Resolution-PC 2001-58~ ~
RESOLUTION NO. PC2001-58
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-04351 BE GRANTED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for
Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State
of California, described as:
THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 4
SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, RANCHO SAN JUAN CAJON DE SANTA ANA, IN THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN
ON MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 10 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF HARBOR
BOULEVARD AND THE NORTHERLY LINE OF ORANGEWOOD AVENUE, SAID
EASTERLY LINE BEING PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT EASTERLY 40 FEET,
MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, FROM THE CENTER LINE OF HARBOR
BOULEVARD AS SHOWN ON MAP FILED IN BOOK 43, PAGE 33 OF RECORD OF
SURVEYS IN SAID COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, AND SAID NORTHERLY LINE
B~1-NG PARA~~€~ WITH AND ~I~TANT N~RT-HERLY 20- ~E€T-~~20M-~kl~
CENTER LINE OF ORANGEWOOD AVENUE AS SHOWN ON SAID LAST
MENTIONED MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID HARBOR BOULEVARD N. 1 DEGREE
21' 00" W. 140.03 FEET TO A LINE THAT IS PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT
NORTHERLY 140 FEET, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, FROM SAID
NORTHERLY LINE OF ORANGEWOOD AVENUE; THENCE PARALLEL WITH SAID
NORTHERLY LINE N. 89 DEGREES 43' 50" E. 270 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL
WITH SAID EASTERLY LINE OF HARBOR BOULEVARD S. 1 DEGREE 21' 00" E.
140.03 FEET TO SAID NORTHERLY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAfD ORANGEWOOD
AVENUE S. 89 DEGREES 43' 50" W. 270 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center
in the City of Anaheim on May 7, 2001 at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duty given
as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03,
to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate
and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by
itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing,
does find and determine the following facts:
1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by
Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.48.020.050.0505(a) and (b), 18.48.070.050.0511 and
18.48.070.050.0521 to permit conversion of an existing legal nonconforming retail building into a full-
service, semi-enclosed restaurant with waivers of the following:
(a) Sections 18.48.070.090.0901(c)(7) - Utility eQUipment screeninq and location reauirements.
and 18.48.070.110.1107 (Utility equipment not permitted to encroach into required
setbacks adjacent to public streets;
One backflow utilitv device proposed to encroach into the
minimum 20-foot setback along Orangewood Avenue)
CR5082PK.DOC -1- PC2001-58
~
•
(b) Sections 18.06.050.020.023.0232 - Minimum number of parkinq spaces.
and 18.48.110.120 (91 required; 43 proposed)
(c) Sections 18.48.130.060.0601(d)(1) - Permitted number of wall siqns and General Syn Standard
and 18.48.130.060.0604 Matrix reauirements.
(one business identification wall sign per business or
storefront permitted;
two business identification wall signs proposed, consisting
of one sign facing Orangewood Avenue and one sign facing
Harbor Boulevard)
2. That this property is located in Development Area 1(C-R District) of The Anaheim
ResortT"" Specific Plan No. 92-2.
3. That waiver (a), utility equipment screening and location requirements, is approved on
the basis of special circumstances applicable to the property consisting of size, shape, and configuration
of the existing building and parking lot, which do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the
vicinity because this commercial parcel is relatively narrow (90 feet wide in comparison to 223 feet deep);
that the proposed back-flow assembly device (serving the on-site fire suppression system) is proposed to
be located on the east side of the building in the proposed 10-foot wide landscaped area adjacent to
Orangewood Avenue (approximately 6 to 8 feet behind the public sidewalk); that the equipment will be
painted green to blend with surrounding landscaping and will be screened from the public's view by a
minimum 36-inch high hedge; and that strict application of the Zoning Code would deprive the property of
privileges enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
4. That waiver (b), minimum number of parking spaces, is approved on the basis of the
Parking Study prepared by Katz, Okitsu & Associates and dated January 24, 2001, which was submitted
to substantiate the requested waiver; that the study indicates that, based on a survey which showed that
the peak parking demand at comparable restaurants ranges from 21 to 37 spaces, the proposed 43
parking spaces would exceed the expected parking demand for the proposed restaurant (43 parking
spaces is equivalent to a minimum of 6 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area plus an
additional 15%); and that the City Traffic and Transportation Manager has reviewed the submitted plans
and the Parking Study and concurs that 43 on-site parking spaces will be adequate to serve the proposed
restaurant operation.
5. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed and based on the information and
conclusions set forth in the Parking Study, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided
for the approved use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable
to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of the use because a
survey of comparable restaurants found that the peak parking demand ranged from 21 to 37 parking
spaces which is less than the 43 parking spaces proposed to be provided for the proposed restaurant.
6. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed and based on the information and
conclusions set forth in the Parking Study, will not increase the demand and competition for parking
spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use.
7. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed and based on the information and
conclusions set forth in the Parking Study, will not increase the demand and competition for parking
spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because an
adequate supply of parking will be provided on the site.
8. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress
to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposal
because no street parking is permitted along Orangewood Avenue and Harbor Boulevard; and that the
sight lines and turning areas for existing driveways on properties adjacent to the subject parcel will not be
affected by the parking or access proposed for the subject project.
-2- PC2001-58
~ ~
9. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed and based on the information and
conclusions set forth in the Parking Study, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking
areas or lots provided for the proposal because the amount of parking demand forecast for the site is well
within the supply provided on-site; and that the overall demand for parking at the site is lower than the
amount of parking provided, and a surplus of parking spaces is expected to exist on the site at all times.
10. That based on the information and conclusions set forth in the Parking Study and as
conditioned herein, the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry traffic in the area.
11. That waiver (c), permitted number of wall signs and General Sign Standard Matrix
requirements, is approved on the basis that there are special circumstances applicable to the property
consisting of its size, shape, location and surroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned
properties in the vicinity because the property is a corner lot with frontage on two major arterial highways
(Harbor Boulevard and Orangewood Avenue); that the property is a corner lot requiring identification
from Harbor Boulevard as well as from Orangewood Avenue; that strict application of the Zoning Code
would deprive the property of reasonable business identification because one wall sign would not be
sufficient to provide reasonable identification visible to both adjacent streets; and that the proposed wall
signs will not be visible at the same time from any point along the adjacent public rights-of-way or from
any adjacent private properties.
12. That strict application of the Zoning Code would deprive the property of privileges
enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
13. That the proposed semi-enclosed restaurant use, as conditioned herein, will not
adversely affect any adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the surrounding area because
modification and conversion of the existing legal nonconforming building into a full-service, semi-enclosed
restaurant will bring the property into greater conformance with the intent of the Anaheim Resort Specific
Plan by establishing a use which is permitted in the underlying District; that modifying the building
fa~ade, installing new landscaping adjacent to the public rights-of-way, interior lot lines and within the
parking lot in conformance with Code requirements, and providing outdoor pedestrian-related activities
(i.e., outdoor dining area) will enhance the property's appearance.
14. That the size and shape of the property is adequate to allow full development of the
proposed use in a manner which is not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety
and general welfare of the surrounding land uses or the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
15. That granting this conditional use permit, under the conditions imposed, will not be
detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
16. That no one indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition to the proposal;
and that no correspondence was received in opposition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City
Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit conversion of an existing legal non-conforming
retail building into a full-service, semi-enclosed restaurant with waivers of utility equipment screening and
location requirements, minimum number of parking spaces and permitted number of wall signs and Sign
Standard Matrix requirements on a rectangularly-shaped 0.65-acre property located at the northeast
corner of Orangewood Avenue and Harbor Boulevard, having frontages of 223 feet on the north side of
Orangewood Avenue and 90 feet on the east side of Harbor Boulevard, and further described as 2080
South Narbor Boulevard (Doll City); and does hereby determine that the previousfy-certified
Environmental Impact Report No. 313 and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 042 (which was prepared for
the proposed project incorporating all mitigation measures included in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan
Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085 that are applicable to the project) are adequate to serve as the
required environmental documentation for this proposal.
-3- PC2001-58
•
•
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:
That the property owner/developer shall be responsible for compliance with all the mitigation
measures set forth in Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 042 for this project, which incorporates those
mitigation measures included in the Anaheim Resort Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085 that
are applicable to this project, and for complying with the monitoring and reporting requirements
established by the City in compliance with Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code.
Furthermore, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for any direct costs associated with
the monitoring and reporting requirements to ensure implementation of those mitigation measures
identified in Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 042 which is made a part of these conditions of approval
by reference.
2. That the property owner/developer shall comply with Condition Nos. 1, 2, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15,
16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 and 41, as set forth in
Ordinance No. 5454 adopted by the City Council on September 27, 1994 in connection with the
adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2; said conditions being incorporated herein
by reference as if set forth in their entirety.
That prior to issuance of the first building permit or within one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, the property owner shall submit a letter to the Planning
D€p~~~~~t r~qu€sting #eFr~ina~io~ of Conditiona~ Use PeFmit No. 2309 (permit~i~g a bus sta~io~rt~r
the CL "Commercial, Limited" Zone) and Variance No. 3618 (waiving minimum number of parking
spaces and minimum landscaped setback to permit a liquor store in an existing bus terminal).
4. That prior to the issuance of the first building permit, Public Improvement Plans shall be submitted
to, and approved by, the Public Works Department for all public improvements, including
landscaping, lighting and irrigation improvements within the back eight (8) foot wide parkway area
adjacent to Harbor Boulevard. Said public improvements shall be completed within one (1) month
from the start of construction of on-site building improvements.
5. That the property owner/developer shall be responsible for paying the full cost associated with the
use of any Police Department and/or Traffic Management Center staff that may be needed for
traffic control purposes.
6. That any on-site pay telephones shall be located inside the building.
7. That no more than ten (10) seats shall be provided at any time in the outdoor patio dining area.
That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications
submitted to the City of Anaheim by the Petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning
Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 18, and as conditioned herein.
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 comptiance
with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof,
be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this
Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
-4- PC2001-58
C~
May 7, 2001.
~
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM I Y PLA NING COMMISSIO
ATTEST:
~~ ~ ~
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
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 May 7, 2001, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ARNOLD, BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, KOOS, NAPOLES
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: VANDERBILT
ABSENT:_CQMMISSIONERS: NONE _ ___
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, 1 have hereunto set my hand this ~ s~ day of
, 2001. •
-~~ c%(.~~-~-•- ~
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-5- PC2001-58