet to complement the colors and materials of the building that the advertised business occupies and a solid base at least eighteen (18) inches in height. (12) The submitted letter of operation indicates the hours of operation from 10 AM to 7 PM daily. The letter further indicates the retail portion of the business would be accessory (less than Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 7 half) of the total facility operation. In addition, the petitioner anticipates an average of three (3) employees working at the facility. (13) There are no code violations pertaining to this property. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (14) Staff has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15301, Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), as defined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare further environmental documentation- EVALUATION (15) Accessory retail sales are permitted subject to the approval of a conditional use permit when in conjunction with a plant nursery in the I Zone. In addition, the applicant must comply with the development requirements of Section 18.38200 pertaining to outdoor storage as specified in Chapter 18.38 Supplemental Uses. (16) Code requires that outdoor storage (other than retail display and nursery stock) be screened from the public right of way. Items such as fertilizer, packaging equipment, and tools would be subject to these screening requirements. Staff has included a condition of approval to require compliance with Chapter 18.38200 pertaining to outdoor storage related to the operation of the facility. Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 7 (17) The subject property is located along State College Boulevard surrounded by industrial uses in an area typically known as "Tile Mile ", where retail sale of tile, floor coverings, wall coverings, and window coverings are permitted, where such sales are incidental to the warehousing and /or wholesale distribution on site. This wholesale plant nursery with accessory retail sales would be consistent with, and complement, the surrounding land uses in the area. Staff believes that the proposed development of the property as conditioned is a substantial improvement to the existing Southern California Edison property. Furthermore, potential use of the site is limited due to the irregular shape of the property, the location of the SCE lattice towers, and the parameters set by SCE for safety and access within and around these high voltage lines. These Southern California Edison right -of -way lines throughout the City contain nurseries similar to the one proposed, and tend to function without conflict with adjacent uses. Since this particular property is not adjacent to residential land uses, the likelihood of conflict with adjacent land uses is even less likely — especially given the nature of the adjacent industrial uses. In addition to the improvements to the property, the site would provide the minimum code - required parking, screening, and setbacks in a manner consistent with the Code. Because this wholesale plant nursery with accessory retail sales would be consistent with, and complement the surrounding land uses in the area, and not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or growth and development of the surrounding properties, staff recommends approval of the project, as conditioned in the attached draft resolution. Page 4 Existing storage as visible from Cerritos Avenue Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 7 FINDINGS: (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 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 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, that the Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures). (b) By resolution, aoorove Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05030 to permit accessory retail sales in conjunction with a plant nursery by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained herein. Page 5 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 -*" A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -05030 BE GRANTED (1500 SOUTH STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD) 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 THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO SAN JUAN CAJON DE SANTA ANA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 7, OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, LYING NORTHERLY OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY'S RIGHT OF WAY (TUSTIN RANCH), AS SAID RIGHT OF WAY IS DESCRIBED FIRST IN DEED DATED MAY 28, 1889 FROM PACIFIC IMPROVEMENT COMPANY TO SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, RECORDED JUNE 27, 1889 IN BOOK 570, PAGE 288, OF DEEDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on October 3, 2005 at 2:30 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 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 accessory retail sales in conjunction with a plant nursery is a proper accessory use for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code; and 2. That the proposed accessory retail sales in conjunction with a plant nursery would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located since the site is located along State College Boulevard surrounded by industrial uses in an area typically known as "Tile Mile ", where retail sale of tile and floor coverings sales are clearly incidental to the warehousing and/or wholesale distribution is permitted. The wholesale plant nursery with accessory retail sales would be consistent with, and complement the surrounding land uses in the area, operating in a similar fashion to existing surrounding land uses; and 3. That the size and shape of the site is adequate to allow full development of accessory retail sales of plants and pottery in conjunction with a plant nursery in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health and safety of the citizens of Anaheim, as the site would provide for the minimum code - required parking, setbacks, and screening; and 4. That 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 as the site is located within an industrial area at the intersection of two arterial highways. The proposed use would not generate a significant number of trips when compared to surrounding industrial complexes and therefore, would not create an increased demand on the streets and highways in the vicinity; and 5. That granting this conditional use permit will not, under the conditions imposed, be detrimental to the particular area and surrounding land uses, nor to the public health and safety as the site Cr\PC2005- -1- PC2005- would be substantially improved and would have full vehicle access and on -site parking. As conditioned, the minimum code requirements for landscaping, setbacks, and parking would be provided on site to ensure the safe and clean operation of the facility in a manner not detrimental to the area or surrounding land uses: and 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 The Planning Department has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15303, Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation. 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 1 - That all sales transactions shall take place within the enclosed building on site. 2. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 3. 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. 4. That outdoor storage except for plants, pottery, and fountains, shall be in accordance with the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.38200 pertaining to outdoor storage. 5. That 4 -foot high street address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of the modular 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. 6. 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. 7. That a maximum of one monument or freestanding sign shall be permitted. The design, size, and placement of wall and monument signage shall be in accordance with the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 1844.080, 18.44.090, and 18.44.110 pertaining to monument signs and wall signs. Final sign plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval as to placement, design and materials. Any decision by staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a 'Reports and Recommendations" item. 8. That a landscape and irrigation plan for the property shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval identifying the size, type and location of all proposed plantings as required by Code. Plans shall reflect the following: The addition of forty -five (45) 24 -inch box sized Tabebuia avellanedae trees within the front setback on Cerritos Avenue and ten (10) 24 -inch box sized evergreen trees within the front setback along State College Boulevard. The addition of three (3) 24 -inch box sized evergreen trees distributed throughout the parking area Any decision by City staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item- -2- PC2005- 9. That a final screening and fencing plan for the property shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Planning Services Division approval. Plans shall reflect the following: • That the storage areas (for tools, equipment, and other related items) shall be surrounded on all sides by a substantial solid and /or opaque fence or wall at least six (6) feet in height as set forth in Section 18.46.110 (Screening, Fences, Walls and Hedges). The design and the materials used for the fence or wall shall comply with the provision of Section 18.40.150 (Structural Setbacks and Yards) of Chapter 18.40 (General Development Standards) unless provided otherwise in this section. • That outdoor storage shall not be located in any required setback area and confined to the areas identified on the approved site plan (Exhibit No. 1). • That all gates for access to the property shall swing inwardly or slide sideways and shall be kept closed when not in use except that the gate may be kept open during business hours provided on -site storage cannot be seen from adjacent public streets. The gates shall be subject to approval by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. • That the proposed six (6) foot high wrought iron fence shall be decorative and located outside of the minimum landscape setback. • That the proposed chain link fencing abutting the railroad right -of -way shall be entirely interwoven with PVC or simulated wood slats and view - screened with fast - growing vines and /or shrubbery. 10. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground and outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division approval. 11. That since this project has a landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet; a separate irrigation meter shall be installed in compliance with Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 12. 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 (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. • Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. • Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in DAMP. • Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMPs. • Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs, and describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. 13. That prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: • Demonstrate that all structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. • Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non - structural BMPs described in Project WQMP. -3- PC2005- • Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Projects WQMP are available onsite. • Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMPs. 14. That the petitioner shall submit grading plans to the Public Works Department to improve State College Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue per Public Works Standard Detail No. 160 -A. In addition, a five (5) foot parkway landscaping strip and five (5) foot sidewalk shall be constructed with parkway irrigation connected to the on -site irrigation system and maintained by the property owner. A bond for the required improvements 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. A Right of Way Construction Permit shall be obtained from the Development Services Division for all work performed in the right -of -way. These improvements shall be constructed prior to final building and zoning inspections. 15. That the property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim a corner cut -off easement at State College Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue for road, public utilities and other public purposes. 16. That a new driveway approach, curb, gutter, parkway landscaping and sidewalk shall be constructed in conformance with Public Works Standard Detail No. 115 -B. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 17. That a sidewalk access ramp with truncated domes shall be constructed at the corner of State College Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue in conformance with Public Works Standard Detail No. 111- 2. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 18. That gates shall not be installed across any driveway in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic in the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan No. 609 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 19. That the locations for future above - ground utility devices including, but not limited to, electrical transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications, and cable devices, etc., shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. Plans shall also identify the specific screening treatments of each devices (i.e. landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.). 20. That plans shall be submitted to the Traffic and Transportation Manager and the Planning Services Division for review and approval in conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436 and 470 pertaining to parking standards and driveway location. Subject property shall there upon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 21. That an on -site trash truck turn around area be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476 and as required by the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 22. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location not within the minimum setback area and 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 building permits- -4- PC2005- 23. That adequate lighting of parking lots, driveway, circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses and grounds continuous 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 Police Department, Community Services Division approval. 24. That "No Trespassing 602(k) P.C." signs be posted at the entrances of parking lot/structure and be located in other appropriate places. Signs must be at least two (2) feet by one (1) foot in overall size with white background and black two (2) inch lettering. 25. That the entrance to the parking area shall post appropriate signs per 22658(a) C.V.C, to assist in removal of vehicles at the property owners /managers request. 26. That an Emergency Listing Card, Form APD -281 shall be completed and submitted in a completed form to the Anaheim Police Department. 27. That final elevation plans for the proposed modular building incorporating architectural enhancements on the north, east, and west elevations facing State College Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. Any decision by staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. 28. That the 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 Exhibit No. 1 and as conditioned herein. 29. 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. 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 and 27 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. 30. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 13, 14, 24, 25, and 26 above mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted I accordance with Section No. 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 31. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal 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 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 15 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- -5- PC2005- THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of October 3, 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 October 3, 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 -6- PC2005- PACIFIC -TEAL DEVELOPMENT Item No. 7 22691 Lambert Street,Ste 519 Lake Forest, CA 92630 (949) 586 -2066 Fax: (949) 586 -1878 August 15, 2005 Response to City Planning Staff's comments on Pre -File Application Case #PRE2005 -00054 REVISED Letter of Operation /Project Summary for A World of Plants & Pottery Retail Sales Facility 1500 South State College Boulevard (Southeast corner State College Boulevard & Cerritos Avenue) within the Southern California Edison Barre -Villa Park 2201(v TLL Right -qf -Way A.M. 253- 061 -001 On Rdy 19, 2005, Pre -File Application Case #PRE 2005 -00054 (Application), was filed for Planning Staff's review and con-iment. The timely results of the Application dated August 10, 2005 was obtained and discussed with the City Planning Staff (Staff), on August 11, 2005. Staff concluded that "The request to conditionally permit a retail nursery facility selling plants and pottery would he permitted in the Industrial Zone under Code section .18.10.030.040." And fiaftlzer; t17at "Zoning Stccff supportive of the proposed land use Page I of 5 Reference is hereby made to Pre -File No. 2005 - 00054. The Water Quality ]Management Planfir the subject proposal has been approved by the City's Department of Public• Worlrs. A copy of the "Approved" cover page is included herewith. In response and in all effort to fully comply with the Zoning Code, we have reviewed the recommended changes that are suggested in the Pre - File Interdepartmental Committee (IDC) Continents dated August I0, 2005 and my Client is willing to implement all of'the changes. Please note that all of the recommended changes will be acceptable ill the form of Conditions of'Approval It is well to note that the Southern California Edison Company is "self - insured "from a title insurance standpoint. Therefore, NO preliminary title report is available with this application. This Letter of Operation and Project Description shall serve to accompany the formal application for a Conditional Use Permit and Variance for the proposed landscape setback A World of Pottery is a successful, wholesale business located at 14708 Valley Boulevard, in the City of Industry, which sells pots, fountains and accessories. A photograph of the existing, place of business included herewith demonstrates the quality of the merchandise, as well as the orderliness and cleanliness of the operation. It is the desire of World of Pottery to expand their business by providing a retailsalesfacility conveniently located in northern Orange County. The major criteria for siting such a business includes site visibility, convenient ingress /egress, a site of approximately 1.0 - 2.0 acres in a clean area, and most importantly, in a "business - friendly" jurisdiction. Page 2 of 5 The above described property meets all ofthe major criteria. Located at the southeast corner of State College Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue in the City of Anaheim, the usable site area is approximately 1.60 acres. Site visibility .in an area that is mixed use, make it ideal. Ingress and egress is proposed to be across from an existing, 30 foot -wide driveway that serves the Commerce Park Anaheim bLISilleSS park. The current zoning of the property is Industrial. The Industrial zone does not permit retail sales with.0LIt industrial uses. We interpret this to mean that, in the specific case of A World of.Plants & Pottery, retail sales would be permitted, if a nursery was the Prirnary business on the site The entitlements sought include a Conditional. Use .Permit, in as much as our request includes retail sales of the nursery plants as the primary use of the site. Said primary use will comprise an area greater than 50% of the site, or more than 0.80 acres. Plant nurseries area "Permitted by .Right" use in the Industrial Zone, Chapter 18.10 (See Table 10 -A). The area designated on the site for plant nursery as the primary use is the easterly portion, as show on the attached, .Rough Grading, Paving and Drainage Plan. While the primary use on the site would be for plant nursery, the retail sales activities would also include the sale of pots, foLmtains and accessories. In addition, a variance is sought to reduce the landscape setback adjacent to State College Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue from 50' to 20'. The Rouglr Grading, Paving and Drainage Plan will he "REVISED" to reflect the Staff's recommended changes prior to issuance of the Conditional Use Permit. It is our desire that the City of Anaheim consider allowing a retail sale's . f acility for A World of :Plants & Pottery on the subject site based on the Following: 1. NO permanent structures such as manufacturing facilities are allowed beneath Southern CaliforniaEdison, 220Kv tower lines within their easements, Page 3 of 5 2. A retail sales facility as proposed herein will provide the City of Anaheim sales tax revenue. The sales reveuue:from A World of Plants & Pottery :is projected. to be as $250,000 i:n. the first year, $300,000 in the second. year and $360,000 in the third year. It is projected that the business will thereafter, continue to grow at an annual rate of between 10 and 20 percent, 3. The proposed business is capable of being located on an irregular- shaped parcel of land that is further constrained by the restrictions of Southern California Edison, 4. The operation of World ofPlants & Pottery will be clean and orderly, especially when compared to the site photos provided with the Pre -1 "ile Application, which showed a run down, unsightly, construction equipment storage facility, and finally, 5. The subject site is NOT within The Platinum Triangle, however the site is adjacent to same. The hours of operation of A World of Plants & .Pottery retail sales facility are proposed to be 10:00am to 7:OOpm, daily. It is anticipated that on average, there will be three (3) employees working at the facility. NO residence will occupy the site. Rather, only the Owners, managers, employees and customers will be on the site, and only during the hours of operations. We previously provided as a pact of the Pre -File Application requirements, lour (4) photos taken at the site on Saturday, January 29, 2005. In. a.d- dition, a CD labeled A World of Plants & Pottery was also provided with the Pre - File Application. The CD contains photos which may be helpful in the City's evaluation of our Application. The proposed facility is very compatible with the surrounding uses. The Rough Grading, Paving and Drainage Plan provides all of the information required for the Formal Application, including "General and Construction Notes" to help the reviewers best understand the depth and breathe of the proposed project. 1 4 of 5 Some of the features of the Pre -File Concept Plan for A World of Plants and Pottery include a secured site, with two (2) meter high, (approximately 6' -6" high), Wrought Iron fencing along the Southern Pacific Railroad Right -of -Way, State Collage Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue on the property line, with a 20 foot -wide landscape setback. A Variance from the required 50 foot -wide landscape setback is part of this formal application. The facility is proposed to be gated at a new ingress /egress driveway off Cerritos Avenue. Southern California Edison (SCE), equipment that is used to maintain the towers and the 220Kv lines, customers, deliveries and trash pick -up equipment will also gain access at this location. It is well to note that SCE seldom needs access to these types of facilities. The Pre -File Concept Plan for World o .'Plan.ts and Pottery also included adequate, onsite parking for both customers and employees. The 28 parking spaces provided well exceeds the 14 spaces required for the sales area and the one space required for the office. An office and sales facility will be a modular trailer or, metal or wood frame construction, meeting all the requirements of the City of Anaheim Building Department. A trellis facility is envisioned to provide customers with comfortable connectivity between the parking area and the office and sales facility. This trellis will be designed and constructed in such a way so as to provide customers with a shaded, display area.. It is envisioned that landscaping will appropriately encompass the trellis and office and sales facilities. The open display area will be clean, organized and accessible to the public for safe and comfortable shopping. As the Agent for the Owner and Applicant, l: Would be happy to answer any questions. :My contact information is as follows: Terry Teeple Pacific-Teal Development, .LLC 22691 Lambert Street, Suite 519 Lake Forest, California 92630 PH 949/586 -2066 FX 949/586 -1 878 Email teeple &ox.,net Page 5 of 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 8 8a. CEQA SUBSEQUENT EIR NO. 332 AND ADDENDUM (Motion for Continuance) AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 138 -A 8b. MASTER TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16859 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This approximate 41.4 -acre project site is generally located between Katella Avenue and Gene Autry Way, extending from State College Boulevard to just west of Betmor Lane in an area of the City of Anaheim known as The Platinum Triangle. The project site is further identified as Sites 1 and 2 on the map below. Site 1 encompasses 31 acres located at 1200- 1558, 1700 and 1800 East Katella Avenue, 1301 -1395 and 1551 Gene Autry Way, 1870, 1871, 1880, 1881, 1890, 1891, 1900 and 1901 South Chris Lane, 1833 and 1841 South State College Boulevard, 1800 and 1801 East Talbot Way. Site 2 encompasses 10.4 acres located at 1871, 1881, 1891, 1901, 1870 1880, 1890, 1900 and 1910 Betmor Lane and 1100 East Katella Avenue. W C OS AVE. N �J� C 0 0 y FOWELL AVE. N_ W p KATELLA AV E. 0 Site 2�� e ¢ Site 1 0 7 m e 9 f A GENE AU TRY WAY C p 1 91 F ORANGEWOOD AVE. \ 9 2 9 arvoFANAHEM A�Nne, zoos L � me aiaonum mangle REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests to establish a 19 -lot (including four lettered lots) subdivision for Lennar's "A- Town ", a master planned community, with up to 2,681 residential units, two public parks and associated public facilities and infrastructure on Site 1 and Site 2 in the above map. SR -CONT TTM16859 Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission October 3, 2005 Item No. 8 BACKGROUND: (3) This property is currently developed with two motels and industrial buildings to be demolished for development of the project. (4) On September 7, 2005, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the following actions related to this request which were subsequently continued by the City Council on September 27, 2005, to the October 25, 2005 meeting: CEQA Subsequent EIR No. 332 and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 138, General Plan Amendment No. 2005- 00434, Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (MIS No. 2005 - 00111), Recission, in part, of the Resolution of Intent pertaining to the Reclassification of Site 2 (MIS No. 2005 - 00116), Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00042 and Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00008. Per the request of the Commission, the Council also reviewed Reclassification No. 2005 -00164 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 - 04999. (5) The applicant requests a continuance to the October 31, 2005, Commission meeting so that this request will be heard after the City Council public hearing for the Development Agreement and related actions. RECOMMENDATION: (6) That the Planning Commission, by motion, continue this request to the October 31, 2005 Commission Meeting. Page 2 F-AU 1 rTiT7, MIMINUIP.W.i September 28, 2005 Ms. Cheryl Flores Senior Planner City of Anaheim Planning Department 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 Dear Ms. Flores: Re. Lennar Platinum Triangle, LLC — Tentative Tract Map Application to the Planning Commission Please accept Lennar's withdrawal of the application of Tentative Tract Map No. 16859 form the Planning Commissions Agenda of October 3, 2005. Instead, we would like the application for the Tentative Tract Map No. 16859 to be heard by the Planning Commission on October 31, 2005. The decision to withdraw the application at this time is due to the City Council's decision last night to postpone its approval of the Subsequent EIR for the Platinum Triangle and of A -Town to October 22, 2005. Lennar hopes that additional postponements will not be necessary. Since ustavo .Duran Community Manager Lennar South Coast Homebuilding • 25 Enterprise, Suite 250 • Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Main: (949) 349 -8200 • Fax: (949) 349 -0893 • www.LennarFamily.com