Loading...
PC 2004/09/20lanrt~n ISS9 11 e ~ Monday, September 20, 2004 Council Chamber, City Hall 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California ® Chairman: Gail Eastman ® Chairman Pro-Tempore: David Romero Commissioners: James Vanderbilt-Linares, Jerry O'Connell Kelly Buffa, Cecilia Flores, Pat Velasquez ® Call To Order Planning Commission Morning Session 11:00 A.M. • Staff update to Commission on various City developments and issues (As requested by Planning Commission) • Preliminary Plan Review for items on the September 20, 2004 agenda ® Recess To Afternoon Public Hearing Session ® Reconvene To Public Hearing 1:30 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: planninacommissionCa~anaheim.net H:ldocslclericallagendas\092004.doc 09/20/04 Page 1 Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 1:30 P,M. Public Comments: This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the Anaheim City Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public hearing items. Consent Calendar: The Report and Recommendation items 1-A through 1-E 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. Reports and Recommendations A. (a) The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Master EIR No 313 2004 Validation Report -Request For Review And Approval: Agent: City of Anaheim, Planning Department, 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Location: Located generally west of the Interstate 5 (I-5) corridor, south of Vermont Avenue, east of Walnut Street, and north of Chapman Avenue. Requests to approve the 2004 Validation Report to allow the continued Project Planner: use of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Master EIR No. 313 along Linda Johnson with the associated Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085, as the (iohnsonfolanaheim net) environmental documentation required by California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines for projects within sr87911j.doc the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 area. B. (a) CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously-Approved) (b) Conditional Use Permit No. 3414 (Tracking No. CUP2004-04889) Agent: Stan Swede, California Marquee, 430 South Varney, Project Planner: Burbank, CA 91502 Amy Vazquez (avazouez(c~anaheim net) Location: 5635 East La Palma Avenue - (Cinema City Theaters) Requests amendment of elevation plans to install neon lighting on a sr8787av.doc previously-approved movie theater complex. Q. S. 184 09/20/04 Page 2 C. (a) (b) (c) A-3 antl D D. Agent: Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, Elisa Stipkovich, 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 1003, Anaheim, CA 92805 Location: Parcels A-1 -A-3 within Downtown Anaheim Requests review and approval of final site, floor, parking elevation, roof-mounted equipment, and pedestrian and vehicle circulation plans to allow for construction of a new Planned Mixed Use Development (Parcels Al-A3) in Downtown Anaheim. Request review and recommendation to the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency of basic concept drawings for a Planned Mixed Use Development for Parcels A3 and D within Downtown Anaheim. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meetings of September 8, 2004 (Motion) E. Receiving and approving revised supplemental detailed Minutes for Item No. 3, Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04857., from the Planning Commission Meeting of August 23, 2004, scheduled to be heard as a public hearing item before City Council on Tuesday, September 21, 2004, (Motion) Project Planner: pavid See (dsee(o~anaheim.net) sr2162ds.doc Q. S. 83 09/20/04 Page 3 Public Hearing Items• 2a. CEQA Negative Declaration 2b. Waivver Of Code Requirement 2c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04876 (Readvertised) Owner: Canyon Plaza, LLC. 503 32"tl Street, Suite 200, Newport Beach, CA 92663 Agent: Jack Jakosky, 503 32ntl Street, Suite 200, Newport Beach, CA 92663 Location: 5747 East Santa Ana Canvon Road. Property is approximately 15 acres, located at the northeast corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Imperial Highway. Request to construct a freestanding building consisting of three Project Planner: commercial retail tenant spaces, roof-mounted equipment and outdoor John Ramirez dining area in conjunction with an existing commercial retail center with (ioramirez(o~anaheim.net) waiver of minimum number of parking spaces Continued from the August 23, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting. sr5114jr.doc Q.S. 185 Conditional Use PermiLResolution No. 3a. CEQA Negative Declaration 3b. Waiver of Code Requirement 3c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2871 (Tracking No. CUP2004-04872) Owner: Connelly S. Cornelia, 2323 West Broadway, Anaheim, CA 92804 Agent: Ron Sorenson, HGA Inc., 1613 Santa Clara Drive, Roseville, CA 95661 Location: 2323 West Broadwav. Property is approximately 6.5 acres, having a fronkage of 454 feet on the north side of Broadway, located 860 feet east of the centerline of Gilbert Street (Cornelia Connel y High School). Request to construct a new gymnasium in conjunction with an existing private educational institution with waiver of maximum structural height Project Planner: adjacent to a residential zone boundary. John Ramirez (ioramirezt7o anaheim.net) Continued from the August 9 and August 23, 2004, Planning Commission Meetings. sr5115jr:doc Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. O.S. 33 09(20/D4 Page 4 4a. CEQA Negative Declaration Request for 4b. Waiver Of Code Requirement continuance to 4c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04861 November 1, 2004 Owner: 230 West Colchester, CALP, c/o Chris DiRiggiero, P.O. Box ................ 304, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Agent: Joseph Curd, Curd, Gallindo and Smith, LLP, 301 East Ocean Boulevard, #460, Long Beach, CA 90802 Location: 2230 West Colchester Drive. Property is approximately 0.87-acre, located at the southeast corner of Colchester Drive and Colony Street. Request to permit and retain two existing churches, a narcotics anonymous meeting hall, and to establish land use conformity with the City's zoning code requirements for an existing non-conforming commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking Project Planner: Spaces. John Ramirez (ioramirezfa~anaheim.net) Continued from the June 28, July 26 and August 9, 2004, Planning Commission Meetings, sr5116jr:doc Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Q.S. 34 5a. CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration (Readvertised) Request for 5b. Reclassification No. 2003-00109 continuance to Sc. Variance No. 2004-04626 October 4, 2004 Sd. Tentative Tract Map No. 16545 Owner: Red Curb Investments, P.O. Box 995, Torrance, CA 90508 Agent: Thomas Hartley, 29462 Thackery Drive, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Location: Property is approximately 53 acres, having a frontage of 190 feet at the terminus of Avenida de Santiago, located 260 feet west of the centerline of Pointe Premier (No address). Reclassification No. 2003-00109 -Request reclassification of the property from the T (SC)(Transition; Scenic Corridor Overlay), formerly the RS-A-43,000(SC) (Residential/Agricultural; Scenic Corridor Overlay) zone to the RH-2(SC) (Single-Family Hillside Residential; Scenic Corridor Overlay) and OS (SC) (Open Space; Scenic Corridor Overlay) zones. Variance No. 2004-04626 -Request waiver of required private street standards to construct a private residential street without sidewalks. Tentative Tract Map No. 16545 -Request to establish a 28-lot, 21-unit detached single-family subdivision. ' Project Planner: Amy Vazquez Gontinued from the August 9 and September B, 2004, Planning (avazouezt7a anaheim.net) Commission Meetings. Reclassification Resolution No. sr8792av:doc Variance Resolution No. D.S. 286 09/20/04 Page 5 6a. CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration (Previously-Approved) 6b. Waiver Of Code Requirement 6c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04881 (Tracking No. CUP2004-04912) Owner: Adolf P. Miller, 1859 North Random Drive, Anaheim, CA 92804 Elisa Stipkovich, 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 1003, Anaheim, CA 92805 Agent: Jerry Zomorodian, 301 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Location: 315-327 South Anaheim Boulevard. Property is approximately 0.54-acre, located at the northwest corner of Elm Street and Anaheim Boulevard. Request to remodel an existing historical building and to establish a commercial retail center with an accessory auto detailing facility with waivers of: (a) minimum landscaped and structural setback adjacent to an arterial highway and (b) permitted type of sign. Continued from the September 8, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 7a. CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously-Approved) 7b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04277 (Tracking No.CUP2004-04888) Owner: Gock Joey Jung, 433 Vicki Lane, Anaheim, CA 92804 Agent: Jimmy Nguyen, P.O. Box 15751, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Location: 420-504 South Brookhurst Street. Property is approximately 1.5 acres, having a frontage of 205 Feet on the east side of Brookhurst Street, located 492 feet north of the centerline of Orange Avenue (Seafood Place Restaurant). Request for reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved on November 19, 2002 to expire November 19, 2004) to retain a banquet hall with service but no sales of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Project Planner: David See (dse eCo~ a na he i m. n et) sr2159ds.doc Q:S.84 Project Planner: Scott Koehm (skoehm ot7anaheim.net) sr8786gk,doc Q.S. 40 09/20/04 Page 6 8a. CEQA Negative Declaration IPrevously-Approved) Sb. Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 (Tracking No. CUP2004-04890) Owner: AOUN, 558 South Harbor Boulevard, #100, Anaheim, CA 92805 Agent: Tony Garcia, 1160 North Kraemer Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92806 Location: 1160 North Kraemer Boulevard. Property is approximately 0.9-acre, having a frontage of 175 feet on the east side of Kraemer Boulevard, located 242 feet south of the centerline of Coronado Street (Xalos Restaurant). Request for reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation (approved on September 8, 2003 to expire August 27, 2004) to retain accessory public entertainment in conjunction with apreviously-approved restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption and to amend previously-approved exhibits and conditions of approval pertaining to the patio .area. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 9a. CEQA Negative Declaration 9b. Waiver Of Code Requirement 9c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04885 Owner: Tao Nguyen, Christian Vietnamese District, 314 South Brookhurst Street, Anaheim, CA 92801 Agent: Tuan Pham, 18010 Sky Park Circle, Suite 100, Irvine, CA 92614 Location: 314 South Brookhurst Street. Property is approximately 0.85-acre, having a frontage of 130 feet on the east side of Brookhurst Street, located 188 feet south of the centerline of Broadway. Request to permit a church and missionary training school within an existing two-story office building with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Project Planner. Amy Vazquez (avazguez(a~anaheim.net) sr8784av.doc Q.S. 140 Project Planner: :Elaine Yambao (eyambao(o~anahem.net) sr3083ey.doc Q.S. 40 09/20/04 Page 7 10a. CEQA Negative Declaration 10b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04886 Owner: Southern California Edison Company, Attn: Robert Teran, 2131 Walnut Grove Avenue, Rosemead, CA 91770 Agent: Cindy Leinhart, Compass Technology Service, 27 Orchard, Suite 200, Lake Forrest, CA 92630 Location: Property is approximately 24 acres, having a frontage of 471 feet on the south side of Santa Ana Canyon Road, located 120 feet west of the centerline of Festival Drive (SCE Easement - No Address). Project Planner: Della Herrick t t R (dherrick(a)anahetm.net) eques o permit a cellular telecommunication facility on an existing Edison lattice tower with accessory ground-mounted equipment. sr8773dh.doc Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Q.S. 207 11a. CEQA Negative Declaration 11 b. Waiver Of Code Requirement 11c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04883 Owner: Slagle Properties A Partners, 912 Via De Angeles, San Clemente, CA 92672 Agent: Rudy Trejo, 1521 East Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805 Location: 1521 East Lincoln Avenue. Property is approximately 0.15-acre, located at the northeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Larch Street. Project Planner: Request to retain a church within an existing single-family residence with Della Herrick (dherrick onanaheim:net) waivers of: (a) minimum setback for institutional uses abutting a residential zone boundary, and (b) minimum number of parking spaces. sr8774dh.doc Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. Q.S. 103 09!20/04 Page 8 12a. CEQA Environmental Impact Report Na. 330 (Previously-Certified) 12b. Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00087 12c. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004.00035 Agent: City of Anaheim, Planning Department, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Location: Approximately 820 acres generally bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west and the Southern California Edison Company right-of-way on the north, and known as "The Platinum Triangle". Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00087 -City-initiated (Planning Department) request to rescind two Planning Commission Resolutions: Resolution No. PC2004-80 (a resolution of the Anaheim City Planning Commission recommending that the City Council rescind the resolution of intent to the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone) (Resolution No. PC2000-14) (Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00082) and Resolution No. PC20D0-14 (a resolution of intent to reclassify certain properties within the Anaheim Stadium Area to the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone) (Reclassification No. 99-00-15). Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00035 -City-initiated (Planning Department) request to amend various sections of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to replace references to the Anaheim Stadium Area and the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone with The Platinum Triangle and The Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone and provide consistency between Title 18 and with The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00087 Resolution No. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004.00035 Resolution No. Project Planner: Susan Kim (skim(c~anaheim:net) sr8777sk.doc Q.S. Multiple Adjourn To Monday, October 4, 2004 At 11:00 A.M. For Preliminary Plan Review. 09/20/04 Page 9 CERTIFICATION OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: ly'.'~o ~....... til~~ loy _ (TIME) (DATE) LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK SIGNED: ~~ ~~ 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 fled during that time. This appeal shall be made in written form to the City Clerk, accompanied by an appeal fee in an amount determined by the City Clerk. The City Clerk, upon filing of said appeal in the Clerk's Office, shall set said petition for public hearing before the City Council at the earliest possible date. You will be notified by the City Clerk of said hearing. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department, (714) 765-5139. Notification no later than 10:00 a.m. on the Friday before the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. Recorded decision information is available 24 hours a day by calling the Planning Department's Automated Telephone System at 714-765-5139. 09/20/04 Page 10 SCF9E®IDLE 2004 October 4 October 18 November 1 November 15 November 29 December 13 December 27 osi2oioa Page 11 ITEM N0. 1-A Anaheim Resort Boundary Requested By: ANAHEIM PLANNING DEPARTMENT Anaheim Resort Specific Plan 92-2 Anaheim Resort Specific Plan ® Amendment No. 5 Expansion Area Date: September 20, 2004 Scale: Graphic REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN MASTER EIR NO. 313 2004 VALIDATION REPORT. czar [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF °' " ANAHEIM VALIDATING THE CONTINUED USE OF MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 313 AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM NO. 0085 (THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-2). WHEREAS, in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, ("CEQA") and the State of California Guidelines for implementation of CEQA (the "State Guidelines"), on September 24, 1999, the City Council of the City of Anaheim, by its Resolution No. 94R-234, certified Master Environmental Impact Report No. 313, adopted a Statement of Findings and Facts and a Statement of Overriding Considerations and adopted Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085 to serve as the required environmental documentation for certain discretionary actions described therein (the "discretionary actions"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 15179, of the State Guidelines, on August 30, 1999, the Planning Commission reviewed the first Validation Report for Master EIR No. 313 and adopted Resolution No. PC99-158 determining that no substantial changes had occurred with respect to the circumstances under which Master EIR No. 313 was certified, and that there was no new available material information which was not known and could not have been known at the time Master EIR No. 313 was certified, thereby validating Master EIR No. 313 and the associated Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085 for continued use as the environmental documentation required by CEQA for projects within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area for a period of five years or until circumstances changed, whichever occurred first; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 15179 of the State Guidelines, Master EIR No. 313, 2004 was reviewed in The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Master EIR No. 313 2004 Validation Report ("2004 Validation Report"), a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim desires and intends to continue to use Master EIR No. 313 as the environmental documentation required by CEQA and the State Guidelines for projects (as defined by CEQA) within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area and for related discretionary actions; and WHEREAS, the 2004 Validation Report has been provided to the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim for review and consideration prior to the continued use of Master EIR No. 313; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission concurs with the conclusion of the Report that the impact analyses and mitigation measures :provided in Master EIR No. 313 are adequate to address continuing growth and development in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area for the foreseeable future; and, consequently, a subsequenUsupplemental EIR is not required; and, WHEREAS, based upon its review of the 2004 Validation Report and consideration of information and evidence provided, the Planning Commission finds that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Master EIR was certified, .and that there is no new available material information which was not known and could not have been known at the time the Master EIR was certified. [DRAFT] NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim that the City of Anaheim does hereby validate the continued use of :Master EIR No. 313, in compliance with CEQA and the State Guidelines based upon the Statement of Findings and Facts, Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085 approved by the City Council of the City of Anaheim on September 20, 1994. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of 2004. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SECRETARY. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 31875.3 ITEM N0. 1-B / S I I ~ I PRANG 1 g ETN pRPE AVENUE ILWAY SP 94-1 RCL 70-71-15 (1) RCL 70-7i-14 CUP 2167 VAR 4271 OFFICE BLDG. O.A. 2 SP 94-i RCL 70-71-15 (1) RCL 70-71-14 CUP 2001-04318 CUP 2167 VAR 4271 OFF6C~ E324DG. SP 94-1 RCL 70-71-15 (1) RCL 70-71-1 CUP 2167 VAR 4271 OFFICE BLDG. D.A. 2 CUP 3823 CUP 2313 VAR 3129 SHOPPING CENTER RCL 86-87-29 RCL fi5-fib-25 2 T-CUP 2004-048 9 RCL 65-66-17 CUP 2003-04622 CUP 3881 CUP 3414 CUP 3240 CUP 2905 CUP 1585 VAR 3892 SP 94-1 RCL 89-90-08 RCL 88-89-59 RCL 84-85-04 RCL fi5-66-25 (Res of Inlenrlo ML) RCL 05-66-17 CUP 2003-04699 CUP 3881 CUP 3253 CUP 3514 VAR 4198 VAR 4192 VAR 4156 SHOPPING CNTR. (ARCADE PERMIT NO. 1019 W) D.A. 5 I . . } Q 2 ~_ S J _Q W o_ L RM-4 RCL 69-7 RCL 69-7 CUP 18 VAR 27 CANYON VI APARTME 196 DI C-G RCL 75-76-I RCL 69-704 RCL 69-70- CUP 3822 CUP 2077 CUP 1934 CUP 178E CUP 171'_ VAR 3977 VAR 2733 CANYON VILL SHOPPING CE as RCL ~ >L.', ~ ' VAR4 tl2 VAR 01566 V AN R ~ RCUP 33914] P 2104 C '~/ ~ - B K ~ U D.A.S 977 ~'-- 275 ~ - - RESTA -~ - --- 300' --~ LA PALMA AVENUE ~ SP 94-1 f RCL 70-71-15 (1) sP 94-1 sP 94-1 ~ D~ RcL ss-7orw ~ RCL 70-71-14 RCL fi5.66-17 RCL 84-85-07 RCL 69-7040 ~ ` T-CUP 2003-04765 T-CUP 2003;04610 RCL 65.66-25 f11 RCL 65-66-i7 ate 'ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE (SC) (SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) ZONE Conditional Use Permit No. 3414 TRACKING NO. CUP2004-04889 Requested By: STAN SWEDE Subject Property Date: September 20, 2004 Scale: 1" = 200' Q.S. No. 184 REQUEST TO AMEND ELEVATION PLANS TO INSTALL NEON LIGHTING ON A PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED MOVIE THEATER COMPLEX. 5635 East La Palma -Cinema City Theatres lszz ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 1-B a AEkoLVTZON OP TNB aNaNaIN CSTY PLaNNItlO CONNI9530N THaT PS2I2ION TOA CONOI2IONaL USS PtPXIT N0. ]43d B6 OPallTEO HNEAEas, thn anahmla clay Plannln9 CommlESiOn did raoaivo a vmcltl¢d P¢tiL ion !os Condltlonal Use P9mtit foc caxtnln seal property Pitun`.¢d in th9 CSty of anshalm, County of Ornnge, State a! CnlllornSa, deaerlbad ¢nl PaRCkL 1, aE 9RONN ON A PaACEL NaP 7ILtD IN BOOR B¢, PaOkk 5, 6, 7, IWD B 0P VaACEG XaP9 IN iFfe OFFICE OP 2Ht COUIRY RECOA08R OP OIUNCE COUNTY, CaI.2FORN2a. NBEASa6, thu Clty Planning Commleelan did hold a publla hearing at the civic tooter Sn th¢ Clty of anah¢lm on Jung ], 1991, at 11J0 p.m., notlem of Bald public hanrln9 having bean duly gluon ¢a raqulead ay law sod in aeeordsnco ulth the peovialana of the annhelm Nunie Spal Coda, CLnptax 18.07, to hms and ronaldar evldan<e tot and a9alnat aald proposud <¢ndltlanal uaa peso!! and to lnva¢tignta end make !!ndinga and t•mcommOdaelOne to oonnootSOn tharowithl end that mnid public hanxlnq was continued to rho Auna 12, July 15 nIW July 29, 1991 Piannln9 CVmmfaalon meatingal and HIIEREak, anltl Comalaelmn, after duo lnepeotlon, lnvaatlgatlen and study made by ltamlf and Sn lea behalf, and attar duo eon¢idetatlon of all avldmnoe and caporte ottmrad nt aald hearing, Boma tied and detarnlno Lhs lollowlrq lnatol 1. Shat the propoead utn L9 pcopet ly one far uhl<h a oondlt lone! use pmrmlt la authorised by annhalm Nu nle !pal Coda Sertlon IB.a¢.OkO.]70 cm perolt the ox panalon o! n molt l-Derain Indoor theater <amPlat and to eon¢trueE a 7B to ]7-toot algh parking atruccu rs wLCh wei+er of tho tollowlnq~ tai 9RC21DNt 18.06.090.0299 - NLnlmun number e! ne rk loo aoaea e. IB,06:q~ i~ required! and 1B.da.066 Aku ~ proposed (jjI o} the rnqu lremsnL(/ (0~ kRCTiDN ]8.84.062.011 - Q3yp1pj2gd roof mountM eoulemmnt. (Reef mounted aealmmn[ prmhlbltedl j9--lypj mounted air eondltlmnara pcaponedl (CI LELT1:. IB.BA.067.011 - to w rnlleend rLvht-e[-vev. 120 loot zaqulrmdl RQIIE proposoa( C RI]a4NP -1- PC91-110 R. Tha! Lha raquesLed wnly as (aJ So heeeby granbod, in pnrtr on the hanle thnh eha potStlonar ntlpuiated at eha publlo haarln9 to providing at lam! BO\ of eho parkinq raquleed by Cod n, so followai 0,150 soar-thantar to hava ]60 packing spate s. or Y,900 aant-theater to hava 700 parkinq epneao, or Y,700 sent-theater to hnro 6A5 perkSnq epaoeal and, further, on eho 6asia thnC the. petitioner oClpulatad to providing n recorded aocaaa agcaauont (!n compllnnea wSLh arondillan Na. Z1 hnrain) uLthln n period oL forty five (65) days fsom the date a! thin Loeolution) antl, further, on the basis thnt Lho parkinq wnlvar will not cause an incrasao Ln lrnffic conyaotion in Cho lmmadineo vicinity nor adversely alfeet any ad]oininq lard uooa and grnnting of Cho pnrking waiver under Gho Condit Sono Svpesed, 1f nny, w111 not ba dstrimontal to the pence, health, aatsty and general walfesa of Chu eLt isano of the CLty o! Anahalm, ]. xhnt the requested walvara (¢) and lC) are hereby granted ort Lhe beelo that thnra axe apooial eLraumataneas oppllanblo to Cho property ouch as eLee, chaps, topography, looetlon and aurroundinga which do not apply ee otha; ldsnt leelly sanod property in eha came v1a 1n1tyt and that atrlct npplLtntlnn a! eho ionlnq Code daprLVeo the peopeety o! prlvllogaa anaoyod by other propertlea Sn the Sdentl<al soon end claaalfiaatlan 1n the vSCSnltyl and, further, that grnntLng ugly ar (¢) is also oub~act Lo rho pat Stloner'o at lpu latlon that eho 4 neu root-mounted n1s oandlelonare nhall bo screened In Cho come faahlon end onnnar ne the 14 arlot lnq roof-aountad alt rand ltlonera. 4. Tnst Lho proposed uao, sa prantad, ulll not ndvenely ntloct the ed)o In lop land uaas and the growth and development at the nraa !n which It So Dropoaod to be loeteed. S. That the also and ahapo of rho site proposed for the use la ad equate to allow the lull dwelopaont o! the peopoeod ues !n a mannee nos detrimental to eho yareltular neat not Lo rho paean, health, utaty and genahQ welters at the Cltltsns of too Clty of anahelm. b. ihst eha grant lnq oL the Condit Lonal Uea poemlt under rho rondlclona lmpooea will not be dstrlmantal to the paten, hoelth, nafety .nod general vsl[aro of ehs eltlsanv at eho CL[y of Anahalm. 1. gnat the esa(t1e panorat.d by eha proposed use will not lopesa an undue burden upon eho atzeatn and hlghwaya designed and Lprovad to carat' the tra!!la !n eha area. d. Thst ono person indicated h1e presence se 4eW public hearing In apposltiont and thnt no eotrmapondonw wn received Ln opposition to rho nub7ect petitla0. -2- PC91-110 ygr xnaC rho anmhalm City Planning CommLelan hoe rmvlawd the proposal Lo cmnnizuet a 30 !0 76-tout high parking ntruoturo with wnlvmrn of minimum nuabar et parking npsema, prohLbLtmd toot mounted oqulLvam~t and minlnum landaeaped netbuok ed3+canG to n railrmnd rlghe-oFvay an an Srxaqularly-ahapmd portal o! land omnmlo[Snq of approxlmnt•ly 5.54 arras, having a lronGagm of appsaxSmalmly 375 fwt on the north aide of Ls palms avmnvor having a mnxlmum depth o! appcaxlmeteLy BBB !soft balnq located approxfmatnly 700 teal voat o! iho centerllna Df LWmrSal Nighuey and tur[her dcaeslbad 4a 5635 Eaot La Palen kvanumJ and doss 6mrmby appcovo Gho Nagatlve Daclaxaticn upon finding 4haG SL Aau nnsidorod !ha Nagatlvm Daolaratlon together vl ch any oautoontn ratwived durlaq the publSo ravlov pracama +nJ turthar llndln9 on tiw benlm that Cha Snl[lal +GUdy and say commonev taco Lvad that there Le no aubetnntSal mvltlencv that the proleoe will boas a aLgniLtcene mfleeL on ehm auvlromwnG. NON, TNEREPOkE, EE IT AI:eDLVEO that thm nnehalm Clty Plntminq Conmlaalon does hereby qr ant mub7aot Pmtltimn for Nod rt !noel Ura perm lt, upon eho lollowtnq zrondlt tans whlan ore hereby found to ba m .w.•samary pre rrqulalts Lo eho peepoaed uea aL the nub7eet propmrty !n Srdmr ~• ptmaerva tho oa[mty and ganmrnl wmi[ero et thm CLelznna a! Cho C1ly o! knahelm, 1. Thnt traoh neorage arena shall ba provldad and malntalned Ln a loeatlon aeemptable to the Strout Nalntananem end Bnnltatlon Dlvlelon and Sn eccmrdnn<e with approved plans on tlla with mold dlvlalen. 9ueh lnloem•elon mhall be apecltlcally mhw ~ the plnne nubmateed for bulldlnq permit a. 3. Tbat prior to issuance mf a bulldlnq parmlc, a solid wnate aunagmmrnt plan with raeyellnq eepabll !flea ahnll bm apProvsd by the mtreot Halntanan co and 9snltatlon Dlvlelon. Upon maeupaney of the pro}act, mold plan shall commence and mhall remnln !n full mtteet am rmqulred by enld Dlv talon. ]. • Tnat peter to eammenemaent of atruatural framing, on-oleo tare hydrants anal! ba lnetnllad a,W ohargad as raqulrad and npprevad 6y rho Plro Dapntu rot. An all-wmathnx cord shall ba pcovlded to Lbe hydrants at all tlmee, as raqu lrad by the ytre Department. 4. • Tha[ flee aprtnklara mhall be loot oiled sa eaqulrad by rho Tlee Department. 4. • Thnt a !Duel lire nlarm syntaa shall bm lnatallad as ruqulrad by tho Plra Dope tame nt. Nenuel alarm pulls a.y be cmlttaa.. 6. • Thnt a Cla+a S c:endplpm shall bm lnetallad In ton parking structure an raqu iced by the Plra Oepartmant. -7- PC93-130 T. That at ruqulnd by Cotl• saotimn 18.06.062.020 (pertalnlny to vamwrolal dmvalopmmnt Sn the seanlr Cmrrldor), in addltlmn to thm 2¢qulrad aaabaek and slope lnndacaplnq, all parkln9 arose and vehicular aecaeevaym mhall be permanenkly landeeaped vlth aC Saaat mna (1) tree par thra¢ khoueand (0,000) eq. tt. of parking aiea and vshlvular abtaea4sy, mvmnly dlotslbuted throughout auoh Grass. Therm shall be an avar¢ga of toYty sight ({a) mq.Lt, of plantar ana provided p¢r txae. 9ald pl¢ntar steam ahnll have minimum dlmanalonn mL mix (6) tare. plans eubmtteed for bulldlnq pecmlta ahnll ehou complianmm vlth [neam raqulzamente. 0. • ihae rho ort-eiem Inndemaplnq and Srelgation eyaCOm mha11 be raturbiahad and malntainad !n eompllanco with Clty mtandnrda. 9. That all root-mounted air condltionln9 taellitiaa shall ba propmrly ahlaldmd team view teom ali dlraetlona and shall be palntad to mCaA the troloc of the root and that the tour { neu ne:e shal mynvd In thv name t~aaht~on _an~roan ~¢ yL qha httmmn 1151 awtetlno air emndltlonmr 9~~n ernntl~- on shall 6e npmoltloally mhavn on thm pions outhr eoE~d r bull"~_ysm~'~ 1q. • Thet Vlana shall bm mubmlttad to the Ctty Tnfflo and Transport et ion banapmx Lmr hie ravlsv n1W npprova] shoving emntoimancm vlth ehm lntast revision e! tnglnmer lop etnndard Plan Nom. {02, 436, 002 and 604 pa rt alnlnq to parking mtandacde and dr lvmvey beat ions. 9ald plena shall vhov chat all eompaet or amnll mnr npacros will bm oonvestad to ntandard n hod opaeee. sub}set proporty shall tharmupan ba dovalopad and m lnealnm0 In contmrmaneo vlth a•id plans. 11. That all block vane located on o[ oast property lines shall bs plnntad and malnealnad vlth clinging ulnas tm eliminate gra1C1t1 oppertunltlaa. :7. • That prlvr to leevenee m[ a WL1dlnq Wrm1t, eho approprLta ma~oe t hmr vu ghleea and bridge tae ehaLl bo ptd tm thm Clty et Mahelm Sn an saw nt as epaelfled In tae Nslor Tno rmughtare and Bndq• tae 9roq ram foe '~a foot hl ll/taRern Tranpporutlon Cmreldor, sa emtnbll shad by Clty r•;. nell rmsolutlon. 1]. • 2het prime to lm•uanea vt a bulldlnq permit, the appeoprlate [rattle e lq nel ameaeament tae shall be paid to thm Clty of Anaheim In an amount se satabilahad by Clty Conneu pea Wtion Nv. 90n-198. 3{, • That eho nmv canoe ruetlvn authorl ¢ad by this rmaolutl^n shall U¢ nmrvmd Dy urde:p round aril It le e. 19. Tnat thm voter baektlw oqu lpaent and any vehor Large voter myatem oqulpsene sMll be Lnatallmd to th• oat lmt•etlon of the Ha ta• Utlllty p lvl elan In •lthar (al undeegreund vaults or (bl Whlnd thu mtraot emtbark area In a manner to lly meeeenad [rem all publle aeeeato and allays. -1• x91-110 I6. Thnt eha drlvvvay alrelinq thv bulldinq eh all be kopt lraa and miser o! all atationory vahlclsv and aquSpmant Sn order to provide emargancy !!rv aeooso. li. That nil plumbing or other similar pLpae and !lxtura~ loeatod on the o xta elor o! the Uulldlnq shall ba fully •craenod by archlioctural devicaa and/or spproprinty bulldinq matarlnlnt and. lurthvr, thnt oath lnCoematlon shall be opaeiflcnlly vhown on the plena vuMvlttad 2or bulldinq paemiin. 10. • Thnt thv proposal ohall comply with all vignlnq requiramantn of eha CL (0c) •COmmaroial, LAmitod Scanlm Corridor ovvclny` Lona anises a vnrlanee alloulnq sign walvesv 1a appeovvd by eha City Connell. Planning Cveminelon or Loninq adminlatrniar. 39. • That lighting et nlgnega on nubf set peopariy Sv prohlbltad betwoan Lhu hour of mldright and o,70 n.m. an opaclllod try Loninq Cody 9vetlon 10.05.091.OS2, univaa a varlante la appllad for and gcantad. 20. That eha pnrklnq Drys nd fsevnt to La Palmn avenue nhall by vesvnnod from v law In eonfnrmanw vleh ion lnq Codo Beetlon 38.46.064.010. Such aervanlnq shell bo vhown on plans submlLCad !or bulldinq pv emit v. 2l. That en unvubordtnatad caeip[ocal ace osv agraamant, Ln a Corm vat lalaetory• to thv Clty attorney, nhal! by eaeordad with Lho Ottleo oC the Orange County 0aemrdac. 5ald ageuvmant shall npael[leally lneluda raetpcoenl ingraos and ograas to and from Lha delvaway on La Palma avanua arrvvv nubf Dee property, to and Iran ihv adfacent property to ehv aouthae at (eu rronely day eloped with a bank) and to Lha oast. Aecv aewayn be Mean the peml,ert lss shall bu esvlawod and approved by the Clty TraLtle and Transporentlan Nenagor. 3l. Thee It the build lnp Wrmtta era not leaned !ar the peo)oet author hod by coed lclmnal Uea Pormlt Mo. 7353 Ito potvlt a cuemo[clal re[a L1 center end o amt-anelvnod teveaurant vleh on-vela •lcohol lc baveragea with waiver vL min imam number o! pnrklnq vpnevo, minloum acruccural vatbaek ndfaeant to imparlal Nlghway and pechlbltad rmt-muneed aqulpoont for property to the eavt of vubfeet prole [tyl vlthln onahundrod eighty (1001 dayn from eha date o[ approval of this rvaolutLnn, than the ox lot Lnq atraat lmprovamenea slang La Palma avenue trenelnq vubfact proparey shall 60 renaved end Lall sera ac lmpravamanta nhall be reeonvc ructvd by the property owner/devaleper o! the thaatar at the loeaclon deelgnacad by Cho City Trs[[le and 7uneperent lan Nanegvr Lar env crlt teal leave saeelan. Pelor tm la vuanra o! a bulldinq permit, nt rove imprevamant plans vhsll 60 wbait tad to and Impeovemene eaeurlly mall be poatad with the eubd lvlolon Dvetlon. Tha plena nhall bn dos lynvd and eonvtrueted to sec eraancm vltn Otaneard Plana and 8pae1[lcat ion on ells !n the otllee of the Clty OngLnvae. Thv nervat Lmprovemanta shell be lnvtallad prior eo seta panty vt the bu LldLnq. -B- Pr91-130 2]. Thet prloe to Savunnca of > bullding permit. Cho caner/dav03oper of !hv ehvatar axpanalon nhall prepare a parking area phaaing program ahoulrg hou pntklnq will be pcovitlnd tlurtnq mnntruaelon o! thv preponad lmprovananta. sold program vha11 bu vubmittad to the Traftie tnglnnvrinq O1vlolon for ravlvw and appcovel by the city Txatllo and Tranaperlatlon Menngvr. 2a. That aubdaet property ahnll bm dvvvleped eubatan<lally !n aeeoxdnoca wleh plane and epvcltleatlone aubmltt ad to the Clty of Anaho lm by the peG St !Doer and which ylana era on ilia with the planning Ovpar[monG marked txhlblt Nen, 3 Theou9h ]. 2S. Thnt prior to lvaunnce o! o bullding pernit or wLthln a peelod of one I1) your from the de<e of LhL resolutlen. whichever oeeura lint, wndltlon Noa. 1, 2, 7, 9, 30, lt, 1], 17, 2D, 21, 22 and 2], lbovo-menGlonod, shall ba eompllmd with. 8xtanslane for turehor C1M eo coeplety veld eondlUone may ba Bnntvd in aceerdnncv wLeh Seet fan 18.0].090 of the Annhaim HunLClpal Coda. 26. Thnt prior to LSml bullding and sonlnq lnapootions, Condition Nos. 4, 9. 6, 8, ll, ]d, 35, 22 end ga, above-mantionatl, shall be toapl Intl v1Lh. 77. + That appt oval a! thle appllution canntltutea apprevnl of ihv prapoa9d rvquant only to the oxeant Chet LC eomplleo with the Mahalm Nunleipal Lonlnq Codv and any ocher applicably C1Ty, BtaGe and Patlarnl npelat ions. Approval does not lne lode any actlen or flndl.pn av to eampLanev er nppreval of the rogue nt soq and top any ocher appl lcabla ordlnsneo, requlaelon or requirement. Condltlone mnrked wleh an avtarlek 1.1 era raga lead by e9cebl lehed lave, codes, rpulntlon• and agraamantn and ero, therefore, not eub)aet to nagotleTlon. O[ fT TVRTN9P Rt$Dtgtp CA et the An she lm Clty Plan~lnq Comminalen deva hereby rind and determine [hat adoption m! ehly Pavolutlon is vxpevealy peed feared upon applicant's eampllaneo wleh each and all of the eandLtlone he [o lnsbove vat to rth. ehw ld any vu eh Condition, ar eny pert the [vot, by deelnred invalid a[ unantoreaabto by the !loci Judgment my any you [t o! Competent dueled LeLlon, than Chia Rveolutton, and eny eppwvale ha[oln eontn load, 'hall ba dvaosd null and void. Tilt LORt0O1H0 Pt80LUTI0H wu ndepled nt the Plennlnq Comlen ion meotln9 0[ Ju IY l9, 1991. ld)tl`Intlnlned by Phygil R B9ydttunl CIfAIPHO1Wl, ANAHtIH CITY PLANNING COMN79810N ATTIST. IOrlglnal signed 6y FAIU t. HarrI11 96Cp[TAPY, ANAI161N CSTY P(d11N iN0 CORN I9vION -a- PC91-110 9rrmE of CALIFOAHIA 1 COUNTY OT OIUNO[ ) me. CITY OT ANAH[SM ) I, [d1tR L. NaYrlm, 9marmtary pT tho Mshmim Clty Plannlnq Coanleaion, tlo Raroby eortlty tRit LAS tosagolnq rmmolmtlpn ws yaaead and ndoptatl at a maatlnq of Cho Anahalm Clty Planning Opn.lealon held on July 19, 1991, by tfie Lollouinq voto of thm mmmbmra iharaoTr AYES, CONX299ION[A91 BOUA9, AOYDSIUN, PBLOHAUl, NELLY[A, HBHNIN08A, P[AAIA NO[SI COMHS SSIONBA51 NONB AUS eNT, CONNI99ION[A9, N6996 IN wITNE9S wHBR80T, I finva fiamm~tm sst my Land thin dsy of , 1991. tmtemli ittllpd er Em~n t. xlrns~ 9[CR[TAAY, ANAtl62M CITY PLANNING CONNS99ION .T_ PC91-130 ITEM M0. 1-C m r y ip N ow y N 0 Pp~p155 5°U 'OV f 1 i m ~~ p BIOG Z C G Rpl B2 i~p35 t-GUP pp1-0ag41 LUP 2 P 3551 GUPBRSpGE 000 ._. W VhtPOE R~ 04 O-~ -04 0.01 "/B-b~19 0.Gl b~A9 °° 2154 OOFP~OE ,2 1 A ,A ~a .c ~~ ~' y 1 sr r w y~---r__.. ~ :a*` „'x i GtOMUI • "'~` RO` 03'' ~ ~ ~ ' plloM q~ R~UP 32~S O ` ~OUp 3521 R~Pp~°°e oPFwE 3fi1G LL p GUP PPRWNRE ~0E5 , mi 31RUC REpEVE ~ m~OUP 3fi2~ F4 ° , ~• A ~• vPR 4~2e F _ /' 4LPNA ~ •~ •i~~ c ~•' ~.~ ~~•/•,/ , l Final Site Plan Review No. 2004-00006 ~ r Subject Property Date: September 20, 2004 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Q.S. No. 83 REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF FINAL PLANS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ON PARCELS Al - A3 WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN MIXED USE OVERLAY ZONE. REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION OF CONCEPTUAL PLANS FOR PARCELS A AND D. Parcels Al - A3 and D within Downtown Anaheim 1523 ITEM N0. 2 I I IN6h OQ REE~PY (SR'9~) ,~ ~cP~t F o _ ~ o ' ERSIDE G~Spooa,S~ ~M1 3`$oG~ / ~tiP~ RIB G yo°(B~Apa$ ~o~EP ~ti~o~P~ F E~ cGQti ,. .I ~ Gp,C~/ T. q- ~ V T- / ' -/ c-Glsc) I m 1 RCL 65-fiF9 RCL 76.73-22 tv„ o T-CUP 2000-0420fi m I LUP 3335 C G (SC) ~ ~ y l CUP 2750 ~ RCL 7UT2-21 m VAR 3619 RCL 6T-66-55 / 1 p I HANFGRO HOTEL x ~ CUP 200404676 a~J s: ~~~~ O`• ' T-CUP 2003-04609` - c W 1 r SE81- " CUP 2003.04750 Z l~ /~ y CUP 2001-04426 ~ < ~tn ~" 1 l' '~/ CUP 2001-04496 ~ Z n x CUP 20004N241 T-CUP 2000.04200 r r ", x :, ^: FG (SC) / ; ~ x LUP dO6T z ~ r r', ~ ~ RS-3 RCL 711221 - ~ > x J I CUP 4021 Y "r p D iDU EACH CUP 3747 RCL 6]-8B 55/ CUP 3629 x x t , ~ 7 RCL 65-68-17 r ~ qCL 64-fi5A0 ~ CUP 3600 / ~ 1 \Y CUP 2004-0467fi x l ~i -I GG(9C) } x .T-CUP 20030460& CUP 2395 m. Rci es.ee ~i ~ ~ cup zaoiu qie ~ , cups e x ~. ~ 1-~REEN~~S-~ RLL %-65-90 =CUP 2001-04406 : l CUP 2366 / CUP d070 = .CUP 200004241 CUP 2261 x 1 CUP 31 B ~ ~T G CUP 406]6200 / SHOPPING LEN~T~ER, CUP 1735 / .~- -> 1 OUSE CUP 4021 ~ CUP P27 CUP 1914 "-I vr-i ¢4 W- CUP 3719 5 i VAR d222 l L VAR 4315 _Q ]~ CUP 3872 / ;, x t VAR 4209 c VAR 4173 ~ :zo CUP 3629 Lx ?: x1 - VAR2636 ~ c VAR 3'!74 :pz CUP 3600 x ~„ t ~!' VAR 2802 ~ y 7 VAR 3I9T LL) ~ r~°a CUP 3221 ~ ~ c ~. xfx x ~ -. VAR 2310 SANK ~ p CUP 3219 z ., .~ ~ z CUP 3363 v~' = z 2692 RESTAURANT ~ ~i VAF ~23Z ~ ~ J ~Y ,x' SGOP tfi18~ 1927 ~ ? VAR 1209 ., 'l M j" 3 ,x~. -~ 1914 L = VAR 2310 = '~ .~ ~ s,,. 4315 CUP 2062-04643 - ~, x VAR 2946 y /,. r--n-- 4t73 SPT 98-04 '~ x (CUP 3363) S / P$ 3774 IMPERIAL PLAZA CUP 190091 3497 SHOPPING CENTER L _fVAR 308] ) { ~-'x x P~ CPN~~~R~P~ 900 Du SPN'(P P ~"~ PASEOA x UQQ Q 3: yW ~ N< R~ ¢ NW :L 71-72-07 (SC~P 3569 C-G(SC) p ~ ~~ I :L 65-fib-17 CUP 3532 RCL 7472-0T (2) j p ~ I 64-65-64 ff1 CUP 3470 RCL 94dsd4 (2) P 2001-OgA~2 CUP3433 VAR 30315 CANYON HIGH _ ~. :UP 3862 CUP 3244 VAR 267a SCHOOL :UP 3769 CUP 1460 VAR 2872 U :UP 3574 VAR 4062 AGJ OON VAR 2283 REALTY AVI CROSSROADS OFFICE POI SHOPPING CENTER ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE SC (SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) ZONE. m- Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-04596 (READVERTISED) ~ r Subject Property Date: September 20, 2004 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: CANYON PLAZA, LLC Q.S. No. 185 REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A FREESTANDING BUILDING CONSISTING OF FIVE (5) COMMERCIAL RETAIL TENANT SPACES, ROOF-MOUNTED EQUIPMENT, AND OUTDOOR DINING AREA IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 5747 East Santa Ana Canyon Road 1514 t ~ 784 a t ~~' { y ! ? _ i k;) a / ~ J,y U g, ~ ~ ty~ 1` ;r ~ a ~ xti b3 ` ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~~'~ r v # s f .~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~~P }~ ~~ ` ~P ~ i ~~,~° - ~ ~ " ` ~ ~~ ra GP , ~ _ -, ~ ~s ~ i DE ITEM N0, 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004' .Item No 2 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION) (Motion) 2b.` ` WAIVER'OF CODE REQUIREMENT ' (Motioh) 2c. ' ` CONDITIONAL`USE PERMIT N0:2004-04876 (Readvertised) i (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION`. (1) This irregularly-shaped, 15-acre property is located at the northeast corner of Santa Ana .Canyon Road and Imperial Highway, with frontages] of 1,095 feet on the north side of Santa Ana Canyon Road and 570 feefon the east side of Imperial Highway (5747 East Santa Ana ' Canyon Road). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests approval of a conditional use permit under authority of Code: Section Nos. 18.08.030.0402 ahd 18:18.090.0202 to constructs freestanding building 'consisting`of five (5) commerdial retail tenant spaces, roof-mounted equipment, and outdoor diking area iri conjunction with an existing commercial. retail center with waiver of :`the following: SECTION 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of oarkino spaces r(1~165 required; 865 existing and proposed and recommended by the City Traffic and'Transportation .Manager) 'r "'Previously advertised for hree (3) commercial retail tenant spaces. BACKGROUND: (3) This item was continued at the request of the petitioner from the August 23, 2004, Commission Meeting to modify the request to allow five (5) commercial retail tenank spaces within the proposed building. (4) This property is developed with a commercial retail center and is zoned C-G (SC) (General Commercial; Scenic Corridor Overlay). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map 'designateskhis property for Neighbonc~od Commercial land uses. (5) Surroundirig land uses are as follows: Direction General Pian Designation North Neighborhood Center East (across Via Cortez) Residential Low Density South (across Santa Ana Canyon Road);. School Site West (across Imperial Highway) Neighborhood Center Staff Report td the Planning Commission September 20; 2004 Item No. 2 PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (6) The following zoning actions pertain to this property: (a) Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04750 (to construcEa full service restaurant with on- premises sales and cdnsumption of alcoholic beverages, including outdoor diningahd roof-mounted equipment in the CL (SC) zone with waivers of maximum number of wall 'signs and minimum front setback adjacentto a scenic highway)'was approved by the 'Zoning Administrator'on September 4, 2003 (5747 East Santa'Ana Canyon Road - lslands Fine Burgers & Drinksj.{,This restaurant was never constructed and termination of this permit is included as a condition of`approval on this project. (b) Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-04406 (td permit the sale of beer and wine for on- premises consumption in conjunction with a full service restaurant with waivers of maximum number of wall signs and minimum number of parking spaces)'[1,040 `required; 865 proposed) was approved by he Zoning'Administ~ator on August 23, 2001 (5701 East Santa Ana Canyon Road, Uhit P - Shefinai Cuisine'of India). (c) Conditional'Use Permit No. 2001.-04428 (to permit the expansion of an existing full- ' service restaurant, including outdoor dining areas and the continued salesof alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption in conjunction with an existing commercial `? retail center) was approved by the Zoning`Administrator on July26, 2001: (5747 East Santa Ana'Ganyon Road -Maxwell's Restaurant). This restaurant was demolished and termination of this permit is included as a condition ofapproval on this project. (d) CdnditionaL Use Permit No. 2000-04241 (td,permit on'-premises sales and'consumption of alcoholicbeverages within afull-service'~estaurant) was approved by the Zoning Administrator on August 10, 2000 (5775 East Santa'Ana Canyon Road - Adami Restaurant)c (e) ConditionaCUse Permit No. 2000-04200 (to establish'outdoor seating in conjunction with a coffee shop within an existing commercial retail center, and to further subdivide the center into additional tenant'spaces) was approved by the Planning Commission on May 8, 2000 (5701 - 5791 Easf Santa Ana Canyon .Road). (f) Cdnditional'Use Permit No, 4067 (to permit a 2,526 square foot addition to an existing tenant space to construct a 9,826 square foot hardware store including a 400 square fdot outdoor plant sales area within an existing commercial retail center with a total bf 59 units with waivers of minimum parking jot landscaping and minimum number of ' parking spaces) was approved 6y the Commission on Octoberl2, 1998 (5765 East Santa Ana Canyon Road -Ace Hardware): (g) Cdnditional'Use Permit No, 4021' (to permit a 40,000'square foot physical fitness fad[Iity with roof-mounted equipment within an existing tenant space in a 157,794?square foot commerciat;centertyith waiver of minimum number of parking spaces, permitted commercial center idehtification;sign and permitted wall signs) was approved by the': Commission on April 27, 1998,(5755 EastSanta Ana. Canyon Road - L. A Fitness). (h) ConditionaiUse Permit No. 3747 (to permit 1,500 square feet of outdoor seating area in conjunction with various restaurant uses with waiver of minimum numtier of parking spaces) was approved by the Commission bn March 20, 1995` Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning,Commissoh `September 20, 2004' Item No. 2 (i} Conditional Use Permit No. 3719 (to permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption in'cohjunctionwith asemi-enclosed restaurant/public dance hall with outdoor dining area with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces) was' approved by the Commission on October 3, 1994(5717 East Santa Aha Canyon'Road The Foxfire Restaurant). - (j); Conditional Use Permit No. 3672 (to permit a public dance hall in conjunction with a restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages foroh-premises consumption) was' approved by the. City Council on June 21, 1994,. for a period of one (1) year, to expire on May 2, 1995, fbllowing approval by;Commission on May:2, 1994. On May 31, 1995, the Cbmmission amended conditiohs bf approval to allow this use until May 2, 1998. (5717: East Santa Ana Canyon Road -rThe Foxfire Restaurant). (k) Conditional Use Permit No. 3629 (to permit aground-mounted satellite dish antenna) was approved by;the Zoning Administrator on August 19:.1993 (5717 East Santa Ana Canyon Road -:The Foxfre Restaurant). (I) Conditional Use Permit No: 3600 (to permit the expansion of a gourmet take-out restaurant with outdoor seating and sales of beer and wine,for on-premise consumption) was approved by the Zoning Administrator on May 6, .1993 (5753-A East Santa'Ana Canyon Road -Yves Bistro). (m) Variance No. 4209 (waiver bf prohibitetl roof-mounted equipment to retain a robf- mourted satellite' dish antenna) was'approved by the City Council on February 9; 1993, following approval by the Zoning Administrator oh January 7, 1993 (5741 East Santa Ana Canyon Road - Delahey's/Maxwell's Restaurant). This restaurant no longer exists and termination'of this permit is included as a condition ofapproval. (n) Conditional Use Permit No.3221 (to permit a veterinary clinic) was approved by the Commission ortDecember4, 1989:.(5701 East Santa Ana Canyon Road). (o) Conditional Use Permit No. 3219 (to permit a gourmet take-out restaurant with outdoor seating and salesof beer and wine for on-premises consumption witfi waiver of minimum number of parking spaces);was approved by the City Courcil on January 16, 1990; following approval by he Commission on`December 4, 1989:. (5753 East Santa Ana Canyon Road - Yves`$istro). (p) Conditional Use Permit No: 2261 (to permit sales of beer and wine for on-premises consumption in aproposedYestaurantwith waiver of minimum numtier of parking spaces) was approved by'the Commission on September; 9, 1981 (5761-H East Santa Ana Canyon i?oad -Lucky Pearl Restaurant). (q) Conditional Use Permit No: 2244 (to permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on-` premises consumption in en existing,restauranfwith waiver of minimum number of parking spaces) was approved by the Planning Commission on July 27, 1981(5717 EasPSanta Ana Canybn Road -The Fbxfire Restaurant). (rJ Variance No. 2948 (waiver of (a) required landscaped berm and (b) maximum structural height to construct a commercial building) was approved by the City Council on September 6, 1977, following approval, in part (waiver (b) denied); by the Commission bh August 15 1977. Page 3 Staff Report tb the Planning Commission September 20 2004 Item No. 2 (s) Conditional'Use Permit No. 1735 (to permit sales of beer and wine for oh-premises consumption in a proposed restaurant) was approved.. by the Commission bn August: 1, 1977 (5775' E. Santa'Ana Canyon Road -Sizzler Restaurant). This restaurant is no longer in operation and termination of Ihis'permit is required as a condition of approval. (t) Conditional'Use Permit No. 1727 (to permit sales of (a) beer ahtl wine for on-premises consumption in a proposed restaurant, and. (b) alcoholic beverages for ori-premise consumption in a proposed restaurant) was approved by the Commissiori'on July 6,, :1977 (5781' East Santa Ana Canyon Road = (a) Canyon Hills Family Restaurant (now Baja Fresh); and (b)belaney's/Maxwell's`Restauratiti(demolistied). (u) Variance No. 2836 (waiver of required landscaped berm) was granted by the 'Commission on August 30, .1976. (vj Conditional' Use Permit No. 1608 (to permit sales of beer and wine for on-premises ' 'consumption in a proposed restaurant) was approved' by the'Commissiori on April,12, 1976 (5765=K East Santa Ana Canyon Road -Lamppost Pizza). (w) Variance No. 2310 (waiver of (a)'permitted!signs, (b) location ofsign at intersection df two arterial highways'(c) minimum freeway setback, and (d) minimum landscape area dimension to permit tfte construction of a shopping center and ah automotive service' station) was: approved. by the City Council on April 11; 1972, following denial by the ' Commission on February 23, 1972. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (7) The petitioner proposes to construct's 6,100 square foot freestanding building consisting of five (5) comme(•cial retail tenant spaces, roof-mounted equipment, and outdopr dining area to replace the previously demolished 5,992 square foot restaurant (Maxwell's)'on this pad. The tenant spaces are intended for restaurahUfast-food uses.:The overall site plan': (Exhibit No. 1) Indicates that the proposed restaurant building would be locatetl at the center of the Canyon Plaza Shopping Center along the Santa Ana' Canyon Road street frontage. The building would be constructed in the same location of the previous restaurant, witfl a structural setback of 57 feet from Santa Ana Canyon Road with a landscaped area varying from twenty (20) to thirty (30) feet wide along this portion of Santa Ana Canyort Road. Code7equiresaminimum fifty-fooC (50) structural setback from Santa Ana Canyon Road with twenty-five feet fully landscaped: Jhe siteiplan for the lease pad; (Ezhitiit No. 2) ihdicates the same parking configuration of the previous restaurant, with. the elimination of five (5) parking spaces. The trash and receiving area would be located oh the south side df the building and the outdoor seating area wouldbe located along the nortfi'side of the building facing the parking area. Page 4 TOTAL PARKING ; ADDRESSITENANT USE SQUARE 'RATID PARKING FEET (Per 1,000 sq. RE(3UIRED ft. BUILDING 5701 Ma Me Bridal Service/Retail 4,702. 5.5 26.0 Grandma's Cu board Retail 2,049 5.5 -11.2 FriarTtix Sho i Service/Retail !1:;150 5.5 6.3 R. Downs, 'Medical/Dental 1,720 6 10.3 O tometrist Yamaha Music Maker ServicelRetail 4;066 < 5.5 22.3 Vacant Potential 286 1 5.5 7.0 Service/Retail , Veloha Needlecraft Service/Retail .4,527 5.5 -24.8 Shehnai Indian Restaurant 3 000 8 24.0 Restaurant , Etite'SAT ;Service/Retail 1;396 S.5 7.6 Kumon- 'Retail 1,813 5.5 9.9 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20; 2004 Item' No. 2 TOTAL PARKING ' ADDRESSffENANT ' USE SQUARE RATIO 'PARKING FEET (Per 1,000 sq. :REQUIRED ft. BUILDING 5717 Foxfire Restaurant Full-Service 16 044 8 128.3 .Restaurant 1 , BUILDING 5731 Quizno's Fast-Food 1 223 16 19.5 Restaurant 1 , Vacant Potential 1 435 ' 5:5 8 7 ServicelRetail' , . . Pacificbental MedicallDental :.3,076 6 18.4 Seattle's Best Fast-Food 1,729 16 27.6 Restaurant BUILDING 5747 New Commercial 6,100 indoori Retail building Fast-Food ':1,800 16 126.4 (SUBJECT) :;Restaurant - outdoor BUILDING 5753 Yves' Bistro: Full-Service ?3 659 8 29.2 Restaurant , Vacant Potential 1 517 5:5 8.3 ServicelRetail , AmourBeaut Salon Service/Retail ;1,380 5.5 7.5 ' PosYBox Plus ServicelRetail 1,020 `5i5 5.6 ' Uhited Studibs Karate:. :.Service/Retail P 1,200 c 5,5 6.6 Doc Sava eIDDS (MedicallDental !2,100 '6 12.6' Max Muscle' i Service - 720 5.5 3.9 ; BUILDING 5757 LA Fitness Service/Retail 40 000 Per Parking 236.0 , Stud BUILDING 5761 Green Burrito Fast Food 2 100 16 33.6 Restaurant; , Christy's Donuts Fast Food 900 16 14.4 Restaurants A.H. Jewel "mart :Service/Retail 900 5,5 4.9 !Ti Nails' Service/Retail: ~ 900 r 5.5 4.9 Vacant Potential 1 200 5;5 6.6 Service/Retail , Artand Decor Galle Service/Retail 900 5.5 4.9 Can on Hair Service/Retail: :;.1,200 5:5 6,6 Lucky Pearl Full-Service ' 1 973 8 15.7 Restaurant Restaurant BUILDING 5765 Dentist :Medical/Dental 1,254 6 7.5 - Page 6 Staff Report to the ' Planning Commissidn September 20, 2004 Item No. 2 ADDRESSITENANT USE TOTAL SQUARE FEET' PARKING .RATIO (Per 1,OOp sq. ft.) PARKING REQUIRED ' Titan Pddl Su I ServicelRetail 685 5.5 4.8 Ace Hardware `.Service/Retail 9;826 5.5 .'.54.0 BUILDWG 5769 Cleaners 'Service/Retail 1,276 5.5 7.0 Can` dh Tailors r Service/Retail 865 5.5 < 4:7 For the Health of It Service/Retail 1;110 5.5 6.1 Childreh's Orchard ;Service/Retail 1',200 5.5 6.6 Time Maker '.Service/Retail 560 5.5 13.0 Can on Travel ?'Service/Retail 840- 5.5 4.6 FldwerGirl Florist< Service/Retail 1;018' 5.5 5.5 AAA Shde Re air% Service/Retail 380 ' !` 5.5 2:0 All Vacuum De otr ServicelRetail 840 S.5 4.6 State.Farm Insurahce Offide 430 4 1:7 Pro Ad.One Medidal/Dental ..2,213`. 6 ' 13.2 BUILDING 5773 Mission:: Renaissance Service/Retail 850' 5.5 '4:6 Pink Art ServicelRetail 960 ( 5.5 ' S.2 Fantastic Sam's ServidelReiail 960 5.5 5.2 Tannin Service/Retail 1;200' 5.5 ' 6.6 Ci ar Store Service/Retail 1;512 5.5 r: 8.3 Beaut Su I s ServidelRetail 912!! 5.5 , 5.0 Sdra in' in the Hills Service/Retail 1,480 5.5 8.1 BUILDING 5775 Adami Restaurant) Full-Service S Restaurant 4,800. 8 38.4 BUILDING 5781 Baja Fresh Fast Food Restaurant 2,500 16 40 BUILDING 5791 r Washington Mutual Bank, Drive-Throw h 4,906 6 = 29.4 , Total 161,262 1,155 (9) The revised floor plan (Exhibit No. 3) indicates five (5) tenant spaces within the', proposed building, including two outdoor dining areas totaling 1,800: square feet (30% of the building). No"specific configuration of the proposed tenant spaces or interior improvements are provided on the floor plan; however, the tenant spaces would potentiallyrange in size from 1,000 to 1',500 square feet. The two (2) outdoor dining 'areas are immediatelyadjacent to the building entrances and are enclosed by landscape planters. Storefront entrances would be located within a courtyard area along the north side $f the building. Code allows outdoor dining areas in conjunction with restaurant uses; provided tftey comply with the following: Page 7 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20;2004 Item No. 2 "0201: The outdoor dining area shall be immediately adjacent to, and take primary access from, the restaurant. .0202 The outdoor dining area shall not encroach into any public right-of--way or mry required setback, yard, landscaping or parking area. .0203`77te outdoor dining area shall be used'exchrsivelyior the seating and - consumption of meals grid/or beverages by patrons of the restaurant. .0204 The outdoor dirting'area shall be entirely enclosed by landscape planters, fencing or other'decorative barriers that physically separate the outdoor dining area from other open: or public areas. .0205 The outdoor diming area shall not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the gross floor area of the"enclosed restaurant and shall be included in the gross floor area of a restaurant to determine parking requirements. " (AMC 18.38::220.020) (10)! The elevation drawings (Exhibit No. 4}depict a building with varied roof planes and heights, and three towerelements with a maximum height of 35 feet: A rangeof materials and colors would be utilized,' including a plaster finish for the majority of the building, painted in mild + contrasting colgrs; with a Canterra stone wainscot base. Recessed storefront windows with a decorative plaster arch and keystone detail would be included on the south and northeast building elevations. Clay file roofs witfi exposed wood rafters would cap the towers, with the remaining roofline treated with a decorative foam cornice finish. Decorative lighting with a bronze'powder coat finish would be affixed to thereast and northeast building elevations and decorative vine trellises would complement the south elevation facing: Santa Ana Canyon Road. The exterior building;elevations would also include the use of recessed windows, file accents; flat suspended awnings with a smooth plaster finish, and ornamental wrought iron around the raisedpatioldining area. (11) Although plans reflect the'conceptual location and number of roof-mounted units, the petitioner has indicated there would be potentially up to five {5) tenant spaces, and : potentially five (5} HVAC units. The roof is fully surrounded by a parapet wail'and other' architectural features of the building (tower elements). The line of site drawing :indicates the roof-mounted equipment would be completely screened from view from the right-of-way on Santa Ana Canyon Road. The line ofsite drawing further indicates the parapefwould be a minimum of fouF(4) feet high and up to eighf(8) feet high'at the highest portion'of the parapet, with HVAC units a maximum bf four (4),feet in height. According to this information, the proposed roof-mounted equipment would tie screened from every direction. The Code requires that such roof-mounted equipment screening be subject to the following: ' a) screening of equipment shall be provided byacceptable;-permanent building;materials, the same as or similar to those that are used in the construction of the underlying building, or equipment shall be screened from view by acceptable atchitectural features`of the building itself. The screening shall not'exceed the height limit as established by this section and shall not consist of wood latticework; b) equipment shall not be visible from any public< street, public or private property at finished grade level, or any Floor level of a residential structure; c) in order to minimize thebisibility of screening methods and materials, all equipment shall tie paintedao match the roof on'which it is located, as well as painted to match any materials used for equipment screening; d) the method and/or screening material used shall not be readily recognizable+as a screening device but shall be integrated intd the design; of the building as apart thereof; e) all equipment screening and paint shall be retained and maintained in good condition. (12) The elevation drawings (Exhibit No. 4)'indicate the conceptual location of proposed tenant signage. Although a otaf of six (6) signs are depicted on the plans -three (3) signs Page 8 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004 Item No. 2 oh the northeast elevation (facing the interior parking area), and three (3) signs located on the south elevation (facing Santa Ana Canyon Road) -the petitioner has indicated a`minimum of two (2) signs would be installed for each tenant, on both the northeast and south elevations of the building -for Up to a total of ten!(10) signs'No information pertaining to the specific size and design has been provided, as tenants for he site have not been secured. Code allows a maximum of two (2) wall signs for each tenant where said signs'are located on parallel walls of the unit on opposite sides of the building and (a) one of the walls lace an arterial highway or local street other than a residential street (where fifty percent (50%) or more of the opposite side is tleveloped with residences and (b) the; opposite wall faces a customer'area such'as a parking lot or entry to the'store, provided both igns are not visible When viewed from any singlelocation antl` neither sign js' intended o be visble to a freeway. The' maximum; permitted sign area is ten percent of the buildingelevation or 200 square feet whichever is less. (13) The landscape plan (Exhibit No. 5) indicates'a variety of canopy trees and shrubs surrounding the proposed commercial retail. building. She plan deflects an existing landscaped area varying from 20'to 30 feet wide along this portionof Santa Ana Canyon .Road and a 10 to 15 foot wide landscaped area along;the west portion of the: lease area bordering the access drive to the site. No atldition to the existing hedge and eucalyptus trees are proposed in these existing areas. ;New landscaping associated with the retail building wdultl include planter areas along the south elevation of the building"planted with 1- gallon hemerocallis daylily, eighteen inches on center. The dining area would be complemented by six;'(li) planter boxes housing 15-gallon Pigmy Date Palms; and a perimeter planter area containing three (3).15-gallon sized London Plane Trees, one (1) 24- inch box sizetl Coast Live Oak, one (1) 24-inch box Chinese Flame Tree, and associated shrubs and ground cover. Decorative scored. concrete would be jncluded within the dining area and associated pedestrian walkways. (14) The petition letter indicates that the building would be utilized primarily for restaurant uses (i.e: Starbuck's, Nick and Willy's Pizza, andPacific Whey). An outdoor dining area would be included to provide an alternative dining experience forcustomers within the commercial center. Nospecific information pertaining to the hours!of operation or the number of employees has been provided as no specific enants have been retained for this proposed retail building! The petitioner has further indicated the request for additional tenants would allow flexibility;fn leasing'the building; however, it is not their specific intent to obtain five'(5) tenants:: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:' '(15) 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 impacYand, therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration tie. approved upon a finding by the Planning Commission that the Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has`considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public reviewyprocess and further finding on the basisof the Initial Study; and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment: GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: ' (16) 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 oh March 17,.1992. Based on City staff review of the proposed project, it has been determined Page 9 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20; 2004 Item' No. 2 that this project does not fit within the scope necessary to,~equire a Growth Managemenh Element analysis, therefore; no analysis has been performed. EVALUATION: (17) Commercial centers with outdoor dining and roof-mounted'equipment are permitted in tfie C- G (SG) Zone, sutiject to the approvaC'df a conditional use permit. However, wfien roof- mounted equipment is proposed, Cdtle requires`that: `Such roof-mounted equipment shall be subject to the following provisions and shall be clearly shown oh plans submitted forYeview to fhe City ofAnaheim. rSubmitted plans shall include line-of--sight drawings from surrounding'properties; demonstrating the effectiveness of the proposed method of screening: :0321 Screening of equipmenfshall be provided by acceptable; permanent building materials, the same as orsimilar to those which are used: in the cbnstruction:ofthe underlying building, or equipment shall be screened from'view by acceptable'architectural features of the: building itself. Said screening shall not exceed the height limit'and shall not consist of wood lattice work. .0322 Permanent, mature landscaping may: also be utilized, but only if it provides a complete and sufficient, year-round screening. i .0323 Equipment shall not be visible from any public street, public or private property. at finished grade level, or any floor level of any residential structure. .0324 In order to minimize the visibility of screening methods and materials, all equipment shalfhe painted to match'the roof on which ifis located,'as well as'painted to match any materials used for equipment screening. .0325 The method and/or screening material used shall not be readily recognizable as a screening device but shall be integrated into the design; of the building as a part thereof. .0326 All equipment screening shall be retained and maintained in good condition." (AMC 18.090:0202) The five (5) roof mounted units proposed would not be visible from Santa Ana Canyon Raad or the surrounding private property within the commercial'center. The parapet screening is incorporated intd the architecture of the building!and would comply with all the equirements of the' Code pertaining to the establishment of roof-mounted equipment within the Scenic Corridor as indicatetl above.' Because the equipment would not be visible from any publid street, public or private property at finisFed grade level, or any floor level'of any residential structure, and would comply with. Code, staff recommends approval of the> request for roof-mounted equipment. (18) Code allows outdoor dining'areas in conjunction'with restaurant usessubject tb approval of a conditional use' permit. 'Code requires that; 0201'The outdoor dining area sha116e immediately adjacent to, and take primary access from, the'restaurant. .0202`The outdoor dining area shall not encroach into any public right-of--way or any required setback, yard; landscaping or parking area .0203 The outdoor dining area shall be used exclusively for the seating and consumption of meals and/or beverages by patrons of the restauraht: .0204 The outdoor dining area shall be entirely enclosed 6y landscape planters fencing or other decorative barriers that physically separate fhe outdoor dining area from other open or public areas.': .0205'The outdoor dining area shall not exceed thirty percent (30%) bf the gross Page 10 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004 Item No. 2r door area of the enclosed restaurant and shall be included in the gross floor area of a restaurant to determine parking requirements."(AMC:18.38.220:p20) Planter areas would enclose the proposed outdoor dining area with openings for access into the food court and building entrances. Thisifood courtarea would be intentled for the< exclusive use of restaurant patrons at this building. Because the'dutdoor dining area does not exceed thirty percent (30%) of he gross Floor areaof the enclosed restaurant, and would comply withlall the requirementsof the Code pertaining to outdoor dining area indicated atiove, staff'recommends approval of the request for the outdoor dining area. (19) The requested waiver pertains to minimum number of parking spaces. Code requires a minimum of!1_,155 parking spaces for this proposed building and dther uses on the'property, antl 865 spaces are proposed. Tfie petitioner has submitted sparking analysis prepared by Paul SinSinger: P.E., dated June 1;:2004, to siibstantiate the requested parking waiver.: The City Traffic aid Transportation Manager has reviewed the parking analysis and has determined that the proposed parking is sufficient for the proposed buildlrig and existing uses within;the commercial center. (20) The parking analysis also indicates the following findings to justify the requested parking waiver. (a); "That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the numtier of suchspaces necessary to accommodate: all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use: The parking study indicates that the peak parking demand for off-street parking spaces is only 69.5% of the quantityprovided for the proposed building and commercial retail'center(602 parking'spaces used at peak demand; 865 parking spaces supplied'on site.) !; (b) , That the variance, under the conditions imposed; if any, will not increase the demand or competition for parking'spaces upon the public streets: in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use: The proposed project will not increase or compete for on street parking because its parking lot has more than adequate parking (263 surplus'spaces) toaccommddate both ttie existing retail commercial cehter usesand theproposed new retail building on site. (c) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand or competition. for parking spaces upon adjacent: private. property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use: The project parking lot is physically separated from other adjacent development. Furthermore, there is no reason to encroach onto otherparking facilities because the project's parking lot provides ample parking asndicated in the parking analysis: (d); That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion, within the off-street parking areas or lots provided forsuch use: Page 11 Staff Repprt to the Planning Commission September 20; 2004 Item No. 2 :Traffic and parking congestion will nok occur because the supply of parking spaces for the projectlsite is anticipated td be only 69:5% occupied during he peak-parking demand period. (e) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular .:ingress to or egressfrom adjacent properties upon the public'streets iri'tfie immediate vicinity of the proposed use: The proposed commercial retail building would not change theiexisting traffic circula4oncr access o or from`adjacenfstreets or private properties, or impact the 'existing onisite circulation within the existing parking',areas on he property. therefore; there will be no impeding of traffic access into or out of adjacent parking` lots " (21) The proposed commercial center building would. be constructed to replace a restaurant building that was' located iR the same'locationwithin the existing commercial'retail centerl The proposed restaurant uses within'the new building would complement the existing commercial center's complexion of retail and restaurant uses, while enhancing he center's ability o serve as a neighborhood commercial'destination.s' Staff hasrincluded'standard '' conditions of approval pertaining to landscaping( maintenance, and sgnage. Because the new commercial retail tenant building would complement the existing commercial ; uses on site, and would incorporate swell-designed and architecturally enhanced building, staff recommends approval of the petitioner's request(to construct a freestanding building consisting of five (5) commercial retail tenant spaces. FINDINGS: (22) Section 18.42.110 of the parking ordinance sets,forth the following findings, which are required to be made beforea parking'waiver is approved by the Commission: (a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any; will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to berprovided for' such use than the number ofsuch spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to'such use'under the normal and reasonably fo~eseeable'conditions of operation of such use; and ' (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any; will not increase the'demand and ':competition for parking spacesupon thepublic streets in the immediate vicinity of the `proposed use; and (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any; will not increase the demand and competition'for parking spaces upon adjacent private`propertyin the immediate vicinity of the proposed use; and (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, Will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots'provided for such use; and (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of 'the proposed use. Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly. imposed upon the granting of any waiver pursuant to this Sectioh by the Planning Commission or City Council, the granting of any such waiver shall be deemed contingent upoh operation bf such use in conformance with Page 12 Staff Report to the Planning'Commissioh September 20, 2004` Item No: 2 the assumptions relating to the operation and intensity of the use as contained in the parking demand study: that formed the basis for approval of said waiver. `Exceeding,r violating;. iritensifyingnr otherwise deviating from anyof said assumptions as contained in the parking demand study shall tie deemed a violation of the express conditions imposed upon said waiver which shall subject said waiver to termination br modification pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits). (23) 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 ah 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 adjoiningJand uses or the growth and developmert of the area in which it is proposed to be ldcated; (c) That the size and shape of the site proposed forthe use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the fiealth and: safety; (d) That the traffic gererated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry he traffic ih 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 Cityof Anaheim. RECOMMENDATION: I (24) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report; and oral and written evidence presented at the `public hearing, the Planning Commissien'approve the petitioner's request and adopt the 7esolution including tFe findings' and conditions contained herein: Page 13 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2004--' A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-04876 BE GRANTED (5747 EAST SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD) WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: PARCEL 1: THAT PORTION OF LOT 4 OF THE DOMINGUEZ ESTATE, AS SHOWN ON A LICENSED SURVEYOR'S MAPS FILED IN BOOK 2, PAGE 15 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF TRACT NO. 7470, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 326, PAGES 18, 19 AND 20 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, BEING A POINT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE SANTA ANA VALLEY IRRIGATION COMPANY, AS DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED MARCH 7, 1940 IN BOOK 1033, PAGE 362 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE SOUTH 74° 10' 35" WEST 507.09 FEET, NORTH 15° 49' 25" WEST 3.00 FEET, AND SOUTH 74° 10' 35 WEST 298.59 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO W.F. GLEASON AND WIFE, RECORDED MAY 22, 1951 IN BOOK 2191, PAGE 226 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID. NORTHWESTERLY LINE SOUTH 74° 10' 35" WEST 715.09 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 818.20 FEET, AND WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09° 21' 14", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 133.58 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4, A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE PASSING THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 06° 28" 11" EAST; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, NORTH 0° 16' 25" WEST 609.25 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE STATE. OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED FEBRUARY 27, 1969 IN BOOK 9995, PAGE 577 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LAST MENTIONED LAND, NORTH 70° 23' 17" EAST 132.19 FEET, NORTH 60° 52' 01" EAST 189.71 FEET, AND NORTH 56° 00'53" EAST 179.51 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY LINE, SOUTH 81° 34' 25" EAST 125.13 FEET, SOUTH 50° 34' 25" EAST 132.00 FEET, AND SOUTH 65° 19' 25" EAST 142.68 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LAND OF W.F. GLEASON; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LAST MENTIONED LAND, SOUTH 03° 22' 25" EAST 464.60 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 1A: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TRACT NO. 7470, PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 326, PAGES 18 THROUGH 20 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, BEING AT A POINT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD, 7160 FEET NORTHWESTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE CENTERLINE OF THE WESTBOUND LAND THEREOF AS SHOWN ON SAID TRACT NO. 7470; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LIEN OF SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD, SOUTH 74° 10' 35" WEST 507.09 FEET, AND NORTH 15° 49' 25" WEST 3.00 FEET, AND SOUTH 74° 1p' 35" WEST 269.55 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING THENCE SOUTH 15° 49' 25" EAST 42.60 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74° 10 35" WEST 660.11 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1968.00 FEET; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH AN ANGLE OF 6° 39' 31", AN ARC LENGTH OF 228.71 FEET TO A Cr\PC2004-0 -1- PC2004- POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4; THENCE ALONG SAID PROLONGATION AND SAID WESTERLY LINE, NORTH 00° 16' 15" WEST 41.74 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 818.20 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 6° 28' 11" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH AN ANGLE OF 9° 21' 14", AN ARC LENGTH OF 133.56 FEET; THENCE ALONG TANGENT LINE, NORTH 74 10' 35" EAST 744.13 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 2: THAT PORTION OF LOT 3 OF THE DOMINGUEZ ESTATE, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 2, PAGE 15 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT A POINT IN THE CENTERLINE OF PLACENTIA-YORBA ROAD, AS SHOWN ON PLANS ENTITLED "PLAN AND PROFILE OF PLACENTIA-YO'RBA ROAp" ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY SURVEYOR OF SAID COUNTY, DISTANT THEREON NORTH 0°28' 36" EAST 384.41 FEET. FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE CENTERLINE OF SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD, 60.00 FEET WIDE, AS SHOWN ON A MAP ON FILE IN SAID OFFICE OF THE COUNTY SURVEYOR; THENCE SOUTH 83°46' 57" 'EAST 230.68 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED JANUARY 23, 1953 IN BOOK 2441, PAGE 84 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS IN SAID OFFICE; THENCE NORTH 65° 02' 06" EAST 202.77 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 86° 25' 25" EAST 160.31 FEET; THENCE NORTH 71°12' 00" EAST 116.09 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED (STATE PARCEL C2577) RECORDED FEBRUARY 27, 1969 IN BOOK 8885, PAGE 577 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS IN SAID OFFICE; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 3, SOUTH 0° 32' 16" WEST 609.26 FEET TO A POINT IN THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE SANTA ANA VALLEY IRRIGATION COMPANY CANAL RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE CENTERLINE OF WHICH IS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 4, PAGES 44 TO 50 INCLUSIVE OF RECORD OF SURVEYS IN SAID OFFICE, SAID POINT BEING ON A CURVE RECORD OF SURVEYS IN SAID OFFICE, SAID POINT BEING ON A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 818.20 FEET; THENCE FROM A TANGENT BEARING SOUTH 84° 20' 31" WEST, WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH AN ANGLE OF 22° 40' 42", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 323.85 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY TERMINUS OF THE EASTERLY LINE SHOWN AS "SOUTH 1 DEGREE 50' 03" WEST, 257.80 FEET' IN PARCEL 2 OF THAT PORTION OF IMPERIAL HIGHWAY RELINQUISHED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM (REL-820) BY RESOLUTION OF THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY COMMISSION, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH RESOLUTION IS RECORDED IN BOOK 10969, PAGE 47 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, AND AS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED MAY 23, 1973 IN BOOK 9, OF STATE HIGHWAY MAPS IN SAID OFFICE; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE OF IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, NORTH 1° 50' 03" EAST 257.80; FEET: THENCE NORTH 9° 56' 32" EAST 276.46 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 2A: ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY BEING THAT PORTION OF THE SANTA ANA VALLEY IRRIGATION COMPANY CANAL CONVEYED TO THE SANTA ANA VALLEY IRRIGATION COMPANY BY DEED RECORDED JULY 18, 1934 IN BOOK 685, PAGE 255 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, LYING WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE SIDE LINES OF LOT 3 OF "DOMINGUEZ ESTATE", AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 2, PAGE 15 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING WESTERLY OF THE EASTERLY LINE, AND THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF SAID EASTERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED JANUARY 23, 1953 IN BOOK 2441, PAGE 84 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. -2- PC2004- WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on August 23, 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 conditional use permit and to Investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did continue this public hearing upon request of the petitioner in order to modify said request to include a total of five (5) retail tenant spaces with the proposed building, and such public hearing was held 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 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 request to construct a freestanding building consisting of five (5) commercial retail tenant spaces, roof-mounted equipment, and outdoor dining area in conjunction with an existing commercial retail center is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section Nos. 18.08.030.040.0402 and 18.18.090.0202, with waiver of the following: SECTIONS 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of Dorking spaces. (1 155 required; 865 existing and proposed and. recommended by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager) 2. That the waiver, based on the parking study submitted by the applicant and under the conditions imposed, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of such .spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of the use. 3. That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use, since at peak demand only 69.5% of onsite parking spaces would be utilized. 4. That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use as there would be a surplus of 263 parking spaces at peak demand with the establishment of the proposed building. 5. That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use. 6. That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. 7. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow full development of said uses in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety and general welfare. 8. That the traffic generated by the proposed uses will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. -3- PC2004- 9. That the proposed uses, as conditioned herein, will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which they are located. 10. 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. 11. That "` indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that rio correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to construct a freestanding building consisting of five (5) commercial retail tenant spaces, roof-mounted equipment and outdoor dining area in conjunction within an existing commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial .study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Ctty Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: 1. That the number of tenant spaces in this commercial retail building shall be limited to five (5). Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 2. That there shall'be no amusement machines, video game devices, or pool tables maintained upon the premises at any time without issuance of property permits as required by the Anaheim Municipal Code. 3. 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. 4. That the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped with decorative lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably illuminate the windows of nearby residences. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 5. That all plumbing downspouts, ladders and/or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be integrated into the architecture of the building. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 6. That there shall be no public telephones on the premises located outside the building. 7. That window signage shall not be permitted. 8. That if required to serve the building, the legal owner of subject property shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement across the property to be determined as electrical design is completed. g. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. Landscape and/or hardscape screening of all pad-mounted equipment shall be required and shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. -4- PC2004- 10. That the legal property owner shall submit an application for a Subdivision Map Act Certificate of Compliance to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division for the parcel on which the proposed building is located. A Certificate of Compliance or Conditional Certificate of Compliance shall be approved by the City Engineer and recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit. 11. That prior to the issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department Development Services Division for review and approval a W ater Quality Management Plan that: o Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. • Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. • Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP. • Describes the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMPs. • Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long-term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs, and describes the mechanism for funding the long-term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. 12. 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 the Project WQMP • Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available onsite. • Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMPs. 13. 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. 14. That any tree planted on-site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead. 15. 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 and 470 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 16. 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. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 17. 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. 18. That the location of the trash enclosure shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, for safety and the on-site trash truck turnaround: 19. That no roof-mounted balloons or other inflatable devices shall be permitted on the property. -5- PC2004- 20. That no outdoor vending machines shall be permitted on the property. 21. That four (4) foot high street address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of the building in a color that contrasts with the ropf material. The numbers shall npt be visible to the adjacent siceets or properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 22. That no outdoor storage shall be permitted on the premises. 23. That final sign plans for the wall signs shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. Any decision made by staff regarding the sign plans may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a'Reports and Recommendations' item. 24. That the plans submitted for building permits shall specify a decorative pavement treatment for the walkways/pedestrian accessways to the new building. 25. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground and outside the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division in either underground vaults or outside the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted to the Water Engineering and Cross Connection Control Inspector for review and approval. 26. 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. 27. That individual water service and/or fire line connections shall be required for each parcel or commercial unit per Rule 18 of the City of Anaheim's Water Rates, Rules and Regulations. 28. That because this project has a landscaping area exceeding two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed in compliance with Chapter 10.19 {.Landscape Water Efficiency) of Anaheim Municipal Code and Ordinance No. 5349 regarding water conservation. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 29. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Service Standards Specifications. Any water service pr fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is nc longer needed. The owner/developer shall be responsible for the cost to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line. 30. That the property owner shall submit a letter to the Planning Services Division requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04750 (to construct a full service restaurant with on-premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages, including outdoor dining, and roof-mounted equipment in the CL (SC) zone with waivers of maximum number of wall signs and minimum front setback adjacent to a scenic highway), Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-04428 (to permit the expansion of an existing full- service restaurant, including outdoor dining areas and the continued sales of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption in conjunction with an existing commercial retail center), Variance No. 4209 (waiver of prohibited roof-mounted equipment to retain aroof-mounted satellite dish antenna), Conditional Use Permit No. 3221 (to permit a veterinary clinic), Conditional Use Permit No. 1735 (to' permit sales of beer and wine for on-premises consumption in a proposed restaurant), Conditional Use Permit No. 1727 (to permit sales of (a) beer and wine for on-premises consumption in a proposed restaurant, and (b) alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption in a proposed restaurant) and Conditional Use Permit No. 1608 (to permit sales of beer and wine for on-premises consumption in a proposed restaurant). -6- PC2004- 31. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted ko the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, and as conditioned herein. 32. That all roof mounted equipment shall be in conformance with Exhibit Nos. 2 and 4 and shall be in compliance with Code Section 18.090.020 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 33. That all outdoor dining shall be in conformance with Code Section 18.38.220.020:0201 through .0205. of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 34. That prior to issuance of a building permit for the first tenant space or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 23, 24, 25, 28, 30, 32 and 33, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Chapter 18:60 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 35. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 12, 29 and 31,above-mentioned, shall be complied with. 36. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of September 20, 2004. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60. "Procedures" of the Anahetm Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on September 20, 2004, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: -7- PC2004- ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: tN W ITNESS W HEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of '' "" 2D04. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING'COMMISSION -8- PC2004- ITEM N0. 3-- 1~ VACAN~ I 1 1 L RM-2 (BCC) o LvLL ~ LL ,J LL C-G RCL 2003-00095 RCL 2003-00093 -.p ~ ER RCL 77-78-23 RM-2 (BCC) RCL 98-99-11 -~ -CUP 2003-0473 RCL 2001-00063 RCL 62-63-28 O CUP 1999 ftCL 90-99-71 T-CUP 2003-04776 - '- --- SHOPPING RCL fi2.63-28 CUP 2003-04681 ¢ W CENTER T-CUP 2003-0477 CUP 3429 CUP 307 -~o T CUP 2003.04681 W N W CUP 3429 VAR 4041 ~- RCL 7A-72-02 (1 ) CUP 2053 FURNITURE STORE-~¢ RCL 71-72-U4 CUP 307 p~ (Res of INenl to CL) VAR 4041 V W 264 DU VACANT o . APARTMENTS CANO PY LN ry w Z ¢ 1 DU EACH ~ I I I J o RS-2 2 TRANSIT AVENUE u, W Z C_ O U MALL AVE a x U NQ yW K~ O 660'to the centerline o(Gilbert Street r N K W Z K Ct U Conditional Use Permit No. 2871 TRACKING NO. CUP2004-04872 ® Subject Property Date: August 9, 2004 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: CORNELIA S. CONNELLY O.S. No. 33 REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A NEW GYMNASIUM IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION WITH WAIVER OF MAXIMUM STRUCTURAL HEIGHT ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL ZONE BOUNDARY. 2323 West Broadway -Cornelia Connelly High School 1431 CUP 2871 RM-4 VAR 2277 cv APARTMENTS 'CUP 223) 'O )ATE SCHOOL' I - 454 ~ ~ ANAHEIM CITY LIMITS _ ~ _ _ ~ _ _ ~ - _ BROADWAY ORANGE COUNTY LIMITS ~ z w = ~ _U m W Z ~ ~ W W rr tY C7 e ^w. ~ -"rc~ .._'_"" Im`m may, ~..} ;~ r io. r ~ '~ $ Nia ID_ ti vJ 9A S a w '^'~ ~ ^ ~ ~` r M ~ r'~ ~ ~ U3TaC ¢ A3Fa6~ as ~ mm ~RSP ~ ~ Ip$ Y.L f f. C ' a k is R 1m06 1>0.b~ M9 A 'R ' v m r~~Y" 5 m ~ 1451 ~ 'A'i)r#5 z .. "a e" tl 'r'r `ran ab' " 1~1 ~ 1 die e ~~ ^ t~ ~~ m ~. ~iaa 0. i. ~~ S r ~ a ""'~`~•*~•, mop a o.a>'moer..TFiiCT NO 1h47~ ~3l ac. ~: ~T <o ;x'ss bs~ xs ss x ."s k ' , . a~ , r zoac y a k k k r a^: k k ~ k k •' k `C ~ °C~ Q ~ r r it 11 ~ i4c ia', IS •p 1 ~ W 1 ~ a ~ IXd ~T ]S b5 ~. x5 S 15 b' 4 -§ '9W §u ss x~6x xs'~xis ss~x~'ss .z§ . _ uc m 4t y'9 # ~~ ~ $ ~ C 13 rk $ 18 I k~k ~k k :k a ,.aa ~' ~_ ~y J o ~ I - a ~ "1 ~ ia* m ''r§ ~~ ~~z wjas x a s ms _ xs x it ss~ ms°e. ~ ~ •~ ' ;'~ "£' •~ ~" ~ ~'~ CANOPY LN » iaac umu Ey § 1 ~[~ `yzv ~s t-~~: ~--te ~.y'^.v.YS-~'•v,r san'iz'SSN g ~ a 4` avs 9PUE uz a c ss~~ ~ ; ~~~~ x~~ s s _. g~a~la I~ g ^`Sa'"+. ~ _ __ _ , F~Fk-j1 °SSGE W. 'r 4CS11WVU1 ~. Y~1~ ffifS ~~ cry l EYgYP ~a< ~~ ~ RI r .x.~ ~~.m m~ m c p } kq ~ f ~ -M~t _ _ ~ ~ c $ ~~ § r f x n~ ~ G ~ r ~S .rl a '~,'3 ~ x~~ ~ .c+ '~~~ ~ m~, . s¢ _. r. ~ mw~^:.ac.~,.>~wr-r~L2 '~"°..a .!n,;~».o~w _a.,.•a :v'; ~~ 1 ns-'=i .a a _.1 im-" -luP" o -`~'~~~• ~ ~ `~ t~ t w ~, ~, .,~ ~ leav ~ ~, l S ~ ~ :2 f~ .~ 5 ~p ~ _ e SCE.GO.EWi ~. WG R01y ~ • ` 1 N N F ,..ter N r N , ..c..o.w..,ti r~..a 3 , " ' i ' ~, ~ ` ~ . ~ ~, as w t ur § Mar ~ ?, u E ~ t' { S b>T __ `y a p 1 5 `; WdP j~ ~G 3~]e~l ~~' I~11~e~I~`-~ r § ? 7 ~'. ' ~ d. , 44/ ` ~ w~ r~ ~ ~ ~ § i en§' ~ ~ s* 4 c e e e ~ ;, ~~ ~ ~ pi p ~ ~ i~a'^z z3F „ ^ R ~( K ~. ~ Maw ~y i` sx.l 5 ~ V F ~ ~ t~~ ~y~~rm ~ • ~r° .~.-- a _ _ __ e~ = ss.. ~, . ITEM N0. 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004 Item No: 3 3a. CEQANEGATIVE DECLARATION ! (Motion) 3b: ?WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT- (Motion).:, 3c' `CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2871 (Resolution) (Tracking No.CUP2004-04872) SITElOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly-shaped, 6.5-acre property has a frontage of 454 feet on he north side of Broadway, a maximum depth of 621 feet; and is located 86D feet east of the centerline of 'Gilbert Street (2323' West Broadway -Cornelia Connelly High,School). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests approval bf a Conditional Use Permit under authority of Code Section 18.14.030.040.0402{ to construct a new gymnasium'in conjunction with ari'existing private educational institution with waiver of the following: :SECTION NO. 18.40:040.040 Maximum structural height adjacent to a residehtial zone boundary (12.5 feet permitted; 1313=30 feet proposed) BACKGROUND:; (3) This project was continued from the August 9 and August 23, 2004, Commission meetings to allow the petitioner time to prepare a Water Quality Management Plan and modification to exhibits to reflect the colors and materials proposed for the new gymnasium. At that'meeting, :members of the local community expressed concerns 'Fegarding noise, drainage, trash, and parking related to the exisking private school. (4) This property is developed with an existing'private educational institution, is zoned T ', (Transition); The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property for school uses. The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map further designatesproperty to the north for Residential Low-Medium land uses, property to the east for Residential Medium lahd uses arid properties to the south and west for Residential Low land uses. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS (5) The following zoning actions pertain to this' property: (a) Conditional Use Permit No. 2871 (to!permit expansion of a private educational facility) was;approvedby the Planning Commission on January 5;.1987. (b) Variance No. 2277 (to permit an 8-foot, 8-inch high block wall) was approved by the Commission on August 9;:!1971. SR5115JR Page 1 'Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004 Item No. 3 TOTAL CODE•REQUIRED USE SQUARE PARKING RATIO PARKINGREQUIREQ FEET (per 1,000 sq. ft) TOTAL:: x977 (8) The floor plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates an approximately 9,600 square foot basketball and volleyball court combination with retractableseating. The facility would alsocontain an exercise training room,'men's and women's ~estroomsllocker areas, storage areas, and 'snack bar/concession stand. The,floor plan'further indicates an art studio classroom facility at the southwest corner of the building. (9) Tfie elevation plans antl colored renderings (Exhibit Nos. 3 and 4) depict a single story building with varied roof planes and heights ranging from thirteen. (13) to thirty (30) feet in height. The building would be primarily of tilt-up construction, with a smooth plaster finish, painted in mild contrasting colors:r An angular metal canopy would be located above the main entryway. Large storefront and small accent windows would be located on the south elevation, with smallerwindows located on .the north and west elevations. Utility exits would be located along the east elevation. Accent)ighting would be included on the south and west elevations. Code requires that for buildings other than single-family dwellings, accessory living quarters, or residential garage, a maximum structural heigfit of one half (Y=) the distance from the boundary of any residential zone, but not to exceed 30 feet. (10) Tfie roof plan (Exhibit No, 5) indicates three (3) air-handling units behind a seventeen (17) foot high parapet wall,es well as four (4) foot high address numbers of theproperty. ,Code requires that roof-mounted mechanical or utility equipment (including, but not limited to, compressors, condensers, conduits, pipes, vents, ducts, etc., shall not be visible in any direction (360 degrees): from anypublic right-of-way, public property or any adjacent property as may be seen from'a point six (6) feet above ground level on such adjacent property, public property, or sidewalk on the opppsite side of the street; and that such screening of equipment shall be an integral part of the building design such that the screening method and materials are not recognizable as a screening device. The screening shall 6e provided by acceptable, permanent building materials, the'same as or similar to those used in the construction of the underlying building, or 6y acceptable architectural features of the'building itself. Woodiattice shall not be'used as a screening`device. Screening materials shall be the same color es the main building. Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004 Item No. 3 e .~, : , ~ ' ~~ ~f ' ~' ` ^' ~ F'~' e st ~. is „ t?~ i E r J- ~ ~ ~f~ ~" `>'~nf i sa ~~ `a^s"S h,3F ~ x ~ ~ u. luL `, s g zka" b~ s,. P ,S..«~~z~as/~iv`"wn ?;s~m-d :,, .., , .,~ .N.;~,4~~,»k, um~ vi~ ~. sue',.. x±~h~?l:3' «-~ V~. R ;.„ 'View of'existing mature vegetation on site (11) The landscape plan (Exhibit No. 5) and site inspection and`photographs indicate a varietyof canopy trees and'shrubs surrounding the location of the proposed building. The plan reflects an existing landscaped setback of 25 feet wide along the north and west property lines. The plan indicates eight (t3) trees would beprotectedin place, eight (t3) trees would be removed to facilitate construction of the new gymnasium, and fourteen;(14) new gees would be planted, The plans do not indicate the size or type of trees that are remaining;'being removed, or proposed. (12) The petition letter indicates in the attached Ietter'of operation that the'existing convent would be demolished to' make way for the new gymnasium. The hours of operation would typically be 7 am to 6 pm however: the school' is requesting the hours of operation be permitted until 11 pm;for after school sports activities and weekend events. No expansion of the enrollment of the school is proposed atthis time./The facility would consist of a maximum'of 320 students from grades 9-12;`as well as`40 teachers and administrators. All activities associated with the building would be'conducted indoors. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: ' (13) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact and,tnerefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a findingby the Planning Commission that the Negative Declaration reflects the independentjudgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public4eview 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 effecton the environment: GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: (14) The proposed project has been reviewed by affected City departments to determine whether it conforms with the City's Growth Management Element adopted by the City Council on Maroh 17, 1992. Based on Citystaff review of the proposed project, it has been determined that this project does notfit within the scope necessary to require a Growth Management Element analysis, therefore, no analysis has tieen performed. Page 4 'Staff Report to the ::Planning. Commission September' 20, 2004; Item Ncx 3 FINDINGS: (19) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the Zbning Code; a modification may be granted for the purpose of assuring that no property, because of pecial 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 tie 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 otheridentically .'zoned properties in the'vicinity; and (b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives thaproperty of privileges enjoyed by other properties ih identical zoning classification in the vicinity. (20) Before the Planning Commissioh grants any conditional use permit, it mustmake 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 unlisteduse 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 forthe use is'adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health andsafety; (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden: upon the sheets 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 andsafety of the atizens of the City of Anaheim: RECOMMENDATION: (21) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary'information is received during the ?meeting,'and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented ih this staffPeport, and oral andwritten evidence presented atthe public hearing,. the Planning Commission approve the petitioner's request and adopt the resolution including ttre findings`and conditions contained herein: Page 7 ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 3 SEGTI"3•Pd ^n PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF TUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER) •sQUEST FOR WAVER OF CODE SECTION: (A separate statement is required for each Code waiver) :RTAINING TO: ~u~i ~~~lr ia~,"~ __ actions 18.03.040.030 and ] 8.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code waiver maybe anted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown: That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do no[ apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and Thal, because of such special cucumstences, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by otherproperty under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. order to de[ennine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to rive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully td as completely u possible. If you need additional space, you may anach additional pages. Are'there special circumstances that apply to the property in makers such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings? ~, Yes , No. If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circtmstances: '(~Yr{~ii'(~jar~'f wq>UA. redvice+tit~ vSuwtkoic`rF SiycUsw~~,eu~+.na(- bereat~wtyyu~sele.o Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different hom other pro emits in the vicinity whic$ are in the same zone as your property? ~ Yes ~No (nt7 tarS~A-s}3.~ In ~(IGtKt~yt~ If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different: Do the special circumstances applicable to the property de rive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighborin propenies located within the same zone? _Yes gNo (~nD RS'R•'13,Gtro nei9lnLodiN 5 ~/ pO~' ~~-GS~ if your answer if"yes," describe the sptcia] circumstances. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property owners)? ,~ Yes i No EXPLAIN he sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be pproved which would have the effect of granring a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone Which is not otherwise expressly authorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted. "1 ~-t~,..a..w-_ ii lure of Property Owner or Authorized Agent lECEMBER 12.200() to CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO. CUP ~~. ° ~ 8 71 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2004--" A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2871 BE GRANTED (2323 WEST BROADWAY) WHEREAS, on January 5, 1987, Resolution No. PC87-05 was adopted by the Anaheim City Planning Commission to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2871 for an expansion to an existing private educational institution; and WHEREAS, the petitioner has requested to amend previously-approved exhibits to construct a gymnasium in conjunction with the existing school. WHEREAS, the Anaheim Ciry 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: ALL THAT CERTAIN LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO LOS COYOTES, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51 PAGE 10 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH LIEN OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, S.B.B. & M. NORTH 86° 15" EAST 865.95 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER AND RUNNING THENCE NORTH 0° 21' 00" WEST 666.49 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH 88° 56' 07" WEST 230.60 FEET FROM THE NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH 0° 18' 10" EAST 666.50 FEET A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER WHICH SAID POINT IS SOUTH 88° 58' 15" WEST 1548.50 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTH HALF OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH 88° 58' 15" WEST 225.15 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALL THAT CERTAIN LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO LOS COYOTES, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51 PAGES 10 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, S.B.B & M. NORTH 86° 58' 15" EAST 1091.10 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER AND RUNNING THENCE NORTH 0° 18' 10" WEST 666.50 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH 88° 58' 07" EAST 230.60 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH 0° 08' 25" EAST 666.51 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH 88° 58' 15" WEST 228.70 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Cr\PC2004-0 -1- PC2004- WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on August 9, 2004 at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18:66.040.030, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and that said public hearing was continued to the August 23 and September 20, 2004 Planning Commission meetings; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.14.030.040.0402, to construct a new gymnasium in conjunction with an existing private educational institution with waiver of the following: SECTION NO. 18.40:040.040 Maximum structural heicht adjacent to a residential zone boundary (12.5 feet permitted; 131330 feet proposed) 2. 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, as a survey of the site indicated that along the easterly property line adjacent to existing multiple family dwellings, the new structure would be immediately adjacent to an approximately thirty (30) foot wide driveway. Additionally, the nearest building on the adjacent property has no windows facing the school property. Because the property is adjacent to residential on both the north and east property lines, an undue burden is created as a result of the size of the property relative the existing site configuration; and 3. That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in identical zoning classification in the vicinity in that staff surveyed nearby properties comparable in size and identified the Ralph's Shopping Center at the southeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Gilbert Street has a structure similar in height and mass to the proposed gymnasium approximately forty feet from the adjacent residential zone boundary. There is an existing garage/storage structure adjacent to both the north and east property lines, and an existing carport approximately four (4) feet from the east property line. Both of these structures exceed the height limit and are situated much closer to the property line than the proposed location of the new gymnasium. The new building would be only thirteen feet in height at its closest point along the north elevation, and then increase to thirty feet in height at a distance of thirty-eight feet from the property line. Along the easterly property line adjacent to existing multiple family dwellings, the new structure would not be immediately adjacent to an approximately thirty (30) foot wide driveway; and 4. 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); and 5. 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 as the new building would be only thirteen feet in height at its closest point along the north elevation, and then increase to thirty feet in height at a distance of thirty-eight feet from the property line. Along the easterly property line adjacent to existing multiple family dwellings, the new structure would be immediately adjacent to an approximately thirty (30) foot wide driveway; and 6. That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety; -2- PC2004- 7. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area as the proposed gymnasium is accessory to the school facilities and would not be utilized concurrently with other assembly facilities on " " site; and 8. 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. 9. That'*` indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to construct a new gymnasium in conjunction with an existing private educational institution with waiver of maximum structural height adjacent to a residential zone boundary; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby amend in its entirety, the conditions contained in Resolution No. PC87-OB to read as follows: 1. That the hours of operation of the facility shall be limited from 7 am to 11 pm. 2. That the enrollment of the school shall be a maximum of 320 students and staff shall consist of a maximum of 40 teachers and administrators. 3. That the gymnasium shall not be used concurrently with the existing auditorium for special events or assembly uses (with the exception of the art room for regular class schedules). 4. That 24-inch box sized broad-headed evergreen trees spaced 20 feet on center shall be planted within the side and rear setback areas adjacent to the proposed gymnasium to include 10 trees along the north property line and 11 trees along the east property line. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. _ 5. That the existing block wall along the east property line be increased to a height of six feet as required by code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 6. That the property owner shall install decorative wrought iron gates between the proposed gymnasium and the north and east property lines to secure the rear and side yard areas adjacent to the new building. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 7. That the setback areas along the north and east property lines shall be equipped with lighting to the satisfaction of the Police Department. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably illuminate the windows of nearby residences. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 8. That all plumbing downspouts, ladders andlor other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be integrated into the architecture of the building. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 9. That the installation of streetlights as determined by the Public Utilities Department, Electrical Engineering Division or a bond in lieu of such work shall be posted prior to occupancy. -3- PC2004- 10. That if required to serve the building, the legal owner of subject property shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement across the property to be determined as electrical design""is completed. 11. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. Landscape and/or hardscape screening of all pad-mounted equipment shall be required and shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 12. That the legal property owner shall submit an application for a Subdivision Map Act Certificate of Compliance to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division for the parcel on which the proposed building is located. A Certificate of Compliance or Conditional Certificate of Compliance shall be approved by the City Engineer and recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of a building permit. 13. That prior to the issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that: • Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. • Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. • Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP. • Describes the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMPs. • Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long-term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs, and describes the mechanism for funding the long-term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. 14. That prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: • Demonstrate that all structural BMPs described in the Project WOMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. • Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non-structural BMPs described in the Project WOMP • Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available onsite. • Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMPs. 15. That the property shalt 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. 16. That any tree planted on-site shalt be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased andlor dead. 17. 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 and 470 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 18. 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 -4- PC2004- identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 19. 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. 20. That the location of the trash enclosure shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works. Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, for safety and the on-site trash truck turnaround. 21. That four (4) foot high street address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of the building in a color that contrasts with the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible to the adjacent streets or properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 22. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground and outside the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division in either underground vaults or outside the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted to the Water Engineering and Cross Connection Control Inspector for review and approval. 23. That atl requests for new water services or fire Tines, 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. 24. That because this project has a landscaping area exceeding 2.,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed in compliance with Chapter 10.19 (Landscape Water Efficiency) of Anaheim Municipal Code and Ordinance No. 5349 regarding water conservation. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 25. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Service Stantlards Specifications. Any water service or fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The owner/developer shall be responsible for the cost to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line. 26. 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, 2, 3, 4, and 5, and as conditioned herein. 27. That prior to issuance of a building permit for the first tenant space or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 24, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Chapter 18.60 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 28. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 9, 10, 14 and 26, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. 29. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. -5- PC2004- 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 CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on September 20, 2004, 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 2004. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -6- PC2004- ITEM N0. ~t 0_ D 4 Q U F } Z O J O U STONYBROOK DR NAHEIi CITY i 1MITS-1 -~ COLCHESTER OR 120 ~ a RM-1200 ~~~'~ s RCL 58-59-34 RCL 57-58-26 w APARTMENTS w K RM-1200 ~ p APARTMENTS ~ O VANCOUVER DRIVE , RM-3000 RCL 78-79-45 RCL 54-55-40 CUP 982 cuP 1220 60 D.U. CONDO T-CUP 2002-04511 T-CUP 2001-04344 CUP 2469 MOTELS RESTAURANT RCL RCL CL CL RCL 98-99-11 RCL 58.59-34 RCL 57-5@-26 CUP 2961 - CUP 1354 CL CUP 1620 VAR 1494 `~ ~ CL RCL 98-99-11 m - RCL 57-58-26 4i m g ao sae; UP 2 0 04-04 6 61 ~ a "> CUP 3649 ~ ~ CUP iF69 CL CUP 3960 CUP 2003-04768 CL VAR 2005 UP 2003-047fi8 COST OFFICE IDLI RCL 98-98-11 RCL 54-55-00 CUP 2003-047fi@ CI1P 9R09-Od599 CL VAR 1211 S BROOKHURST SHOPPING CENTER I 1 I 1 1 J h W W Cn 2 Y O (] CO CUP 3159 1 DL '. PARKI GLOT CL RCL 9@-99-11 RGL 57-5@-35 CUP 3267 VAR 64@ CUP 3159 MEpICAL OFFICES CL RCL 98-99-11 RCL 5@-59-111 OFFICE BLDG /`I VAR 1918 CL RCL 96-49-11 RCL 67-68-86 RCL 62-63-113 d: RCL 54-55-7 ~ CUP 2317 ~ ~ '. CUP 2181 ~ CUP 1877 O BALLHURST PLAZA U SHOPPING CENTER Q U r' W L BROOKMORE AV O U ti y CO j RCL 96.99-01 Z RCL 63-64-106 ~ RCL 62-63-113 BANK m CL RCL 98-9411 RCL 54-55-7 CUP 29fi9 SUBWAY SANCWICH SHOP CL RCL 9fi-99-11 RCL 54-55-7 RESTAURAM CL 3CL 90-9&11 CUP 1444 RCL 54-55-7 VACANT CL RCL 98-99-11 RCL 54-55-7 T-CUP 2002-04314 T-VAR 2002-04515 ,.iARnoccuc Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04861 Subject Property Date: June 28, 2004 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: 2230 WEST COLCHESTER, A CALP Q.S. No. 34 REQUEST TO PERMIT AND RETAIN TWO EXISTING CHURCHES, A NARCOTICS ANONYMOUS MEETING HALL, AND TO ESTABLISH LAND USE CONFORMITY WITH THE CITY'S ZONING CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 2230 West Colchester Drive lseat2oo4-s•z21 Staff Report to the Planning Commissidrt September 20, 2004 Item No: 4 4a. ` CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1 4b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 4c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2004-04861 (Motidn for continuance) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly-shaped 0.87-acre property is located of the southeast corner bf Colchester Drive and Coldny Street; having frontages of 120 feet oh the south side of Colchester Drive arid 321 feet on the east side of Colony Street (2230 W est Colchester Drive): REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests'approval of a Conditional Use Permit to permit and retain two existing churches, a narcotic§ahonymous meeting hall, and to establish lahd use conformitywith the City's zoning code requirements for an existing non-conforming commercial7etail center with waiver of the following:' SECTIONS 18,42.040 Minimum number ofbarkino spaces. AND 18.08.070 j (213required; 64 existing and proposed and recommended by the Traffic and Transportation Manager)' BACKGROUND: ' (3) This property is developed with ah'existing commercial retail center, is zoned CL (BCCO) (Commercial Limited - Brookhurst Commercial Corridor Overlay] and is located within the West Anaheim Commercial Corridors constituent sub-area ofYhe Anaheim Redevelopment Project. The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this. property and all surrounding properties for Residential Medium land uses. (4) This item was continued from the June 28, July 26, and August 9, 2004, Planning. Commission meetings. at the request of the petitioner due to a scheduling conflict and to review the recommended conditions of approval with staff. The petitioner has submitted the attached letter dated September 10 2004, requesting an additional continuance to allow the scheduling ofa site inspection to evaluate unpermitted improvements to the buildings located on-site. RECOMMENDATION: (6) That the Planning Commission, by motion, continue this item to the November 1, 2004; Commission meeting,'as requested by the petitioner SrS~ ~ 6jr Page 1 9/10/2004 16:11 5626241178 CURD, GALIIVI)Q & SMITH, L.L.P, Attorneys September 10, 2004 John P. Ramirez Planning Aeparhnent City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Bivd., #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 CGS Re: CUP Application Our Client: 2230 W. Colchester, a CA LP Pmnerty Address: 2230 W. Colchester Dr. Anaheim CA Dear Mr. Ramirez: Via Facsimile Only (714) 765-5280 PAGE 02 Pursuant to the September B'~ meeting with the City of Anaheim, the referenced applicant is requesting a postponement of the hearing on the CUP application from September 20, 2004 to November 1, 2004. Please contact my office to confirm that the hearing has been postponed. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Vim' ~Y Yo~~ G O &c SMITH, L.L.P. Jo JDC:map CG: Client ITEM N0. 4 • 301 Eaet Ocean Hlvd. • Suite 460 0 long Heach • CA o 90802 • (562) 624-1177 • Fax (562) 624-1178 ITEM N0. 5 ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE (SC) (SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) ZONE ~ Reclassification No. 2003-00109 r Subject Property Variance No. 2004-04626 Date: September 8, 2004 Tentative Tract Map No. 16545 Scale: Graphic Requested By: RED CURB INVESTMENTS Q.S. No. 286 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2003-00109: REQUESTS RECLASSIFICATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM THE T (TRANSITION; SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) FORMERLY RS-A-43;000 (SC) (RESIDENTIAL/AGRI- CULTURAL;SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) ZONE TO THE RH-2 (SC) (SINGLE-FAMILY HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL; SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) AND OS (SC) (OPEN SPACE; SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) ZONES. VARIANCE NO. 2004-04626: REQUESTS WAIVER OF REQUIRED STREET STANDARDS TO CONSTRUCT A PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL STREET WITHOUT SIDEWALKS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16545: TO ESTABLISH A 28-LOT, 21-UNIT DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION. No address 1481 Staff Report to the Planning. Commission Septemtie~ 20, 2004 Item No. 5 5a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion for continuance) 5b. ';RECLASSIFICATION N0 2003-00109 5c. `- VARIANCE NO'. 2004-04626< 5d. +-TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 16545 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly-shaped, 53-acre prbperty has`a frontage'pf 190 feet at the terminus of Avenida de Santiago; a maximum depth of 2,657 feet and is located 260 feet west of the centerline of Poihte Premier (No address). REQUEST: {2) The'petitioner requests approval of the following: Reclassification No.' 2003-00190- to reclassify the property from the T (SC) (Transition; Scenic Corridor Overlay) formerly the RS-A-43;000 (SC) (ResidentiallAgricultural;.Scenic Corridor Overlay) zone3o the RH-2 (SC) (Single-Family HillsideResidential Scenic Corridor Overlay) and OS (SC) (Open Space; Scenic Corridor Overlay) zones. Variance Nb:2004-04626 - to waive the required private'street standards street standards under authbritybf Gode Section 18.40.060:030. Tentative Tract Map No. 96545 - tb`establish a 28-lot, 21'-unit detached single:-family <tesidential subdivision. '< BACKGROUND: (3) This project was continued from the August 9 and September 8, 2004, Commission meetings to allow stafftme to readvertise this request to include a variance to waive the required street standards and to respond to comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The petitioner; Tom Hartley, has submitted the attachedletter dated September 14, 2004, requesting arcadditional continuance of this item to the October 4;2004, Commission meeting in order to finalize the response tb the comments received on the environmental document. (4) This property,is currently vacant, zoned T (SC) (Transition; Scenic Corridor Overlay), formerly RS-A-43,000: (SC) (ResidentiallAgricultural; Scenic Corridor Overlay). The Land Use Element Map of the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Residential Estate land uses. RECOMMENDATION: (5) That the Commission by motion, continue this item to the October 4, 2004, Planning Commission meeting in order for staff to respond to comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration. sr8792av Page 1 Page 1 of I ITEM N0. 5 Amy Vazquez From: tom hartley [newcastleinc@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 7:10 PM To: Amy Vazquez Subject: Commission Meeting Amy, Please reschedule our commission appearance for October 4, 2005. This will provide more time to conclude our geo mitigation analysis. Thank you Tom Hartley 9/15/2004 ITEM N0. 6 m\ ~O 1 Z RMA ApT`- .~n0.467 ~^- G CUP VAR sa 2917 M~sEUM c~7 ~a VAC jP HP ~ ~ ROB z 03-~7Ba 62 N t-OUP pp3-~7 OUP UP 2144 N\ cE1RM~FORUM C ~"9.8p.11 m FREED R ANS. ~\ ,. ~/A BR~P~®.P R!®\~ ~. .O~ p9 1 ROP 02 g619 jLUV AR 435p9 PONE STAT\ON 1 SER~cARWPSH ~ seot 1 GUP ~c7N APSS, pHUR 2pU E~-Mi,/ 2 '{09494 ~q8°°Y f ~ ~ Vges UP R9~491_'1y ~l cU~Rap9~' Y 131, .~ C C ~ mG y y ~ _ ~ \ O SPNT~S A' D; Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04881 (READVERTISED) Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2004-04912 Date: September 20, 2004 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: ADOLF P. MILLER AND ELISA STIPKOVICH Q.S. No. 84 REQUEST TO REMODEL AN EXISTING HISTORICAL BUILDING AND TO ESTABLISH A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER WITH AN ACCESSORY AUTO DETAILING FACILITY WITH WAIVERS OF: (a) MINIMUM LANDCAPED AND STRUCTURAL SETBACK ADJACENT TO AN ARTERIAL HIGHWAY (b) PERMITTED TYPE OF SIGN PARWNG E FSP ~~~-~~ ~. ~~ CENIER SSR{ET p~yOME~nM OM,UI p F\GES O-G l0 Op\p6 / ROl.2 p03-p0006 2 Fsp O-G 9D9pU59 OG IpMU~ ROGUp 3266 CyK\N \ PA Z° VAR. \pv, ~pu VAR ~ \a~ r= 315 - 327 South Anaheim Boulevard t5is ~ ~3a w"~ tir,,,,r~ m.+ t} 1 o-~~ ', ki; '~ N `pN ~R ~ . ~ t aw ' S ~:.: ,y ; rl ~ L"~- n~ ~ ~ } i'~ ~ z Y ~~ .~'~ J° ~A l ` k ~ #1 1 ~}~ ~~ 1 L ~~ , r` i x=51 / '~' ~ ~ ~ _.5" ~ ..~ ~ };. t 1 ~. ~ z"~~~''~, ~r ~ ,n ~. i e` t< a, °.x 4 ~ ~ ~~~ Tu 3~ ~ a ~ .x '. ( Pty w, x t ~ Y -~ ~ ,.. EY z ~ ~ ~'~~ ~ ~ t ' ~ ~~ ~ . ~, ~; '~ ~ ~' ~ ~' ~ 'ALL ~ + ~ ~ ~ s `s ~ ~ ~ ~~ i %' { ` 3 1 s...,~ n ,.z.-~ ~~~ .•. ,1 ~.:..#2~ . ~~~ j i ~ .. ?al.i1 ~,t ~~ S ~ ~ : t1 l~ ! ~ `. i. ~,~f ~, wl ~, ~ s C'' ITEM N0. 6 Staff Report. to the Planning Commissidn September 20, 20041: Item No. 6 l 6a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED) !(Motion) '; ! ', 6b. WAIVER OF CODE: REQUIREMENT (Motion) ' . 6c. CONDITIONAL IJSE PERMIT N0..2004-04881'(READVERTISEp} y'(Resolutioh) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly-shaped 0.54-acre property is located at the northwest corner of Elm Street and Anaheim Boulevard, with frontages df,181 feet on the west side of Anaheim Boulevard `and 131 feet on the north side of Elm Street (315 - 327 South Anaheim Boulevard). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests approval of a conditional use permit to remodel an existing historical building and to establish a commercial retail'center with an accessory autd detailing facility under the authority of Code Section No. 18.08.030.0402 with waivers of the following:,' SECTION NO. 18.08.060.010 Minimum landscape and structural setback adjacent to an arterial hidhway, (15 feet required; 0 to 1_1 feet proposed) SECTION NO. 18.44:040.190 - Permitted type of'sign. (Roof signs not permitted; three historically-compatible roof signs proposed) :BACKGROUND: (3) Af the request of the petitioner, this item was continued from the September 8, 2004 meeting to`allow additional time to submit'revised plans and readvertise this item to include an additional waiver to allow historically-compatible roof sgnage. (4) This property is zoned'I (SABC) (Industrial; South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor Overlay Zone, Neighborhood Commercial District) and the'Anahelm General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property for Mixed Uses. This property is located within the Commercial / Industrial (South Central) constituent sub-area of the Anaheim Redevelopment Project and is currently developed with a 4,200; square foot historic building that serves as an auto body facility. (5) Surrounding General Plan designations are as followst Direction , General Plan Designation North and East across Anaheim Boulevard': Mizell Use South across Elm Street Low Medium bensity Residential 'West Medium Density Residential Sr2159ds Page 1 Staff Report to the Plahhng Commission September 20, 2004 Item No. 6 PREVIOUS'ZONING ACTIONS: (6) Miscellaneous No. 2004-00077 (review and recommendation to the Redevelopment Agency of basic concept drawings for an adaptive reuse project consisting of the restoration and reuse of an existing historical building as a potential commercial retail center) was approved by the Planning Commission on April 5, 2004. PROPOSAL:' (7) ; The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the 4,200 square foot building footprint for the existing historical structure. As shown in the photograph pelow, thebuilding is located at the northwest corner'of Anaheim Boulevard and Elm Street with no setbacks abutting these sheet frontages. The plan also shows three enant spaces, patio?shade structure, new parking stalls, re-paved parking lot, 12-foot wide walkway adjacent to the building„t1-foot wide landscape setback:' adjacent to Anaheim Boulevard, trash' enclosura; and an auto detail center with5 auto bays and accessory storage building in the year. No ezpansiori to the historical building is proposed in conjunction with this request. The plan also shows the irtegration'bf this site:with the contiguous Arco'service station site to he north.`: r jrt~-> I an ';., a'' cf' -'c2 a °.h~ .rte - X;,"~s„rr" ~c.3?"^-s4,i s''N r' ~t-•s~,~r ..a`r" ~. .Wec~; Y`rfti'`~~ ~~c~,4'~'3`'~ - i < ,ham r r a<r~ 4' ~ ~-..us "^" -~.~~ ~r'~ a"<`'r.~,.,"'a` '' ,a, < r'vz «,%ss'`a t~~ ti"' urf ,:,~ m '`" .~ S-£- ~ fi K'"z"a ^'~~~".~~'~ >~'Wwr~~y~'~~?~s l~r ~r~~~'.."y~j.~~~~c~~rf~{~v~yr^~~'~s`'~"'~ ~';. `,a..,,%'. era` ,~ ~ ~..~'ro` "~^> s..-c' S s, s a„6, v .- .;~ ,s3.a r` as' sue` ,3,: ~,. r ~~..p'~"a r' ~.".^-?rte ~"C ~ir':~r xs~ ~xs'~r'yd°rvs-.s ``des ~ s ~'au. 3'Gn~er£t `'trs.,a .^".~"s~~hf ~""~ ?t~"r,~+~}a~ai'.t~'r's.'fiyir lqF:. ~~ t ~.-..e ~~,cy~:~w~~= .rr. .~* t G ~ ? ~ ~ ,.frva.k .env ,.sc. ~=r€-.'s.~ c.`'v`. .x~ .~,v` ,Y~ s .S~:s~-,rte,., S rvPc s ~4 3~ ¢ /"" ;:, ~~ :.: r'` ~'u5'.e, z a '"'~ .~, ~ > ~"7s s='` s+ zn~ L~..`~ s~ s>~ ~ r ~ Nr~c~^:-c'~' n ~ i .ad .~'~~.n ?-s .a`'rr' .'„" r't~ o,'"-~ ~-m ~~„a ~ a ~ ~ ~,- ''"~ :: s ~` r ~ ~~`~y K~ ,af aS`:- r"~a.~"fa rs s~Y :"" ~ s+^~~~w.~. , r : a s ! 34 r .; rs' r r r sa ~~rx~ : s. > x~ Fr a ~zw'ri as ~ r sF „ .aw ~, x r ,.., , c ".~ ~ ~'A `~' 6 J b het ~ ~..5 t '. '~ iT v rcxn ~ i ~ ~ ~ ^' '~ a^~5v~`d~ {' ~ r } ~: a, y 3 ~~~X P °Y n -'~' ~:m oa v a~-s x'x~ `"rG'i.,a„~s^Y-i ,v,- - a , /s~'~ rte, '~" ., 7rF i r, -av o~~"x 4 ~ -..ur.:x'w- ,nom ~ e;`2°',~ ~ ~ ~i'~f~ C~ F' ~'v F,.. .. a I View of existing historical building from Anaheim Boulevard (8)' The floor plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates a 4,200 square footbommercial retail building with three'separate tenant spaces and a'432 square foot attached patio shade structure. No : expansion to the building footprint is proposed. (9)' The elevation plans {Exhibit Nos. 3 and 4) indicate a 22-foot high commercial retail building with aluminum fihish metal siding, metal storefront doors'ahd windows, wood trellis structure, Page 2 Staff Report to the Planting Commission September 20; 2004 Item No. 6 Code requires 34 spaces based on a ratio of 8 spaces per 1,000 square feet fdr` potential'- i restaurant uses. : (12) This project involves the renovation of an existing historical building td a future commercial retail center on aisite currently occupied with ari`auto body. business.''The attached letter of operation indicates that the building would be occupied with potential`retail and ~estauraht tenants. The auto detailing structure would be used as anaccessory facility to the Arco service station to the north;' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (13) Staff has reviewed the request for the proposed commercial retail center and accessory auto detailing facility and has determined3hat the current request would be covered by the previously-approved Mitigated Negative Declaration approved for the establishment of the': South Anaheim Boulevard Overlay Zone adopted in May of 2000. Any mitigation measure that would be required of a project under2hat Mitigated Negative Declaration would be adhered to. Moreover, the developer is required to rehabilitate a historic structure'in accordance with historical standards, including the Anaheim Coldny Historic District Preservation Plan ahd the U.S. Secretary of,the Interior Standards for Historic Preservation. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b)(3) provides, in relevant part;'that generally a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior: standards for the treatment of historic properties with guidelines for preserving, rehabilitating, restoring and reconstructing historic buildings or the Secretary of the Interior standards for rehabilitation and guidelines for rehabilitatinghistoric buildings shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than significant impact on the historical resource: A complete environmental analysis is contained within the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department),"for this project. j GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: (14), The proposed project has been reviewed by affected City departments to determine whether it conforms with the City's Growth Management Element adopted by the City Council on March 17, 1992. Based'on City staff review of the proposed project, it has been determined tfiaf this project does not fit within the scope necessary to require a Growth Management Element analysis, therefore, no analysis has been performed. EVALUATION` (15) Waiver (a) pertains to the minimum landscape and structural setback adjacent to an arterial highway. Code requires a minimum setback of 1„_5 feet along Anaheim Boulevard and no setback is proposed for the'patio structure and 11 feet is proposed for the front landscaped planter: The petitioner has submitted he attached Justification for Waiver form'stating thrat this waiver is being requested since the proposed structural setback for tte patio cover would match the setback of the existing historical building, and further that the width of the front planterwould match the width of the contiguous planter in front of the ervice station. (16) Waiver (b) pertains to permitted types`of signs. Code prohibits roof signs and three historically compatible roof signs are proposed oh the north building'elevation. The petitioner has submitted the attached Justification for Waiver form stating that this waiver is tieing requested based do the limited amount of wall space to accommodate wall signage without disturbing the historic characterbf building for three`separate tenants, as'well as the need to provide unique Page 4 Staff Report to the 'Planning Commission ' September 20, 2004 Item No. 6 signage which would complement existing historical buildings within the Downtown Anaheim area. (17) With the exception of signage for mixed use'projects within the Downtown Mixed Use Overlay zone, roof signs are prohibited'Citywide. However, the Commuhity Design Element of the General Plari'states that"roof signs are generally discouraged, although exceptions can be made for historically appropriate'designs through established zoning provisions" (Goat No. 13.1 (9) of the Community Design Element).'The applicant proposes three historically;. appropriate roof signs which have been reviewed and approved by the Redevelopment: 'Agency's ardhitectural (historical consultant Based on the historical character of the proposed roof signage in accordance with the Generai Plan, and based on the unique circumstances of this historically significant property in the Downtown Anaheim area, staff recdmmend5 approval'of this waiver request: (18) This property is located within the Commercial /Industrial (South Central) Redevelopment project and has been reviewed by Community Development Department (CDD) staff. d Pursuant to a Disposition and DevraopmentAgreemeht between: the RedevelopmenYAgency and Developer (West Coast Natiortal Investment LLCIJerry Zomo~odian), the developer' is required to rehabilitate an historic'structure in accordance with historical standards, including the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan`and the U;S. Secretary of the Interior Standards for HistoricPreservation and develop a neighborhood commercial retail center on the site. Ttra CDD has been working with the developer and neighborhood groups to discuss tfie architectural design and historical elements for the project. The City has invested in new infrastructure; new housing developments, fiistoric preservation projects, and urban office, mixed use, and commercial developments within the Downtown area. This project would complement and promote the ezisting and proposed developments in the downtown area, as well as the development goals of the Redevelopment Project area; therefore, staff redommends`aooroval of this. request to remodel an existing historical building and to establish a commercial retail denter with artaccessory auto detailing facilityat this location. FINDINGS: (19) Before the Planning Commission'grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows tfiat 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, dr is an unlisted use asbefined in subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18:66.040 (Approval Authority); (b) That the proposed use will not adversely affectthe 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 develbpmenYof the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to fiealth and safety; (d) That the traffic generated,by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets'ahd highways designed ahd improved to carry the trafficin the area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not tie detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20; 2004 Item No. 6 RECOMMENDATION: (20) Staff recommends, 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 l Planing Commission a rove the petitioner's request by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. ,~ Page 6 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2004--' A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-04881 BE GRANTED (315-327 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOULEVARD) 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: LOT 53 OF THE ORIGINAL "TOWN LOTS" OF ANAHEIM, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM; COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 4, PAGES 629 AND 630 OF DEEDS, RECORDS, OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on 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 conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; 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 approval of a conditional use permit to remodel an existing historical building and to establish a commercial retail center with an accessory auto detailing facility under the authority of Code Section No. 18.08.030.040.0402 with waivers of the following: SECTION NO. 18.08.060.010 Minimum landscape and structural setback adjacent to an arterial hiohwav. (15 feet required; 0 to 11 feet proposed) SECTION NO. 18.44.040.190 Permitted tvoe of sign. (Roof signs not permitted; three historically-compatible roof signs proposed) 2. That the above-mentioned waivers are hereby granted on basis that there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as the location and unique characteristics of the existing historical building within the Downtown Anaheim area, which does not apply to the majority of identically zoned properties in the same vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity. 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 waivers are necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone. 5. That the requested waivers will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. 6. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.08.030.100. Cr\PC2004-0 -1- PC2004- 7. That the proposed commercial retail center and accessory auto detailing center as conditioned herein would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located. 8. That the size and shape of the site for the commercial retail center and accessory auto detailing center are 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 since no waivers from Code development standards were necessary for this business. 9. That the traffic generated by the commercial retail center would not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. 10. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 11. That ""' indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That it has been determined that the current request would be covered by the previously-approved Mitigated Negative Declaration approved for the establishment of the South Anaheim Boulevard Overlay Zone adopted in May of 2000. Any mitigation measure that would be required of a project under that Mitigated Negative Declaration would be adhered to. The historic structure would be renovated in accordance with historical standards, including the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan and the U.S. Secretary of the Interior Standards for Historic Preservation. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b)(3) provides, in relevant part, that generally a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior standards for the treatment of historic properties with guidelines for preserving, rehabilitating, restoring and reconstructing historic buildings or the Secretary of the Interior standards for rehabilitation and guidelines for rehabilitating historic buildings shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than significant impact on the historical resource. A complete environmental analysis is contained within the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) for this project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: 1. That the auto detailing facility shall be operated and maintained as an accessory facility to the service station north of the subject property. 2. That no outdoor storage, display, or sales of any merchandise or equipment shall be permitted; including in and around the accessory auto detailing facility. 3. That no temporary or permanent signage shall be permitted on the auto detailing structure or the adjacent storage building at any time. 4. That no portable signage shalt be utilized to advertise any businesses within the commercial retail center. 5. That sign plans shall be submitted to the Planning and Community Development Departments for review and approval. Any decision by staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendation item. -2- PC2004- 6. That a trash enclosure shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. 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 Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division approval., No trash storage areas shall be allowed in any required setback areas. 7. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage, collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. 8. That an on-site trash truck turnaround shall be provided and maintained in conformance with Standard Engineering Plan No. 476. Said turnaround area shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 9. That a Burglar/Robbery Alarm permit application, Form APD 515 shall be obtained from the Anaheim Police Department. 10. That a Fire Emergency Listing Card; Form APD-281 shall be obtained from the Anaheim Police Department. 11. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 12. 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 and 470 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 13. That no trucks shall be parked or stored anywhere on the subject property for the purpose of advertising this commercial retail center or tenants. 14. That a detailed landscape plan for the entire site shall be submitted to the Planning and Community Development Departments indicating type, size and location of existing and proposed landscaping and irrigation for review and approval by the Planning Department. Any decision by staff regarding said plan may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendation item. Once approved, the landscaping shall be installed within sixty (60) days of plan approval and maintained in accordance with the plan. The landscape plan shall indicate the following: That an on-site landscaping and irrigation system shall be provided/refurbished and maintained in compliance with City standards. That the front landscaped setback area adjacent to Anaheim Boulevard shall be planted and irrigated with a minimum of nine (g) 24-inch box evergreen trees, shrubs (minimum size of 5-gallon) to provide screening of the parking area from public view and groundcover. That parking lot trees (minimum of twelve (12), 24-inch box trees) shall be planted within the parking lot landscape planters. 15. 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. 16. That all landscaping shall be permanently maintained and immediately replaced in the event that it becomes diseased or dies. -3- PC2004- 17. That all air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground-mounted equipment shall be properly screened from view by architecturally compatible enclosures. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Planning Department approval ` °' 18. That all public telephones shall be located inside the building only. __ 19. That roof-mounted balloons or other inflated devices shall not be permitted. 20. That no vending machines shall be permitted on the property which are visible from the public right- of-way. 21. That the maximum number of tenant spaces shall be limited to three (3) units, as reflected on the site and floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2). 22. That the legal owner of subject property shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement as determined to be necessary when the electrical design is completed. 23. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. 24. That all backflow equipment shall be above ground, outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division in either underground vaults or outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans and approved by Water Engineering and Cross Connection Inspector before submittal for building permits. 25. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocation, or abandonments of existing water services and fire lines shall be coordinated through the Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. 26. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Services Standards Specifications. Any water service andlor fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is not longer needed. The owner/developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line. 27. That a valid business license shall be obtained from the Gty of Anaheim, Business License Division of the Finance Department for all businesses within the commercial center. 28. 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 5. 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, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 17 and 24, 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. 9, 10, 22, 26 and 27, above- mentioned, shall be complied with. 31. 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. -4- PC2004- Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of September 20, 2004. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18:60, "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on September 20, 2004, 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 2004. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -5- PC2004- ITEM N0. 7 L L I 0 I 0 a RCL 83.894 1 RCL 59.64103 VAR 433 GG CUP 2738 CUP 1494 RCL 868&71 LUP 1@47 SM. COMM. RGL 63.84-118 (@) GUP 1675 SHOPS SMALL COMM. SHOPS C-G RCL 98-99-11 RCL 63-04-118 {i) CUP 2487 CUP 670 COMM.SHOPS RCL 96-99-11C~ CUP 2489 RCL63-64-118 (2) CUP 2431 CUP 3269 CUP 2416 CUP 3044 CUP 994 RITZ DANCING C-G (BCC) RCL 98-99-11 RCL 63-04-118 (5) CUP 3513 CUP 3044 RESTAURANT T CUP 3468 VAR 1607 S CHURCH SCHOOL LLI U-I f ~ C d' m S Y O O m yS.S ~ &SHOPS GG BCG VAR 433 RGL 9 -99- 1 PROF. RCL 59-fi0.ID3 9UILOING LUP 2004.04685 ALCOM C-G RGL 9699-11 RGL 59.60.1p3 TAGO EELL CDP 3352 REST. VAR 433 FG CUP 1731 CUP @4fi REST N h O ~ O I ~ CG (BCC) RCL 96.9941 RCL S6S7-2 CUP 2001-04419 N p VAR 433 - m O BROOKHURST a u PLAZA ~ m a > GG ((BLL) _ RCL 88-8&11 C-G (BCC) 1 I4) I RCL 84-@675 RCL 96-99.1 : RCL 5@-57-2 VAR 227@ 5 VAR 433 1 VAR 4330 PIZZA SMALL SHGPS - - - ORANGE AVENUE N Q yw 0=L] D N U rn~ K~ ^ F- W 2 U Q RCL 9488-11 TTTT c-G I c L-I~TJ GG .-.. ,~...... v~~~~n RLLB fi6~e )- } W J -! Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04277 fi Subject Property TRACKING NO. 2004-04888 Date: September 20, 2004 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: GOCK JOEY JUNG Q.S. No. 40 REQUEST FOR REINSTATEMENT OF THIS PERMIT BY THE MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO A TIME LIMITATION (APPROVED ON NOVEMBER 19, 2002 TO EXPIRE NOVEMBER 19, 2004) TO RETAIN A BANQUET HALL WITH SERVICE BUT NO SALES OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR ON-PREMISES CONSUMPTION. 420-504 South Brookhurst Street -Seafood Place Restaurant tass(zoo4-s-ts) ELM AVE Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004.' item No. 7 7a. ` CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED) (Motion) 7b. 'CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNQ 2000=04277 (Resolution) s (TRACKING NO. CUP 2004-04888) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: ' (1) This irregularly-shaped, 1.5-acre property has a frontage of 205'.feet on the east side of Brookhurst'Street, a maximum'depth of275 feet and'is located :492 feet north of the> centerline of Orange Avenue (42p-504 South Brookhurst Street=Seafood Place "Restaurant). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests reinstatement of this permit by the modification ar deletion ofi a condition of approval"pertaining o a time limitation (approved on November 19„2002, to expire on November'19, 2004) to retain a banquet hall with service but no sales of alcoholic beverages for on-premises under authority of Code Section 18.60.180. '' BACKGROUND: (3) This property is developed with a restaurant operating as a banquet facility in the CG (BCC) (General Commercial-BrookhursfCommercial CorridofClverlay) zone. This property is'also located within the West Anaheim Commercial Corridors constituent ' subarea of the Anaheim Redevelopment Project Area. The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property and the properties to the north; south and west `for Corridor Residential land uses, and the'property to the east for Low Density Residential '.wand uses.'. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) A request for reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04277 (to'retain and permit a banquet hall with service, buf not sales, of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption) by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation was deniedby the Planning Commission ohiJune 17;2002. A subsequent .'appeal to the City Council was approved oh November 19, 2002; for a period of twoyears to expire on November 19, 2004'. Resolution No. 2002R-242 cohtalns the'following ? 'condition: '9. That this conditional use permit shall expire and the use permitted hereunder shall be term)hated on' November 19, 2004." DISCUSSION: (5) De Hua Jr., the restaurant owner, has submitted the attached letter and justification for reinstatement requesting deletion of the condition ofapproval pertaining to the time limit. "The justification indicates that no physical'modificatiohs to the'building or changes to he existing operation are proposed: Sr8766gk Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning:Commission September 20, 2004:! Item No. 7 FINDINGS: (10) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit or a major amendment to an existing conditional use permit,' if must make a findirig of fact that the evidence presented '"shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That he proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is auttiorized bythis code,: dr is an unlisted use as defined ih subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66:440 (Approval Authority); (b) Thatahe proposed use wilCnot 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 df the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of ttie proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to health and safety; z (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways desighetl and improved to carry the ttaffic in the area; and (e) Thatthe granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any;: will not be detrimental to the health and`safety of ttie citizens'df the City df Anaheim. (11) Section 18:60.180.030 of the Anaheim Muriicipal Code provides: that before the Commission grants reinstatement of the approval by extension,'modification or deletion the !applicant must present evidende to establish the following findings: (a) That the facts necessary to support each and every finding for the original approval of the entitlement asset forth'in this chapter exist; ' (b) The permit is being exercised substantially in the same manner and in conformahce with all conditions and stipulations originally approved; (c) The permit is beirg exercisetl in a manner not detrimental to the particular area and surrounding land uses, noPto the public health and safety and; (d) With regard onlp 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 andthe surrounding area and thatthe periodic review of the use is no longer necessary and/or it can be determined that, dueto changed circumstances, the use is consistent with the City's long-term plans fdrthe area. RECOMMENDATION: (12) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary .information is received during .the hearing, antl based upon the evidence submitted td the Commission, including the ? evidence presented'i~ this stafFreport, and'oral and written evitlence presented at the public hearing, the Commission approve the petitioner's request, by adopting the attached resolution jncluding tte findingsand conditions contained therein. Page 3 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2004--*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION REINSTATING AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000-04277, AND., AMENDING CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. PC2000-125, ADOPTED THEREWITH (420-504 SOUTH BROOKHURST STREET) WHEREAS, on November 6, 2000 the Anaheim City Planning Commission, by Resolution No. PC2000-125 approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04277 in part, to permit a banquet hall with service (but not sales) of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption for one year at 420-504 South Brookhurst Street. On November 19, 2002 the Anaheim City Council, by Resolution No. 2002R-242 approved a two-year time extension to expire on November 19, 2004; and WHEREAS, said Resolution No. 2002R-242 includes the following condition of approval: "1. That this conditional use permit shall expire and the use permitted hereunder shall be terminated on November 19, 2004" WHEREAS, this property is currently developed with a restaurant operating as a banquet facility, the underlying zoning is CG, (BCC) (General Commercial-Brookhurst Commercial Corridor Overlay) zone; the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Corridor Residential land uses; and this property is located within the West Anaheim Commercial Corridors constituent subarea of the Anaheim Redevelopment Project Area; and WHEREAS, the petitioner has requested reinstatement of this conditional use permit to retain the banquet facility and delete the condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation pursuant to Code Section 18.60.180 of the Anaheim Municipal Code; 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: That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code. 2. That the use has not adversely affected the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is located. 3. That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow full development of the use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety and general welfare. 4. That the traffic generated by the use has not imposed 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 peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 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. CRIPC2D04-0 -1- PC2004- 7. That *"' indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. - CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to retain an existing banquet hall; and does hereby find that the Negative Declaration previously approved in connection with Conditional Use Permit No, 2000-04277 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation in connection with this request upon finding that the declaration reflects the independentjudgment 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 hereby amend, in their entirety, incorporate the conditions of Resolution No. PC2000-125, adopted in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04277, to read as follows: "1. That this conditional use permit shall expire and the use permitted hereunder shall be terminated on November 19, 2007." 2. That no admission fee or any other type of public entrance fee shall be permitted for this facility. 3. That the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises or off-premises consumption shall be prohibited, 4. That the activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to surrounding properties. 5. That there shall be no pool tables or coin-operated amusement devices maintained upon the premises at any time. 6. That the hours of operation shall be limited to: Sunday to Friday 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. Saturday 10 a.m. to 11 p.m. 7. That a manager shall be on-site at all times while the banquet facility is in operation. 8. That at all times when the facility is being utilized, uniformed security shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department to deter unlawful conduct on the part of patrons, and to promote the safe and orderly assembly and movement of personsand vehicles, and to prevent disturbance to the neighborhood by excessive noise generated by patrons entering or leaving the premises. 9. That the door located on the east wall of the building shall be kept closed and inaccessible from the exterior of the building, except in cases of emergency. 10. That signage shall be limited to existing and approved signs. That window signs, temporary signs and other advertising devices in connection with Special Event Permits shall not be permitted. 11. That a minimum ten (10) foot landscaped planter shall be installed and maintained adjacent to the proposed parking area along the east property line. 12. That any tree planted on-site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged or diseased, and/or dies. 13. That an eight (6) foot high block wall shall be installed and maintained adjacent to the new proposed parking area on the east property line adjacent to the residential boundary. -2- PC2004- 14. That an unsubordinated reciprocal access and parking agreement, providing a minimum of fifty two (52) parking spaces for a total of one hundred eighty four (184) spaces for the banquet-- facility on the property located at 504 South Brookhurst Street, shall be maintained to serve the parking needs of the property. 15. That trash storage area(s) shall be provided and maintained in location(s) acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable to adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum one (1) gallon sized clinging vines planted on maximum three (3) foot centers., or tall shrubbery. 16. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. 17. That an on-site trash truck turn-around area shall be maintained in compliance with Engineering Standard Detail No. 610 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Streets and Sanitation Division. 18. That the existing parking lot shall be maintained in good condition free of trash and debris. 19. 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. 20. That any new roof-mounted equipment shall be completely screened from view from all directions, in compliance with Section 18.38.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 21. That valet service shall be provided to patrons of the banquet facility to minimize impacts to the adjacent residents. The valet service shall utilize the parking spaces along the east property line as the "last load" area. 22. That this facility shall only be utilized for banquets and wedding receptions. 23. That this use shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 6.70 "Sound Pressure Levels". 24. That no outdoor uses and/or assembly shall occur on subject property. 25. That Code Enforcement shall inspect the property on a biannual basis for the period of three years. Said inspections shall be paid for by the property owner. 26. 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. 27. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. 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_ PC2004- 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 "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. CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Pat Chandler, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on September 20, 2004, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 2004. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2004- ATTACHMENT -ITEM N0. 7 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT JUSTIFICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT ° Section 18.03.093 of the Anaheim Municipal Code requires that before any conditional use permit or variance containing a time limitation can be reinstated for an additional period of lime, or before such time limitation may be deleted or modified by the Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator, the following must be shown: The facts necessary to support each and every required showing for the issuance of such entitlement as set forth in the following excerpts from the Anaheim Zoning Code still exist: '16.03.030 (Relative to Conditional Use Permits) Before the City Council or Planning Commission may grant any request for a conditional use permit, it must make a fnding of fact, by resolution, that the evidence presented shows that all of the following exist: .031 That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by this code, or is not listed herein as being a permitted use; .032 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; .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 nor to the peace, health, safety and general welfare; .034 Tha[ 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; .035 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; 18.03.040 (Relative to Variances) Before any variance may be granted by the Planning Commission it shall be showm .031 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; .032 That, because of special circumstances shown in .031, 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 by the approval body; 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 necessary to permifreasonable operation under the permit or variance as granted. ° In order to determine if such findings exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive a[ 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 permitt~ or variance? YES ^ NO Explain: lo~~~ L~tJQS~~~-~/~6V(~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~=N (over) CASE cur gyp, z~ae e ©~. ~ 7 z 2. 3. Has any aspect of the nature of the operation changed since the issuance of this use permit or variance? ^ YES t~NO Explain: ~ U ~ ~ I H r~(NCT~2~ t~~t ~-f N ~ f-{ ~ ~ ~9-Ati(~ , 4. Are the conditions of approval pertaining to th~eruse permit or variance being complied with? YES ^ NO Explain: ~ if ~(rRrl I K i N C, ~t~ ~ f {Z~~ ~i l/_ 7FJ t~ C I I y (~C 5. If you are requesting a deletion of the time limitation, is this deletion necessary far the continued operation of this use or variance? ~j YES ^ NO Explain: ~t'(i 5 D~-t _~ ~ r Oat/ P~~ ~ (M ~ L ('~'C ( 1 /Q ~ I 0 8L1 W 61J1~~ fK.~Oc,~) l f) ~ I3US) NHS S `7-o CoN i r,N ~I~_ "~.-CZ^~,~-I2 Ft- I ~ . ~~~ N o1l ~-Y~t /3~ ~2 r 9 201-t- Name of Property Owner or Authorized Agent (Please Print) Signature of Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date 206226JK.DCC 1L97 CASE 2 Have the land uses in the Immediate vicinity changed since the issuance of this use permit or variance? YES ^ NO ATTACHMENT - ITEM N0. 7 RESOLUTION NO. PC2000-125 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000-04277 BE GRANTED, IN PART, FOR A PERIOD OF 1 YEAR TO EXPIRE NOVEMBER 6, 2001 WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: THE SOUTH 125 FEET OF THE NORTH 205 FEET OF LOT 5 IN BLOCK B OF TRACT NO. 13, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 9, PAGE 12 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY. LOT 4 IN BLOCK B OF TRACT 13, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 9, PAGE 12 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on November 6, 2000 at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.03.030.010, 18.44.050.010, 18.44.050.03D and 18.55.030 to retain and permit a banquet hall with service, but not sale, of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption and with waiver of the following: Section 18.55.041.010(2) - Reouired lot consolidation. 2. That waiver of required lot consolidation is hereby denied on the basis that the waiver was deleted following public notification. 3. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is located. 4. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposal in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, sa#ety and general welfare. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. That no one indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition to the proposal; that one person spoke in favor; and that no correspondence was received in opposition. f :r4436 P K.doc -1- PC2000-125 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City. Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a banquet hall with service, but not sale, of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption and with waiver of required lot consolidation on a irregularly-shaped 1.5 acre property having a frontage of 205 feet on the east side of Brookhurst Street and a maximum depth of 275 feet, being located 492 feet north of the centerline of Orange Avenue, and further described as 420-504 South Brookhurst Street (Seafood Place Restaurant); and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, in part, for a period of one (1) year to expire on November 6, 2001, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: 1. That this conditional use permit shall expire one (1) year from the date of this resolution, on November 6, 2001. 2. That no admission fee or any other type of public entrance fee shall be permitted for this facility. 3. That the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises oroff-premises consumption shall be prohibited. 4. That the activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to surrounding properties, 5. That there shall be no pool tables orcoin-operated amusement devices maintained upon the premises at any time. 6. That the hours of operation shall be limited to: Sunday to Friday: 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. Saturday: 1p a.m. to 11 p.m. 7. That a manager shall be on-site at all times while the banquet facility is in operation. 8. That at all times when the facility is being utilized, uniformed security shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department to deter unlawful conduct on the part of patrons, and to promote the safe and orderly assembly and movement of persons'and vehicles, and to prevent disturbance to the neighborhood by excessive noise generated by patrons entering or leaving the premises. 9. That the door located on the east wall of the building shall be kept closed and inaccessible from the exterior of the building, except in cases of emergency. 10. That the "crash" posts on the north elevation shall be removed and replaced with landscaping and the "crash" posts on the south elevation of the building shall be painted to match the building. 11. That signage shall be limited to existing and approved signs. That window signs, temporary signs and other advertising devises in connection with Special Event Permits shall not be permitted: 12. That twenty four inch (24") box sized broad-headed trees shall be planted in the landscape planters in the parking areas and on the east property line in order to effectively screen this use from adjacent residential properties. -2- PC2000-125 13. That a minimum ten (10) foot landscaped planter shall be installed and maintained adjacent to the new proposed parking area along the east property line. 14. That any tree planted on-site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged or diseased, and/or dies. 15. That an eight (8) foot high block wall shall be installed adjacent to the new proposed parking.area on the east property line adjacent to the residential boundary. 16. That an unsubordinated reciprocal access and parking agreement, providing a minimum of fifty two (52) parking spaces for a total of one hundred eighty four (184) spaces for the banquet facility on the property located at 504 South Brookhurst Street, in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney, shall be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded agreement shall be submitted to the Zoning Division. 17. That within a period of three (3) months from the date of this resolution, the legal property owner of 420. South Brookhurst Street shall submit a Lot Line Adjustment to merge the three (3) parcels under common ownership. The lot line adjustment shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division, for review and approval by the City Engineer. The lot line adjustment shall be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder within six (6) months from the date of this resolution. 18. That if the new landscaped area exceeds two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed in compliance with Chapter 10.19 "Landscape Water Efficiency" of the Anaheim Municipal Code and Ordinance No. 5349 regarding water conservation. 19. That trash storage area(s) shall be provided and maintained in location(s) acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable to adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum one (1) gallon sized clinging vines planted on maximum three (3) foot centers, or tall shrubbery. 20. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. 21. That an on-site trash truck turn-around area shall be provided in compliance with Engineering Standard Detail No. 610 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Streets and Sanitation Division. 22. That the existing parking lot shall be resurfaced and maintained in good condition free of trash and debris. 23. That prior to completion of the electrical design., the legal property owner shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement for primary lines and transformer. 24. 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. 25. That roof-mounted equipment shall be completely screened from view from afl directions, in compliance with Section 18.44.030.120 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 26. That valet service shall be provided to patrons of the banquet facility to minimize impacts to the adjacent residents. The valet service shall utilize the parking spaces along the east property line as the "last load" area. -3- PC2000-125 27. That this facility shall only be utilized for banquets and wedding receptions. 28. That this use shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 6.70 "Sound Pressure Levels". 29. That no outdoor uses and/or assembly shall occur on subject property. 30. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2, and as conditioned herein. 31. That within a period of three (3) months from the date of this resolution, Condition Nos. 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25 and 30, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions of further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 32. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim 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 November 6, 2000. IOrl~ktal el~ned by John hoos) CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: (Original signed by Margarita Solorio) SECRETARY., ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Margarita Solorio, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on November 6, 2000, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ARNOLD, BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, KOOS, NAPOLES, VANDERBILT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 2000. (Original signed by Margarita Sotoriol SECPETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2000-125 RESOLUTION N0. 2002R-242 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REINSTATING AND APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 20002-04277 TO EXPIRE NOVEMBER 19, 2004. - WHEREAS, on November 6, 2000 the Anaheim City Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. PC2000-125, granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04277, in part, to retain and permit a banquet hall with service (but not sales) of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption (waiver of required lot consolidation was deleted following public notification); and WHEREAS, Condition No. 1 of said resolution specifies that the use permit. shall expire on November 6, 2001; and that Condition No. 15 specifies that an e-foot high block wall shall be constructed along the east property line to separate a new parking area from adjacent single-family residential uses to the east; and WHEREAS, the property is developed with a restaurant operating as a banquet facility (Seafood Place Restaurant) and a chiropractic office, that the property is zoned CL (BCC) (Commercial, Limited - Brookhurst Commercial Corridor Overlay); that the property is located within the West Anaheim Commercial Corridors Redevelopment Project Area; and that the Anaheim General Plan designates the property for General Commercial land uses; and WHEREAS, the petitioner requests reinstatement of this use permit by the modification or deletion of the above-mentioned Condition No. 1 pertaining to a 1-year time limitation to retain the banquet hall with service (but not sales) of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption; and that the petitioner also requests the modification or deletion of Condition No. 15 pertaining to construction of an e-foot high block wall along the east property line; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on November 19, 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 that the hearing was continued to the January 28, February 25, April 22 and June 17, 2002, Planning Commission meetings; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study did adopt its Resolution No. PC2002-97 denying said application for an extension of time and amendment of the conditions of approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2000-04277: and WHEREAS, thereafter, within the time permitted by law, the applicant appealed said decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Anaheim Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on said application on November 19, 2002 at which hearing the City Council did receive and consider evidence, bath oral and documentary, relating thereto; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds that said Conditional Use 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. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the .City of Anaheim that said application for extension of said time limitation be, and the same is hereby, approved for a period of (2) years and that said conditional use permit is hereby extended to expire on November 19, 2004. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Condition No. 1 of Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-04277, as heretofore set forth in Resolution No, PC2000-97 be, and the same is hereby, amended to read as follows: "1. That this conditional use permit shall expire and the use permitted hereunder shall be terminated on November 19, 2004." BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Condition No. 15 of Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-04277 be, and the same is hereby, deleted in its entirety. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the time within which a rehearing must be sought is governed by the. provisions of Section 1.12.100 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (and the time within which judicial review of final decisions must be sought is governed by the provisions of Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure). THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Anaheim t~i9`~ ay of November, 2002. ~~ !,%/ MAYOR OF THE CITY OF EIM ATTES~ T~/7~%Q~.-~-f.BSs'' G1~4~ ITY CL K 0 THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 4]540.1 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, SHERYLL SCHROEDER, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2002R-242 was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting provided by law, of the Anaheim. City Council held on the 19"' day of November, 2002, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Kring, Tait, McCracken, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY CL RK F THE CITY OF ANAHEIM {SEAL) n~-- '/ SP 94.62-99 \o M1.1 G` l o \n\. R R Ras W SP 62 69 t501 ~E\ DP RG~6HEPPSION \ GoRPppP L i1ER ;,l v,._ -1 SP 94.14 -14 i 606 66 61j6R0\P\,F\RMS P nGSG SMP~~ Wo ~P2 / p S~R~E~ _ _ CORONPD /~ 9 ~1p ~ 7"~f 169 4 Ym ERG\P~ Cn JP S tp ~ <G f SP g4-~ t0. tRG ~ :::.-; ~ ~. L 66-5g.~10 Y R~ ,^ 5P 1614 O lRe~ ~ 5P 9~j.14 FC~bpp 0411 n CU CUP 3188 N CUP ~p0 r.1 p61 SEAN/~ 62.61 D6 G 1 R SP 94-1 1 9 4 RCL 6 4i24i1 CUP 2004 04890 , \ 62"61 SP \ 6 - 3 RG ' P' CUP 2003-04740 O CUP 2002-04671 CUP 2 00 1-044 1 3 CUP 2001-04326 CUP 2090 CUP 168 RESTAURANT DA 3 Sp 9462.69 lR s`° \ PK\NC' p~N'G p,NPHE?t't`P pp3 , G\-6P 62-\B~gSR~ 1. S P~~F M3 DP / \ SP g4~f 61.62 .:oaC~ Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 TRACKING NO. 2004-04890 Requested By; AOUN - Subject Property Date: September 20, 2004 Scale: 1" = 200' Q.S. No. 140 REQUEST FOR REINSTATEMENT OF THIS PERMIT BY THE MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO A TIME LIMITATION (APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 8, 2003 TO EXPIRE AUGUST 27, 2004) TO RETAIN ACCESSORY PUBLIC ENTERTAINMENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH APREVIOUSLY-APPROVED RESTAURANT WITH SALES OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR ON-PREMISES CONSUMPTION AND TO AMEND PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED EXHIBITS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO THE PATIO AREA. 1160 North Kraemer Boulevard - Xalos Restaurant tas7 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20; 2004 Item No. B 8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED)> (Motion), Bb. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0: 2090 (Resolution) (TRACKING NO. CUP2004-04890) 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 of216 feet, and is located 242 feet south of the centerline of Coronado Street (1160'North Kraemer Boulevard - Xalos Restaurant) ' i REQUEST: (2)' The petitioner requests reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition pf approval pertaining to'a time limitation (approved on September:8, 2003, expiring on August 27 2004) to retain public entertainment in conjunction with a restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption and to amend previously-approved exhibits and conditions of approval pertaining to the patio area underauthority of Code Sections 18.60.180 and .18.60.190.: The request to amend conditions of approval pertaining to the patio area has been withdrawn. 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 Nlpha .:Northeast Redevelopment Project constituent sub-area of the Anaheim Redevelopment Area. The ' General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property and surrounding properties for General Industrial land uses. i (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, 2004. " DISCUSSION: (5) The Commission granted a one (1) year reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 on September 6,`2003. Resolution No'. PC2003-.129 (copy attached) included the following conditions of approval pertaining to time limitation and the sales antl consumption of alcoholic beverages: "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 Exhifiit No 1, and as conditioned herein:' (6) Tony Garcia, the restaurant operator, requests a 5-year reinstatement (to match the lease agreement) ordeletion'of time limitation to continue operating the accessory;public entertainment in conjunction with the restaurant with sales of alcoholidbeverages 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, Sr8784av:doc Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20;2004 Item No. 8 felony assault, 3 battery calls; 2 disturbances, 1 stolen vehicle, 4 burglaries, 1 grand theft, t recover IosUstoleri!property, 1 traffic control, andil foot pursuit. The Police Department is supportive of the request to reinstate the public entertainment portion bf this permit, but recommends a one (1) year time limitation, in ortler to closely monitor the operation of the '' business. (11) j Although the crime rate in the reporting district has decreased substantially from the prior reinstatement (from 260% to;76%) and the business owner has made%an effort to upgrade the property, the Police Department continues to have concerns with the,types of calls for service for this busjhess. Moreover, the Police Department is concerned with the'unpermitted increase in r height of the patio`wall and recommends that it be returned'to it's approved condition to increase visibility`and surveillance. Therefore, a'dne (1) year reinstatement is recommended, to expire August 27, 2005. (12) ,' Staff redommends approval of the revised exhibits for the interior of the restaurant and the7aised block wall since the new configuration would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the traffic generated by the proposed modifications would not impose an undue burden upon: the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. Additionally; the size and shape of the property is adequate jd allow the full development of the alterations of thee.' business in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to health` and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. ENVfRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (13) i Staff has reviewed the request for reinstatemenk and to modify previously-approved exhibits and finds no!significant adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, staff recommends that the ? previously-approved Negative Declaration in connection witH Conditional Use Permit No. 2090 serve as the required environmental documentation for this request upon a finding by the i Commission that the Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that: it has considered the previously-approved Negativebeclaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial r study (a'copy of which is available far review in the PlanningDepartment) and any comments received that there.. is no substantial evitlence thafthe project will have'a significant effecfon the environment. FINDINGS: (14) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit ota 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 ari unlisted use as defined in subsection .030 (UnlistedUses 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 developmeht 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 manneFhot 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 ahdhigfiways designed and improved tb carry the traffic in the area; and Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004 Item No. B (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit untler the conditions imposed, if any;' will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens df the City of Anaheim. (15} 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 applicahfmust present evidence to establish the following firdings: (a) .,That the facts necessary to support each and every finding lot 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 publicpeace; health, safety and getie~al 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 underlytrig zone and the surrounding area'and thafthe periodic review of the use is no longer necessary andlor it oan be determined that, due to changed circumstances, the use is consistent with the. City's long=term plahs for the area. RECOMMENDATIONi (16) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the hearing, ahd based'updn the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission ' approve the petitioner's tequest, by adopting}he attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. ' Page 5 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2004- 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 Resdlution 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 fle with the Planning Department marked Exhibit No 1, and as conditioned herein" WHEREAS, the property is developed with arestaurant/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 -1- 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, 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 Nos. 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 imprpved 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 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 mast of the surrounding industrial businesses are closed; and that recent inspections by Code Enforcement Division staff indicates that the property is currently demonstrating compliance with all the conditions of approval except for the requested modifications to the floor plan. 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 City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to retain accessory public entertainment in connection -2- 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 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 operatorlowner 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 tc 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. -3- 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 'putilic 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. -4- 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 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. 31. That plans shall be submitted to the Building Division and permit obtained for the unpermitted modifications to the interior of the restaurant. 32. 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. 33. That Condition Nos. 2 and 31,above-mentioned, shall be completed within a period of sixty (60) days from the date of this resolution. 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 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 herefnabove 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. CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -5- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. °- CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Pat Chandler, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on September 20, 2004, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VACANCY: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 2004. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -6- ATTACHMENT -ITEM N0. 8 RESOLUTION NO. PC2003-129 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. PC2002-114, ADOPTED THEREWITH 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 extensioris 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 and PC2002-114) to reinstate the accessory public entertainment (a public dance hall) for additional periods of time iri connection with an existing restaurant with sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption; and that the most recent resolution (PC2002-114) includes the following conditions of approval: That the accessory public entertainment shall expire on August 27, 2003. 2. That the outdoor patio area may be used by patrons for seating and smoking purposes only; and that no other outdoor activities, including but not limited to dining, drinking, entertainment, dancing, etc., shall be permitted on this property,. 21. That there shall be no direct pedestrian access to the outdoor patio area from outside the building. All access to the patio 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 outdoor patio. WHEREAS, the property is developed with arestaurant/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 General Industrial land uses; and that the property is located in the Project Alpha Northeast Redevelopment Project Area; and WHEREAS, under authority of Code Sections 18.03.091 and 18:03:093, 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) Tracking No. CUP2003-04740 cr\PC2003-129.doc -1- PC2003-129 or deletion Condition No. 1 (which specifies that the accessory public entertainment shall expire on August 27, 2003) to eliminate any time limitation; and that the petitioner has also requested modification to Condition Nos. 2 and 21 pertaining to consumption of food and alcoholic beverages on the existing 'smoking patio; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on September 8, 2003, at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required bylaw and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Cade, Chapter 18.03, 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 peace; health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 6. That this conditional use permit is being exercised in substantially the same manner and in 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 peace., health, safety and general welfare; that the accessory public entertainment is primarily conducted in the evenings when most of the. surrounding industrial businesses are closed; and that recent inspection by Code Enforcement Division staff indicates that the property is currently demonstrating compliance with all the conditions of approval. 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 ENVfRONty1ENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has :reviewed the proposal to retain accessory public entertainment in connection with an existing restaurantwith sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption, and to amend or delete certain conditions adopted therewith, on a 0.9-acre property having a frontage of 17S feet on the east side of Kraemer Boulevard and a maximum depth of 216 feet, being located 242 feet south of the centerline of Coronado Street, and further described as 1160 North Kraemer Boulevard (Xalos Restaurant);. 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. -2- PC2003-129 NOW, THEREFORE, BE tT 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 BE IT FURTHER RESOVED that the requested modifications to the conditions of approval pertaining to consumption of food and alcoholic beverages on the existing 'smoking patio' are denied; and BE IT FURTHER RESOVED that the conditions of approval in Resolution No. PC2002-114, 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 accessary public entertainment shall expire on August 27, 2004. 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 persods 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 ingresslegress, deliveries and in cases of emergency. 9. That at at! times when entertainmenfor 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 -3- PC2003-129 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 Cade. 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 sflall 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 9andscape 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. -4- PC2003-129 28. That any tree planted on-site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dies. "" ' ' " 29. That alf existing mature landscaping shall be maintained and immediately replaced in the event that. it becomes diseased or dies. 30. That trash storage area(s) shall be provided and maintained in location(s) acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage 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. 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 No. 1, and as conditioned herein. 32. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval. of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. 33. That within a period of sixty (60) days from the date of this resolution, the following shall be satisfied, as stipulated b'ythepetitionen (1) Removal of the coin-operated telephone from the patio; (2) Obtain the required permits for the sink; (3) Construct an enclosure around the water heater, including obtaining the appropriate permits; (4) Remove the un-permitted wood sign in the landscaped setback along Kraemer Boulevard; (5) Refurbish the trash enclosure gates; (6) Clean up area to the rear of the restaurant and install slats in the chain link enclosure; and (7) Refurbish the landscaping in parking lot. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of September 8, 2003. - fORIGINAL SIGNED BYJAMES VANDERBILT} CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: (ORIGINAL SIGNED BY PAT CHANDLER) SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM j -5- PC2003-129 I, Pat Chandler, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Ciry Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on September 8, 2003, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, EASTMAN, FLORES, ROMERO, VANOERBILT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: O'CONNELL VACANCY: COMMISSIONERS: ONE SEAT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of .2003. (ORIGINAL SIGNED BY PAT CHANDLER} SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -6- PC2003-129 ~~-w-tour iu: auan rrcm- T°233 ? 015/879 F-713 t ATT6GHhfENT - ITEM N0. 8 ?S~' • "r! PETITIONER'S STATERflENT JUSTIFICA7iON FOR RE1NS'SABEiVIE1~iT ~` ^ Section 18,03.D93 of the Anaheim Munleipat Coda requires that before any wndttionat use permit or variance containing a time limitation can be relnstatatl for an additional period oP dme, or before such time fimitetion may b®deleted ormodlflad by the Planning Commissan or Zoning Administrator, the follov+ing must be ehowm f. The facts necessary to support etch end every required showing Por the Issuance cf suoh entitlement as set forth In the following excerpts from the Mehe[rn 2oning Code stHl exist: 19.03.030 (Relative to Canditionat use Permits) aefore the City Council or Planning Commtsslon may grant any reques! (or a conditional use permit, ll must make e flndrr~ of sect, by resuMlhnt, ll,d! tAe avidaaw prxantod shows that nil Of the (gllgrilnq @xlsh .031 That the Proposed use is propery one For which a ecndftlonai use permit Is authorized by this cctle, ar is not paled herein as being a pemddad usa; .032 That the proposed use wiG not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of rho area in which it is proposed to be rotated; .033 Thal the size antl shape of the site proposed far the tree is adequate to allow the full development of the propose6 use in a manner not detrimmentai to the particular area nor to the,peece, Health, sa~aty end general welfare; A34 That the traffic generated by the proposed use will rat impose an undue burden upon the s',reets and highways designed end improved to carry the traffic Lnihs eras; .035 That the granting Of the gondiCarnl usa permit under the tonditjons imposed, If any, wiN not be detrimental to the pasta, health, safety end general welfare of the GNzens of the City of Anahalm; 19.03.040 (Relat7va to Variances) Before any valance may be granted by the Planning Commtsslon B shall ba shown: ;031 That there ere apaelal circumstances apPlicabie to the property, inNuding srse, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning daeaificeion In the vicinity; ,032 That, because of special circumstances shown in :037, strict application of the zoning nods oeprtvos the proporty of privitegas enjoyedby ot.9er property under Identical sorting classfficatlan in the vitkttty, 2, Said pemttt or variance Is being exorcised substantially to the same manner and in conformance with all oonditlons and stipulstions adglnally approved by the approval body: 3, Sald permit or variance is being exerdsetl In a manner not detrimental to the paAlcular area and surrounding IancJ.• uses, norto the public peace, health, safety and generrt wethre; and '~. 4, With regard only to any deletion of a time Gmitalion, such deletion is necessary to permit reasonatfla operation under the permit orvarienee ss granted. ^ In order to determine If such flndings exist, and to assist the Zoning Atlminiatratrur or Planning Commission to atrrve et s declsbn, please answer rho fogowing questions fully and as complete as pos6lble. ~t ch ddtttona aheais if ad itlcnal space is needed. Naa tiny physical aspect of the property for which this us rmit or variance been granted changed slgnlficantiy airtce the Iseuanca oft 's use permit r varian~rC~_ ~ YES No ...._,_ _. i nPn~ n,n ~n n c V)Pa rn OdP t'Q~I r G ~l ~ G .. _ (over) CASE NO. LUN ~~ r3 EI ~ ~ u~ ~1~. 2 4 R 0 ATTACHMENT -ITEM N0. 8 MEIVIOI2ANDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Code Enforcement Division DATE: SEPTEMBER 2, 2004 TO: AMY VAZQUEZ, PLANNER FROM: DON YOURSTONE, SENIOR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER SUBJECT: XALOS RESTAURANT, 1160 N. KRAEMER BLVD., ANAHEIM, CA. REINSTATEMENT OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT # 2090 This memo is written in response to your request for information regazding the Xalos Restaurant located at 1160 N. Kraemer Blvd. Code Enforcement records indicate for the past year no citizen complaints had been received regazding this business. On July 22, 2004, I conducted an inspection of the property found the restaurant was open and I observed the violations of the Anaheim Municipal Code and Conditional Use Permit # 2090 as follows: 1. New unpermitted walls built azound the front patio area. 2. New unpermitted man door had been installed in the west wall leading to the patio. 3. No plumbing permit had been obtained for the reaz sink as required in Conditional Use Permit # 2090, condition 33 (2). 4. Parkway and parking lot landscape areas was in poor condition and a violation of Conditional Use Permit # 2090 conditions 22, 27, 33 (7). 5. The parking lot asphalt was damaged and needed repair, slurry seal and stripping. 6. The interior floor azea had major construction and alteration by relocating the baz, tables and office azea. 7. Property owner needs to obtain a City of Anaheim Tax on rental of non-residential property permit. On July 23, 2004, a City of Anaheim Notice of Violation letter was mailed to the business and property owners allowing them fifteen days to correct the violations. On August 31, 2004, Planner Amy Vazquez and I conducted a reinspection of the property and found all of the violations had been corrected except the following # 1, 2, 3, and 6 listed above were still present. I spoke to the owner of the restaurant Mr. Tony Gazcia and he informed me that plans and modification application for his Conditional Use Permit has been submitted to the City of Anaheim Planning Department for approval. XALOSRESTAURANT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT # 2090 PAGE 2 OF 2 I checked with Planner Amy Vazquez and I was informed the application has been submitted and is pending Planning Commission action. If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at ext. 4451. m823dy.dac ATTACHMENT -ITEM N0. 8 IIA9 YYI ~ F{1 1~ ® ~ IAA City of Anaheim POLICE DEPARTMENT DATE: September 1, 2004 TO: Amy Vazquez Planning Department FROM: A/Sergeant Ryan Blackburn Vice Detail SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit 2090/Tracking Number 2004-04890 LOCATION: Xalos 1160 North Kraemer Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92806 The Police Department has received an I.Q.C. Route Sheet for Conditional Use Permit 2090. The applicant is requesting reinstatement to retain public entertainment in conjunction with a previously approved restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption and to amend exhibits. This is a restaurant/night club that features live entertainment. 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 August 1, 2003 through August 23, 2004 this location had 48 calls for service. The calls consist of: 1 man with a gun, 3 felony assault, 5 battery, 1 robbery in progress, 5 fight, 4 disturbance, 3 stolen vehicle, 5 burglary, 1 grand theft, 1 petty theft, 3 problem, 3 car stop, 4 suspicious circumstances, 1 fire department, 2 ID, 1 recover lost or stolen, 1 public assist, 1 illegal parking, 1 traffic hazard, 1 assist other department, 1 traffic accident no .injuries. Of the 48 calls for service there were 21 reports taken. They consist of: 2 man with a gun, 1 robbery, 3 fight, 1 felony assault, 3 battery, 2 disturbance, 1 stolen vehicle, 4 burglary, 1 grand theft, 1 recover lost/stolen property, 1 traffic control, and 1 foot pursuit. Memorandum Amy Vazquez Xalos Page two The Police Department does not oppose the reinstatement of the CUP and the public entertainment permit. We do oppose the reinstatement of the CUP for a five year period of time. We would like it to remain aone-year period of time due to the high number of calls for service and the severity of crimes that occur. We oppose the service of alcohol and food on the patio. We also request that the following conditions be placed on the Conditional Use Permit: 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 illuminated the windows of nearby residences.. Memorandum Amy Vazquez Xalos Page three 9) There shall be no public telephones on the property that are located outside the building and within the control of the applicant. 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 shal'I 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. Please contact me at extension 1456 if you require further information.. f:\homeMminvin\2004-04890 Xalos.doc 11!;1.1 1VV 1 RCL 68-69-75 RCL 68-69-71 VAR 2p57 768 DU 1 DU EA H VICTORIA qVE 1 DU EACH RS-2 I 1 DU EACH AN AHEIM CITY LIMITS _ _ _ _ _ ORANGE COUNTY LIMITS ~ _ BROADWAY --- ~ I W ~ GG ~ ~ m RCL 99.9941 RCL 9B 99-11 RCL 64-65-74 m ~ F• RCL 59.60-103 RCL 59 fi0 103 3 ~ VqR 4 3 VAR 433 UOUOR PCN 99-01 gSHOPS s s. I ~ 275 I - ~ u ~ t I ( 9(RCC VAR 430 l+ GG9 1'1 PROF ; ~ 3 . C , ~~ RCL i9-60 Y CUP 2004-04885 BUILDING ~ 1 O ® ALCOM •~ I 1 r O ' ~ Gc m ~ W RCL 98-9941 2 RCL 59.69403 TACO BELL O CUP 3352 RE5T I . ~ VAR 433 ^ .. Q Q RCL 98-99-11 SMALL COMM. RCL 63-64-118 (3) SHOPS GG RCL 9&9941 CUP 2739 CUP 1494 CUP 1647 SM. COMM. 3CL 63.64.118 1fi) COP 1675 SHOPS T R!Y so-en-vo I-64-118 SMALL COMM. n IO CLI SHOPS InI 1 . C-G ~ RCL 98-99-11 RCL 63-64-118 (i) O CUP 2487 U rn CUP 6~9o m Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04885 ~ RCL 96-9941 !RCL 59-60-103 c.ft VAR 433 twi n i-0i' U U i a o ~I D U C-G act svsnm U CUP 1]31 T-0lIP 2CO0.dd 1x 01 CUP 84fi cUPxOW~Mx _ _ VRa dSl REST. GG RCL 96-99.11 RCL 59.80.103 RCL 5&5]-2 T-CUP 2004.04969 T-CUP 2000-04512 CG T-CDP 2001-04457 SEAFOOD CUP 2000-04277 PLACE VAR 433 PARKING GG RCL 90.99.11 ~ N T-CUP 2001-04457 po V1 CUP 2000-0-02)7 ¢„ ~ H !n W U Q VALLE F } W J Q 1 Li ~~~r~~!! Subject Property Date: September 20, 2004 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: TAO NGUYEN Q.S. No. 40 REQUEST TO PERMIT A CHURCH AND MISSIONARY TRAINING SCHOOL WITHIN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 314 South Braokhurst Street 14x4 ELM AVE ~~ ~~~ t iv yam. S N ; .i~. `~~ ...f (~ ~~ ' } ~ F ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ x~ ~ ~ ~ r ~~ ~ =~m ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ f ~, ~~ r~ 2 E~~ ,~ ~~ ~:,~ J ~t ,r~, ,.~ ~ ~ £~ ~_ ~~ ~' ~ :_ . . , ~ ~; ~ ~ ~, ~' '° v._ ITEM N0. 9 -= -=-;~ 3 S' ~ ~~ ~~ x Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004! Item No. 9 9a. ` CEQA NEGATIVE.DECLARATION ;(Motion) 9b. 'WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT ((Motion) 9c. 'CONDITIONAL' USE PERMIT N0. 2004-04885 {Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly-shaped, 0.85 acre property has a frontage of 130 feet on the east side of Bropkhurst'Street, amaximum depth of 275'feet and is located 186 feet south of the centerline of Broadway (314 South Brookhurst Street). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit under authority of Code Section 18:08.030.0.10.040.0402 to establish a church and missionary training school within an' existing two-story office: building with waiverof the following: SECTION NO. 18.66.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces'. ?AND 18.42.040.010 137 spaces required; 6F:proposediand recommended by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager') BACKGROUND: (3) This property;is developed with a two story office building and parking lot, is'zoned C-G {General Commercial) and the Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates the site for Corridor Residential land Lses. Thisproperty is' also located within the West Anaheim Commercial Corridor, constituent sub-area of the Anaheim Redevelopment Project. ,' (4) Surrounding General Plan land use designations are as follows: Direction .General Plan Designation North, South and West across Brookhurst Street Corridor Residential East :!Low Density Residential PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: i (5) Conditional Use Permit'No. 1563'(to permitpn-sale beer and wine in an existing restaurant) was approved by the Planning Commissionbn September 15, 1975. This restaurant no longer existson the property andthe entitlement should be terminated. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (6) The petitioner is requesting approval of a conditional use permit tb establish a church and missionary. training school in an existing 17,500 square foot two story officebuilding The `church organization currently utilizes the building for administrative office purposes for both the missionary schoofand church activities at an off-site location; Sr3083ey.doc .Page 1 Use -Size ~ ~ ~ Code-Required Parking ~ Parking ` " s.f: _ Re wired Sanctuary 1,564 ' 29 spaces per 1,p00 square' 45.4'' (assembly) feet`of assemtity area Classroom 1 630 20 spaces per 1,000 square 32 6 , feet of classroom area . Office 13,6204 4 spaces per 1,000 square ` 54 5`' feet , Medical office 686 6 spaces per 1,000 square 4 1 feet . TOTAL 17,500 13T Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commisston September 20, 2004'1 Item No. 9 (10) The sign plan (Exhibit Nd. 4) and site plan indicate thaTone monument sign is proposed adjacent to Brookhurst. Street. The proposed monument sign would comply with Code requirements'for freestanding signage. The sign would'be a maximum of 8 feet high, including the required 18 inch base, a maximum width of 8 feet, 2'inches and have align copy area df approximately 26 square feel The church; missionary training school and twe office tenants would be advertisedon the proposed sign. Code allows for a freestanding sign with a maximum height:. of 8 feet, a maximum,wldth of 10 feet and a maximum sign copy area of 55 square feet. A review of thei photographs and a site inspection revealetl two existing wall signs on3he west elevation, facing Brookhurst. One sign consists of alogo for the church organization; while the second contains the text "Alcon'Professional Plaza ° The existing signs comply with the maximum wall signage: as permitted by Code, which is a maximum of i 10'percent of the building elevation. No additional wallsignage is proposed:' (11) The petitioner has submitted the attached letter of operation and project description indicating tfieproposetl hours of operation fdr church ahd missidnary schodl activities;: Proposed hours a are' as follows`. `(a) Church Services: >' Saturday - 9 a.m. - 2 p.m'., 6 p.m. - 9 p.m. Sunday: 9 a:m. - 2 p:m: (b) Bible Study:: Daily - 4 p.m. - 9 p.m:. The overall size of the congregation would not exceed 146 members, consistent with the maximum occupancy, per the parking study.] Additionally, the administrative office would operate throughout the week with a maximum of five (4) people on the premises at any time. Further, noprivate preschool, elementary, high schoolor daycare Uses are"proposed.;. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSISi (12) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a popy of wFiich is available for review in tha Planning,Department) and finds no significant environmental impact and; therefore, recommends'that aNegative Declaration beapproved,Upon afinding by the Planning r Commission: that the Negative Declaration reflects the'ndependent]udgment 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 wilt have a significant effect on the environment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENTANALYSIS: ' ;~ (13) The proposed project has been reviewed byaffected City departments to determine whether it oonforms with the City's Growtfi Management Element adoptedby the Ciry Council on March 17( 1992. Based on City staff review of thepraposed :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 fias been performed. EVALUATION: (14) Community and religious assembly, including churches, and educational institutions are permitted'within in the G-G (General Commercial) zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. s (15) The requested waiver pertains to minimum number ofparking spaces. Code requires:a minimum of 137 parking spaces for this proposed church and other useson the property as :described rrparagraph'no. (9) of this report and 67 spaces are proposed.:The petitioner has submitted a;parking study, prepared by Austin-Foust Associates, inc. dated May 17; 2004, to Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September20, 2004 Item No. 9 substantiate the request for this waives The City Traffic arid Transportation Manager` has`"' reviewed this study and has determined that 67`parking spaces is adequate for his facility: (18) The parking study further includes the following findings for the waiver of minimum number of parking spaces: "(a) :That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-street .:parking spaces to be provided: for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommpdate alf vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and 'reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. The project will be conditioned'to park all vehicles oh-site so as to not utilize any on- 'street spaces. The total persons in attendance at ttie services will be parked either on- site or shuttled in from other remote sites: In addition, there is' no on-street parking: conveniently locatedto this building. (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces uponahe public'streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. s ;The project will be conditioned o park all vehicles on-site so as to not utilize any on- street spaces. The total persons in attendance at the services will be parked either on- site or shuttled in from other remote sites In addition, there I no on-street parking `conveniently located`to this building. (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand for parking spaces upon. adjacenfprivate property in the immediate vicinity'of the proposed use. The project will utilize its own adjacent parking lot. All other church goersiwill park at established remote parking lots and be shuttled to and from the sanctuary. ChurcH ;goers will not park in the adjoining lots except if they frequent those businesses on' their way'to or from church. Even then none will park there longer than Hecessary;to conduct their business. (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic `congestion within the off-streeEparking areas or lotsprovidedi for such use. The parking on the church site will be filled (63 spaces), but this will not result in any 'significantbn-site congestions:'Similarly the remote parking lots will be utilized but ''generally not filled tolcapacity.', No congestion is expected attfie remotelots. (e) :That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent prdperties upon the public streets i~ the immediate vicinity `bf the proposed use:( The existing access to/from the site is via`one existing driveway on Brookhurst street. 'The entryand exit of 66 vehicles for the church services on Sunday morning will not f interfere with the traffic flow on Brookhurst Street. THe two adjacent uses, fast-food restaurants and gas station, have considerably more traffic than the church and they do not cause traffic congestion'on Brcokfiurst Street" (17) The adjacent properties to the east of the proposed church' include single-family; residences. Staff recommends that the'petitioner install a total of four additional tiroad-headed evergreen knees along the east property line in prder to provide a buffer between the residences and the churcH parking lot. Staff Has also included a condition of approval requiring thafany on-site activities, including use of the parkinglot, end by 10 p.mlt daily. Page`4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission Septemtiec 20, 2004 jtem No.9 FINDINGS: (18) Section 18.06.080 of the parking d~dinance sets forth the following findings„which arec required to be made tiefore a parking waiver is approved by the Commission: (a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, ifany, will not cause fewer off-street parkingspaces to be provided for such use than'the number of such spaces necessary to accdmmodate all vehicles attributable to such Use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of'such use; and (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition fdr parking spaces upon the publid streets ih'the immediate vicinity of the proposed use; and (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces uppn adjacent private property in the tmmedtate vicinity of the proposed use; and (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for such use; and- (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, ifany, will riot impede: vehicular ingress to o~'egress from adjacentproperties;upon thepublic streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use: Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed upon the granting of any waiver pursuant to this Sectiorby the Planning Commission or City Council, the granting of any such waiver shalt tie deemed contingent upon operation of such use in conformance with the assumptions'relating to the operation and intensity of the use as bontained'in the parking demand study that formed the basis for approval of said waiver.: Exceeding; violating, intensifying or otherwise deviating from anyof said assumptions'as contained in the parking demand study shall be deemed a violation of the express conditions imposed upon said waiver which shall subject said waiver to termination or modifidatidn pursuant to the provisions of Sections`9 8.03.091'and 18.03.092 of this Code. (19) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence;presented shows that all of the following'conditions exist: `_ (a) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection'.030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) df Section 18.fi6.040 (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 isadequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a mannernot detrimental to the`particular'area or to the'health antl safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden'upon the streets and highways designedarid improved to carry the traffid iri 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 5 Staff Report to the Planning. Commission September 2p, 2004 Item No. 9 RECOMMENDATIONr (20) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the hearing, and based upon ttie evidence submitted to the: Commission; including: the evidence presented in thisstaff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commissidh'2porove tfie petitioner's request by adoptthg the attached resolution iriclutling the findings coritained therein: Page 6 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-* A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY'PLANNiNG COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-04885 BE GRANTED (314 SOUTH BROOKHURST STREET) 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: LOT 4 IN BLOCK B OF TRACT 13, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 9, PAGE 12, MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE SOUTHERLY 378.44 FEET. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTHERLY 195.00 FEET, MEASURED FROM THE CENTERLINE OF THE STREET ADJOINING SAID LOT 4 ON THE NORTH AS SAID STREET IS SHOWN ON SAID MAP. 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 18.66:040.030., to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.08.030.010 to wit: to establish a church and missionary training school within an existing two-story office building with waiver of the following: SECTION NO. 18.66:040.010 - Minimum number of parking spaces 137 spaces required; 67 proposed and recommended by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager) 2. That the property is developed with a two story office building and parking lot, is zoned C-G and that said zoning permits religious assembly subject to approval of a conditional use permit; and that the Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates the site for Corridor Residential land uses. 3. That the waiver will not, under the conditions imposed and based on the conclusions contained in the parking study submitted by the petitioner, cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be available for the church and other on-site activities provided the church .adheres to the assumptions contained in the parking study because the study indicates that the peak parking demand for off-street parking spaces would be accommodated by the number of available on-site spaces for the proposed church use. 4. That the waiver will not, under the conditions imposed, increase the demand and competition for parking spaces on the public streets and adjacent private properties in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the project parking lot has adequate parking to accommodate the peak parking demands of the proposed church use; that the parking lot would be physically separated from adjacent properties; and, further, there is no reason to encroach into other parking facilities because the parking lot will provide ample parking as indicated, in the parking study. Cr\PC2004-0 -1- PC2004- 5. That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, would not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for such use. 6. That the parking waiver will not, under the conditions imposed, impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the project site is physically separated from adjacent private properties. 7. 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. B. 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. 9. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. 10. That granting this conditional use permit, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 11. That "' indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. ', CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City Planning ', Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a church and missionary training school within an existing ', two-story office building with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim 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 church operations, with the exception of the administrative office, shall be limited to the following schedule, as stipulated by the petitioner in the letter of operation, dated September 9, 2004: (a) Church Services: Saturday - 9 a.m. - 2 p.m., 6 p.m. - 9 p.m. Sunday - 9 a.m. - 2 p.m. (b) Bible Study: Daily - 4 p.m. - 9 p:m. 2. That the classes related to the missionary training school'be limited to the rooms identified on Exhibit No. 3 as "Meeting Room". 3. That church activities and classes related to the missionary training school shall not occur simultaneously. 4. That this facility shall not be used as a private daycare, nursery, elementary, junior and/or senior high school. 5. That all church activity, including the use of the parking lot, shall cease by 10:00 p:m., daily -2- PC2004- 6. That no portable signs shall be utilized to advertise the church. 7. That signage shall be limited to one monument sign as shown on Exhibit No. 4 and two existing wall signs. Any additional signs shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for review and approvah Any decision by staff regarding signs may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a 'Reports and Recommendations' item. 8. That four (4) additional trees shall be planted along the east property line, adjacent to the single-family residences, for a total of 6 trees. All new trees shall be minimum 24-inch box, broad-headed, evergreen trees, spaced 20 feet on-center. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 9. 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. 10. That at no time shall there be any outdoor storage on the site: 11. That plans analyzing the existing building conditions and the codes applicable to the proposal, shall be submitted to the Building Division for review and approval to ensure compliance with such Building and Safety Code requirements (i.e., exiting requirements and occupancy loads). Said plans shall be prepared by a licensed architect and/or engineer. 12. That the on-site landscaping and irrigation system shall be maintained in compliance with City. standards. 13. That four (4) foot high address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of the building in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible to adjacent and nearby streets or properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted to the Police Department, Community Services Division, for review and approval. 14. 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. No compact parking stalls shall be permitted. 15. That the trash enclosure gates shall be replaced as determined by the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 16. That a letter from the property owner, requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 1563 (to permit on-sale beer and wine in an existing restaurant), shall be submitted to the Zoning Division. 17. That subject property shall be maintained substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 4, and as conditioned herein. 18. 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. 8, 11, 13, 14, 15 and 16 above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 (Time Limit for Amendments, Conditional Use Permits, Administrative Use Permits, Variances and Administrative Adjustments) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. -3- PC2004- 18. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 17 and 18, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. 19. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. 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: CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on September 20, 2004, 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 2004. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2004- 7mFrr n1n i n VPR]B]\ SANTA V` a: ,p Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04886 Subject Property Date: September 20, 2004 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY Q.S. No. 207 REQUEST TO PERMIT A CELLULAR TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY ON AN EXISTING EDISON LATTICE TOWER WITH ACCESSORY GROUND-MOUNTED EQUIPMENT. Southern California Edison Company Easement - No Address lass HLL YKUYtK I ItJ HKt IN I Ht (SL) (SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) ZONE 11L41 Y\V• iV Staff Report to the Planning Commissioh September 20, 2004: Item No: 10 10a.'' CEQA NEGATIVEDECLARATION (Motion) 10b. CONDITIONAL`USE PERMIT N0. 20b4-04886 (Resolution) r SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION; (1) This irregularly-shapetl 24-acre property has a frontage of 471 feet on the;south side of Santa Ana"Canyon Road, a maximum depth of 3,169 feet and is located 120 feet west of he centerline of Festival Drive`(SCE Easement - No Address). REQUEST: ? (2) The petitioner requests approval of a conditional use; permit under the authority of Code Section 18'.14.030:0402 to permit a cellular telecommunications facility on an existing Edison lattice tower with accessory ground-mounted equipment. BACKGROUNDc (3) This property is developed with multiple lattice tower`structures'on aSouthern California ...Edison. easementwitfi the remainder of the propertypeing vacant. The property is,zoned T (SC) (Transitional; Scenic Corridor Overlay). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use `Element Map designates this property for General Open Space land uses and further designates';the surrounding properties as follows: Open Space to the north (across;Santa Ana Canyon Road) and south;`Regional Commercial'to the east and Estate Density.: Residentiai to the west. PROPOSAL: (4) The petitioner proposes to construct a telecommunications facility consisting of three (3) sectors (with three (3) panel antennas per?sector) including one parabolic antenna on an existing 118-foot high. Edison transmission tower. This request also includes aground- mounted accessory equipment facility located near the tower.:`. (7) The site plan and enlarged site`plan (Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2) indicate the tower is located 'approximately 1,100 feet south from the property line along Santa Ana Canyon Road. (8) The elevation plan and photo simulations (Exhibit No. 2) indicate the antennas 4 feet in height would be placed at a maximum height 39 feet on the lattice transmission tower and the 24-inch diameter parabolic antenna wduld be placed at a'maximum height of 50 feet. Sr8773dh.doc Paget Staff Report tb the Planning Commission September 20, 2004 Item No. 10 (11) The site is located within a Natural Communities Conservation Program (NCCP) area. Any construction orgrading activities require specific precautionary measures be taken to avoid potential disturbance to the California Gnatcatcher, a federally listed endangered species, or its habitat. Staff has included conditions of, approval to ensure compliance with the `NCCP. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: a (12j The proposed project has been reviewed by affected City departments to determine whether it conforms to 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: (13j Communication facilities and antennas are permitted within the T (SC) zone subject to the approval of a donditional Use permit. (14) The petitioner's supplemental information and?search ring analysis indicate this site is intended to provide coverage on Weir Canyon: Road and for the proposed new developments in Anaheim Hills near Weir Canyon Road.: Three factors were'UtAized to determine site viability, including: (1;) Market demand; (2) system capacity requirements'for specific geographic area; and (3) the need to provide continuous coverage from one site to another in a particular geographic region. The petitioner'indicates hat this proposed facility best`satisfied the search location criteria while'minimizing the need to construct additional facilities. Additionally, this location was found to be the most reasonable for the proposed ;j facility when taking into consideration the residential nature of the area and the limited siting opportunities in non-residential areas. (14) The Planning Department continues to discourage unscreened telecommunication facilities due to the significant cumulative visual impact on the community as a whole. Staff feels that:"stealth" installations'are the best alternative to decrease visual clutter and preserve the'aesthetic quality of the community. However, due to the topography, and the limited visibility from Santa Ana Canyon and Festival' Drive, placement of the antennas on the lattice tower wduld not significantly contribute tc the visual clutter of the towers. These antennas would be painted to match the legs pf the tower, and therefore, would be less. visible and blend into the framework of the tower. Therefore, Staff recommends approval of this request.:' FINDINGS: (15) Before the Planning Commission grants any cbnditional 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 far which a conditional use permitis authorized by the Zoning Code; or is an unlisted use as definetl in Subsection .030'(Unlisted Uses Permitted)'of Sectiori 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 ifis'proposetl to be located; Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning, Commission `September 20, 2004; Item No. 10 (c} That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the: particular area or to the health and safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and. highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area;' and (e) That the granting bf the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizehs of the City of Anaheim: RECOMMENDATION: (16} Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary informatidn is received during the meeting, and basedupon the eyidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission: approve the petitioner's request and adopt the 7esolutiori including he findirigs and conditions contained herein: Page 5 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2004--* A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING GOMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-04886 BE GRANTED (SCE EASEMENT - NO ADDRESS) WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition fore 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 24 OF TRACT NO. 117, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 11, PAGE 15 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 117, SAID POINT BEING NORTH 0° 38' 53" EAST 2045.63 FEET, MEASURED ALONG SAID EAST LINE, FROM A FOUND 9 INCH BY 9 INCH POINT, REPLACING A 4 INCH BY 4 INCH STAKE SHOWN ON RECORD OF SURVEY RECORDED IN BOOL 11, PAGE 24 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 23° 16' 30" WEST 193.52 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0° 15' 49" EAST 89.55 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 24; THENCE SOUTH 89° 0T 00" EAST 73.03 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 24; THENCE NORTH 0° 38' 53: EAST 268.46 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 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 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 18.14.030.0402. 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; the antennas will be painted to match the existing tower structure and the equipment will be blended into the hillside surroundings and not visible from public view. 3. That the size and shape pf the site is adequate to allow full development of the proposal in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health and safety; and that the site contains existing Southern California Edison lattice towers which allow the opportunity for the co-location of telecommunications facilities on the existing tower without building separate facilities, thereby minimizing impacts to the surroundings. 4. That because this is an unmanned facility with infrequent maintenance, the traffic generated by the proposed use will not, under the conditions imposed, :impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. 5. That granting this conditional use permit will not, under the conditions imposed, be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim and that the use will contribute to an essential and effective wireless communications network system.. Cr\PC2004-0 -1- PC2004- 6. That `** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: . That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a cellular telecommunication facility on an existing Edison lattice tower with accessory ground-mounted equipment; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public :review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant sub}ect 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 this permit shall expire five (5) years from the date of this resolution on September 20, 2009, 2. That the telecommunications facility shall be limited to feet in height, with 3 sectors consisting of 2 panel antennas per sector with dimensions of 5'/z feet in length by 8 inches in width .and 2 inches thick flush- mounted on the existing tower; and a 24-inch diameter microwave dish at a height of 26 feet on the tower, and accessory ground-mounted equipment. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. No additional antennas or equipment cabinets shall be permitted without the approval of the Planning Commission. 3. That the antennas shall be finished and painted to match the existing lattice tower structure. If the finish or color of the lattice tower is modified, the antennas shall be modified accordingly. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 4. That the portion of the property being leased to the telecommunication provider 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. 5. That no signage, flags, banners, or any other form of advertising shall be attached to the antennas, the transmission tower structure or the accessory equipment building. 6. That the cable connecting the equipment shall be underground and shall not be visible to the public. Said ground-mounted equipment shall match in color and texture the adjacent block wall and shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 7. That all equipment, including supply cabinets and power meter shall be installed on private property and shall be screened from public view as required by the Planning Department. The developer shall obtain a Right of Way Construction Permit from the Public Works Department for any work within the public right of way, including but not limited to installation of conduit, cable and electrical service lines. 8. That grading shall conform to the requirements of Chapter 17.06 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. A grading plan approved by the City Engineer and a grading permit are required prior to any grading activities or construction of retaining walls. 9. That the operator shall ensure that its installation and choice of frequencies will not interfere with the 800 MHz radio frequencies required by the City of Anaheim to provide adequate spectrum capacity for Public Safety and related purposes. 10. That before activating its facility, the pperator shall submit to apost-installation test to confirm that the facility does not interfere with the City of Anaheim's Public Safety radio equipment. This test shall be -2- PC2004- conducted by the Communications Division of the Orange County Sheriff's Department or a Division- approved contractor at the expense of Operator. 11. That all interference complaints shall be resolved within 24 hours. 12. That the operator shall provide a "single point of contact" in its Engineering and Maintenance - Departments to ensure continuity on all interference issues. The name, telephone number, fax number and a-mail address of that person shall be provided to City's designated representative. 13. That the operator shall ensure that any of its contractors, sub-contractors or agents, or any other user of the facility, shall comply with the terms and conditions of this permit. 14. That additional landscaping in the area of the equipment shelter shall be provided and indicated on building plans submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. The on-site landscaping and irrigation plan shall include type, size and location of planting materials intended to screen the equipment enclosure. Once approved, the landscaping shall be installed within sixty (60) days and maintained in accordance with the plan and the irrigation system shall be maintained in compliance with City standards. 15. That landscaping shall be maintained and immediately replaced in the event that it becomes diseased or dies. 16. That the following notes shall be indicated on the grading and building plans and continuously complied with during all grading and construction activities: To the maximum extent practicable, no grading of CSS habitat that is occupied by nesting gnatcatchers will occur during the breeding season (February 15 through July 15). It is expressly understood that this provision and the remaining provisions of these "construction-related mitigation measures" are subject to public health and safety considerations. These considerations include unexpected slope stabilization, erosion control measure and emergency facility repairs. In the event of such public health and safety circumstances, landowners or public agencies/utilities will provide USFWS/CDFG with the maximum practicable notice (or such notice as is specified in the NCCP/HCP) to allow for capture of gnatcatchers, cactus wrens and any other CSS identified Species that are not otherwise flushed and will carry out the following measures only to the extent as practicable in the context of the public health and safety considerations. e Prior to the commencement of grading operations or other activities involving significant soil disturbance, all areas of CSS habitat to be avoided under the provisions of the NCCP/HCP, shall be identified with temporary fencing or other markers clearly visible to construction personnel. Additionally, prior to the commencement of grading operations or other activities involving disturbance of CSS, a survey will be conducted to locate gnatcatchers and cactus wrens within 100 feet of the outer extent of projected soil disturbance activities and the locations of any such species shall be clearly marked and identified on the construction/grading plans. a A monitoring biologist, acceptable to USFWS/CDFG, will be on site during any clearing of CSS. The landowner or relevant public agency/utility will advise USFWS/CDFG at least seven (7) calendar days (and preferably fourteen (14) calendar days) prior to the clearing of any habitat occupied by Identified Species to allow USFWS/CDFG to work with the monitoring biologist in connection with bird flushing/capture activities. The monitoring biologist will flush Identified Species (avian or other mobile Identified Species) from occupied habitat areas immediately prior to brush-clearing and earth- moving activities. If birds cannot be flushed, they will be captured in mist nets, if feasible, and relocated to areas of the site to be protected or to the NCCP/HCP reserve system. It will be the responsibility of the monitoring biologist to assure that Identified bird species will not be directly impacted by brush-clearing and earth-moving equipment in a manner that also allows for construction activities on a timely basis. e Following the completion of initial grading/earth movement activities, all areas of CSS habitat to be avoided by construction equipment and personnel will be marked with temporary fencing or other -3- PC2004- appropriate markers clearly visible to construction personnel. No construction access, parking or storage of equipment or materials will be permitted within such marked areas. 17. 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 marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 3, and as conditioned herein. 18. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 2, 3, 6, 7, 14, and 16, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.Og0 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 19. That prior to final building and zoning inspections., Condition No. 10, 12 and 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 Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of September 20, 2004. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Procedures' of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. ATTEST: CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on September 20, 2004, 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 2004. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2004- TTRM N!1 11 Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-04883 Subject Property Date: September 20, 2004 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: BEAGLE PROPERTIES A PARTNERSHIP Q.S. No. 103 REQUEST TO RETAIN AN EXISTING CHURCH WITHIN AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH WAIVERS OF: (A) MINIMUM SETBACK FOR INSTITUTIONAL USES ABUTTING A RESIDENTIAL ZONE BOUNDARY (B) MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES 1521 East Lincoln Avenue 1493 ~~ '^ a -''~" ~ fir' ~+~, ~ i 2~ C ~ ~'_, a '"'~. ' r y a i bb J~ (n r ,"^~ ?'r s ~G -~. -.~~ r siw 9 ~"" ~ ' ' - ~. ,. . . t . . r . ~ ~ ,.. ~ , k~ ~'; .,. tygr-~«. ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ y.~.Y ` T ~tY ~ ~ ~ 1 1 ~. Y ~ .Nh } t 4 $ ..i ~. ~~. ~~.Y~yrr ~~ r~ ~~z ~r' ~ ~~~~ ~ 1 ~~~ a~'~>~,* 1~ {fi~~ ~~ ~ ~ `~ f'7 -~J~ ~`,` e y! x.. 'fir -~ "5: ~~1 b ~ , v ,~, ry'~ ~' ~ ~~t, b~ ~ ~i~s"'s'-y~~~ zsi5' ~:c- ~s ~, ~~ s~ ~. ~u t~< ~~ ~\ I/~ ~ ¢,~ ei tf ~"a ~ P~E~~'"* ~ fir' ,.. ,"~ ,~„~ , /~g.,~ ~R L~ ~ r '1 .~~ ~.. _~w''y+' _'~~' t ~5 ~~ ~ ~q ,~y I yt n ~ ~~ r ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ r~ ~~ s~ ~ w ~~ ~~ ~,`=', ~ ~ 5 ~ '. ~ 2m "~ ~ ~ _ ~ - -~b~= ~ b~~ ~ ~~ r -~" ~ `z ~' ~ ~~ ~'~ . ~.,. -'~.r~ ~N% y O4 ~ ~ E~ ~ ~' ~~ 1 ~~~ y~ `Y W ~ Y 1 l,Llf~ ? ~ ITEM N0. 11 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004 `; tem No.11 11a.` CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION .(Motion) 11 b. ' WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT ,(Motion) _, 11c:^ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0: 2004-04883 ;(Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly-shaped 0.15-acre parcel is located at the northeast corner of Lincolri Avenue and Larch Street with frontages of :124 feet on the north side of Lincoln Avenue and 65 Peek on the east side'of Larch Street (1521. East Lincdln Avenue). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit under authority of Code Section 18.08.030.0402 to retain an existing church within ari existing single-family residence with waiver of the following: ? (a)' SECTION N0.18.40.040.040 Minimum setback for institutional Lses abutting'a'residentiafzone tibuhdarv 15 foot wide setback required] 5 feet existing adjacent to the building and 3 feet adjacent to the parking area):. (b) SECTION NO. 78.42.040:010 Minimum number of parking spaces 18 spaces required; 6 spaces;proposed and not recommended for approval by the Traffic and Transportation Manager) ':BACKGROUND: (3) This property is developed with an'existing single-family residence and is zoned OL (Office Low). The Anaheim. General Plan Land Use ElemenPMap designates the site for Lowbensity Residential land uses: s Surrounding General Plan land`use designations are Residential Low to the north ahd west; and Residential Low-Medium to he south and east. '' PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) The following zoning cases pertain to the subject property: (a)', Conditional Use Permit No. 308 (to establish a day care child nursery for six or more children) was approved by the Planning Commission on October 1; 1962. (bj Conditional Use Permit No. 547 (to establish an escrow office in an existing single,family residence) was approved by the City Council on April 21,.1964 (Plans ihdicate an'dffice use). DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (5) The petitioner is requesting approval of a conditional use permit td retain an' existing church within an existing single-family residence. Sr8774dh.doc Page 1'- Staff Report td the Planning Commission September 20 2004 Item No. 11 (6) The floot'plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates that the 1,806 square foot residence would fiave a 552 square foot religious assembly/meeting area, 308 square feef of a foyer area, 121 square feet of kitchen area, a 126 quote foot office, two bedrooms (115 and 120 square feet). and two bathrooms (48 and $6 square feet). (7)' Vehicular: access isprovided via a driveway located on Larch Street. Plans indicate a total of 8 proposed on-site parking spaces for this property. Code requires 18 spaces based the followings, Use Square ' Code Required Parking Parking Feet Spaces Re wired Meeting. Room (assembly) 552 29 spaces per 1,000 square feet :..16.0 of assembly area or 0.333space er fixed seat whichever is realer Office 126 ' 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of '0.5 ross floor area Restrooms 104 N/A N/A Garage (Indicated on plans as - 360 N/A > N/A stora e'area Kitchen 121 r .02; space/maximum capacity of kitchen area Accessory Church Uses (foyer) 308 N/A N/A Bedrooms 235 ! N/A N/A TOTAL ! 1,606' c16 Note: Codedoes not require any parking for theadcessory uses (e.g.,.fdyer)provided such areas'arenot used concurrently'. with the sanctuary. (8) No exterior modifications to the building are proposed as part of this application. A'photo of the ', existing residence is shown on the following page. '' N Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning,Commission '` Septemtie~ 20, 2004 Item No. 11 View of the residence from Larch Street':. y:~ r -., ,t ~. ., ~, , ( ~~ '. r,..,~v. fsy ~ ~ P.6 ~ ~ ~ t~ y ~ _ Staff Report to the Planning Commission `September 20, 2004 Item No. 11-' Commission that the Negative Declaration reflects the independentjudgmentof the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any.. comments received during the public reviewprocess and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study antl any comments received thatthere is no"substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ANALYSIS: (12) The proposed project has been reviewed by affected City departments to determine whether it conforms with the City's: Growth ManagemehtElemehfadopted by he City Council on March 17,::1992. Based on Citystaff review of the proposed project, it fias been determined that this project does not fit within the scope;necessaryto require a Growth Management Element analysis, therefore, no analysis has been pertormed. EVALUATION: (13) Churches are permitted within the OL zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. However, this' zone does not permits caretaker's unit. ` (14) Waiver (a) pertains to the minimumlandscape and structural setback for institutional uses abutting a residential zone boundary. Code requires a minimum structural setback and landscaping pf 15 feet for institutional uses (e:g., churches) adjaceht to residential zones and plans indicate the existing residence is setback 5 feet from the adjacent residential zone boundary irtaddition to parking spaces encroaching into this area. 'Section 18:40.040.040 states that "no' building shall be hereafter erected, structurally altered or used for a SCHOOL, CHURCH, INSTITUTION OR OTHER SILIMAR use permitted under the use'regulation of this title; unless such buildings are removed at least fifteen'(15) feet from every boundary lipe of a property." Further the code sectiort totes "that no side'yard as required in this paragraph, shall be used'for play arparking purposes". Code doeshot permitparking within the required 15-foot wide setback and. plans indicate 2 parking spaces proposetl within the setback area. Staff does notsupport the requested waiver, as a 3-foot'landscapetl setback does not provide an'adequate'tiuffer for noise impacts to the adjacent sipgle- familyesidence: Staff cannot find any special circumstances or justification'applicable to the property thatwould prevent the parking area from complying with the setback requiremeht. (15) Waiver (b) pertains to the minimum number of parking spaces. Code requires 18 parking spaces for the; church as`outlined in paragraph no. (7)`of this staff?eport. The petitioner has submitted a'parking analysis (prepared by the: applicant Calvary Apostolic Church), dated July 17;:20043, to'substantiate the requested parking waiver: The City,Traffic and Transportation Manager has'reviewed the parking analysis and has determined that the proposed on-site parking is notsufficientforthe church. Based. on the parking study, the parking supply; provided is33% of the Code-required parking for the proposed church. The: parking study also counts 80 off-site parking spaces on an adjacent property (a;Glass Shop) towards fulfilling the Code-required parking,for the church operation. Code'does not permit the ' counting of parking areas located'on an adjacent property unless that property has parking spaces in excess of the'Code Requirementfor the use(s) located on the premises. The business located on the: adjacent property (the Glass Doctor Shop). can, by right, change the days and hours of operation. At any time, depending on the levetof business activity; the adjacent business may'cnange their hours of bperatiortor the number of workers they employ to meet their company's`heeds. Because this parking area on the: adjacent property may not always be available, staff is not supportive of using this area towards fulfilling Code-required parking for the church, In order to utilize parking on a nearby property, the property may need to tie encumbered by a'parking variance, ihbluding parking study: analysis ofthe on-site'use. Such variance wouldlimit the usage on the property tb a point that may negatively affect the current and future on-site business operations. The City Traffic and Transportation Manager Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004 Item No. 11 has reviewed this study and has determined that the actual supply of 6 spaces on the property is not'adequate for the proposed church. Staff,is concerned that available parking is not adequate to meet both the short-term and long-term growth of the church and has the potential to negatively impact the adjacent residential neighborhood'with overflow parking: (1(i) Staff is not supportive of the church at this location, as the'site is too'small to accommodate the intensification of the site and would have potential negative impacts on the surrounding single family properties (parking, traffic, noise; lighting impacts). FINDINGS: ! a (17) Section 18.42.110 of the parking ordinance sets forth the following findings, which are required to be made before a parking waiver is approved by the Commission: (a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-street` parking spaces to be' provided for such use than tfie number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the: normal and reasonably foreseeaole conditions of operation of such use; and (b) :That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and 'competition for parking spaces`upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the ;'proposed use; and (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will noE increase the demand and competition far parking spaces upon adjacent; private property in the immediate vicinity'of the proposed use;'and (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within tfienff-street parking areas or lots provided for such use; and (o) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacenfproperties upon the putilic streetsiin the immediate vicinity of theproposed'use. Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed upon the granting of any waiver pursuant to this Section. by the Planning Commission or: City Council, the granting of any! such waiver shall be deemed contingent upon operation' of such use in conformance with the assumptions relating o the operation and intensity of he use as contained in the ~' parking demand study that formed he basis for approvat'of said waiver. Exceeding, violating, intensifying or otherwise deviating from any of'said assumptions as'containetl'in the parking demand study shall be deemed a`violation of he express conditions imposetl upon said waiver which shall subject said waiver to termination or modification pursuart to the provisionsbf Section18.60.200(City-Initiated Revocation or Modificationbf Permits)'. (18) Before the Planning Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all pf 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` 16.66.040; (Approval'Authority) (b) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the atljoining land uses or the growth :and development of he area in?which it is' proposed to be located; Page 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004' Item No. 11 (c) That the size and shape of ttie site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposetl use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and'safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and' improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting'df the conditional use' permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be'iietrimental"to the health and safety of the'citizens of the City`df Anaheim. RECOMMENDATION: (19) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the hearing, andbased upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and'dral and written evidence presented at the: public hearing, the Commission deny the petitioner's request by adopting the attached resolution including the'findings contained herein. (20) Should the Commission wish to approve this'. request, staff recommends that. the item be continued to the October 18, 2004 to incorporate the appropriate fihdings into a draft resolution for Commission consideration. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SUBMITTED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS ACTING AS AN INTERDEPARTMENTAL'COMMITTEEANDARE RECOMMENDED. FOR ADOPTION BYTHE PLANNING COMMISSION IN THE EVENTTHAT THIS PERMITlSAPPROVED. ' 1. That the hours of operation shall belimited toSunday services from 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m., and 6 p;m. to 7:30`p.m. and Wednesdays from 7:30 p.m. -8:30 p.m.; and office hours Monday through Fridayfrom 9 a:m. to 2 p.mS 2. That the numlaer of persons in the congregation at any one time that are driving age (sixteen (16); years of age and over) shall be limited to 10 persons. If the number of such congregates of driving age exceeds 10 members, at anyone time, tfte applicant shall then'submit a parking management;plan to tfie Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and: approval'ata noticed public hearing. 3. That no outdoor services shall be permitted.'All services shall be conducted within the building at all times. :j 4. That gates shall not be installed across any driveway in s manner which may adverselyaffect vehicular traffic in the adjacent public street. Installation cf any gates shall conform to Erigineering Standard Plan No. 475.. and shall be subject to the review andapproval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. 5. 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 and 470 pertaining to parking standards and drivewayJocations. Subject property shall r, thereupon be developedsnd maintained in conformande with said plans. 6. That no required parking area should be fenced or otherv/ise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 7. That trash barrels shall be stored out of public view. Page 7 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004 Item No. 11 8. That aBurglar/Robbery Alarm permit application, Form APD 515 shall be obtained from the Police Departmentand submitted in a complete form. 9. '; That a Fire Emergency Listing Card; Form APD-281 shall be'obtained from the Police Department and submitted in a complete form. 10. 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 Exhibits Nos. 1, 2 and;3, and asconditionetl herein. 11: That within sixty (60) days from the date of this resolution, Condition Nos. 5, 9, 1 Q'and 11 above-mentioned'shall be complied withi Extensions for further time to`complete said conditions may be granted in'accordance with' Section 18:40:040.040 and 18.42.040.010 of the Anaheim Municipal`Code. 12. That at approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed;request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim MunicipatZoning,Cbde and any otherapplicable City, State and Federal regulations: Approval does noEnclude any action o~ findings as to compliance or approval of the: request regarding any other applicable ordinance„}egulation or requirement. I Page B [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2004--** A:RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION " ` THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-04883 BE DENIED (1521 EAST LINCOLN AVENUE) 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: LOT 6 OF TRACT NO. 1426, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 47, PAGES 8 AND 9 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a putilic 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 18.66.040.030, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the petitioner proposes to retain an existing church within an existing single family residence with waivers of the following: (a) SECTION N0.18.40.040.040 (b) SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum setback for instituticnal uses abutting a residential zone boundary (15 foot wide setback required; 5 feet existing adjacent to the building and 3 feet adjacent to the parking area) Minimum number of oarkino spaces (18 spaces required; 6 spaces proposed and not recommended for approval by the Traffic and Transportation Manager) 2. That waiver (a) is hereby denied on the basis that permitting a 3 to 5-foot wide setback adjacent to the existing single family residence to the north would negatively impact the adjacent residential neighborhood due to additional traffic, lighting and noise impacts from the proposed church. 3. That waiver (b) is hereby denied due to the intensification of the site from a single family use to a church use will cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to use under the normal reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use; and 4. That the church use will increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use; and will increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the adjacent single family neighborhood property and commercial property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use; and. 5. That the church use will increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking area provided for the use; and CR\PC2004-0 -1- PC2004- 6. That the church use will impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent single family properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. 7. That the proposed church use within an existing single family residence is hereby denied because the operation would be detrimental to the health and safety of the surrounding single family neighborhood and that the proposed use is incompatible with the surrounding area and character of the residential area to the north and the commercial property to the east. 8. That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is not adequate to allow full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health and safety of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim. 9. That "* indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. cAUFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a church within an existing single family residence with waiver of minimum setback for institutional uses abutting a residential zone boundary and minimum number of parking spaces; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby deny subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, on the basis of the aforementioned findings. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of September 20, 2004. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 16,60 "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. CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) -2- PC2004- 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: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 2004. SECRETARY. ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC2004- ITEM N0. 12 0 MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2004-0087 CITY-INITIATED (PLANNING DEPARTMENT) REQUEST TO RESCIND TWO ~eueoe® ° The Platinum Triangle PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS: RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-BO Teo®®a r (A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Resolution of Intent to RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RESCIND THE RESOLUTION OF ~ ~`~ ~, the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone INTENT TO THE SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT (SE) OVERLAY ZONE) (RESOLUTION NO. PC2000-14) {MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2004-00082) , _ i `n: formerAnahaim AND RESOLUTION NO. PC2000-14 {A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO RECLASSIFY , Stadium Area CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE ANAHEIM STADIUM AREA TO THE SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT (SE) OVERLAY ZONE) (RECLASSIFICATION NO. 99-00-15). Date: September 20, 2004 Scale: Graphic ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2004-00035 CITY-INITIATED (PLANNING DEPARTMENT) REQUEST TO AMEND VARIOUS SECTIONS OF TITLE 18 (ZONING) OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE TO REPLACE REFERENCES TO THE ANAHEIM STADIUM AREA AND THE SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT (SE) OVERLAY ZONE WITH THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE AND THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE (PTMU) OVERLAY ZONE AND PROVIDE CONSISTENCY WITH THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE MASTER LAND USE PLAN. 1489 Staff Report to the Plannirg £ommissio~ .:September 20, 2004 Item No. 12' 12a. + CEQA ENVIRONMENTALIMPACT REPORT NO 330 (PREY: CERTIFIED) (Motion) 12b. - MISCELLANEOUS CASE N0. 2004-00087 (RESCISSION OF RESOLUTION NOS: PC2004-80 AND PC2000-14h (Resolution) 12a ' ' ZONING' CODE'AMENDMENT NOi 2004-00035 '! (Motion); LOCATION DESCRIPTION: (1) Subjectproperties'are located within the approximately 820 acres generally bounded by the: Santa Ana River on the east; the Anaheim City Limits on the south; fie Santa Ana Freeway: (Interstate 5) on tFie west antl the Southern California Edison Company right-of-way on the north, ! and known as the "The Platinum Triangle". PROPOSAL: (2) The requests listed below are hereafter referred to as the "Proposed Actions": (A) MIS2004-00087 City-initiated (Planning Department) request to rescind two Planning Commission resolutions (included as Attachments A and B to this staff report): (i) Resolutior No. PC2004-80 (a resolution of the Anaheim City `Planning Commission recommending that the City Council rescind :'.the resolution of intent to the Sports Entertainment'(SE) Overlay Zone) (Resolution No. PC2000-14) (Miscellaneous Case No. 2004- '00082) (ii) Resolutiorr No. PC2000-14 (a resolution of intent to reclassify certain properties within the Anaheim Stadium Area to the;Sports Entertainment (SE)'Overlay Zone) (Reclassification: No. 99-00-15) (B) ZCA2004=00035 City-initiated (Planning Department) request to amend various sections of Title 18 (Zohing) of the Anaheim Municipal; Code to Yeplace references to the Anaheim Stadium Area and the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone with The Platinum Triangle and the Platinum Triangle Mixetl Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone and provide consistency between Title 18 ahd The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (a draft ordinance is included as Attachment C) BACKGROUND: (3) On March 2, 1999, the City. Council adopted Resolution No: 99R-39 approving the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan;to provide'a plan for bffice, sports, entertainment and retail uses around a sports entertainment destination' known asrSportstown: On March 16, 1999.; the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5673 amending Title 18 to add a new chapter entitled "Zoning and Development Standards for the Sports Entertainmenf(SE) Overlay Zone" to implement the master land use plan and amend'various other chapters of Title 18 to reflect the overlay zone requirements.' On February 14, 2000, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution NorPC2000-14i establisfiing a resolution of intent to reclassify certainproperties to the SE' Overlay Zone. Ordinances finalizing he SE Overlay Zone on threeproperties were subsequently adopted in response to property owner requests:: Sr8777sk.doc .Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20; 2004 Item No. 12 (4) On May 25, 2004, the City Cpuhcil approved the citywide General Plan and Zoning Code Update ` Program and Final Environmental Impact Report and associated mitigation monitoring programs. The approved General Plan included a new vision for the area regulated by the Anaheim Stadium j Area Master Land Use Plan and SE Overlay Zone and referred to said area as "The Platinum Triangle"..This new vision included a dynamic mix of uses and upscale, high-density urban housing, integrated by a carefully planned network of pedestrian walkways, streetscape improvements and recreational'spaces inbrder to create an urban environment of a!scale never before seen in Orange County, ; In particular, the introduction of housing` in this area'was 'dramatically differenf`from the land uses envisioned by the previous General Plan land use designations, the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plah and theiSE Overlay Zone. (5) In order to' provide the implementation tools necessary to realize the City's new vision for The : Platinum Triangle, on July 12;'2004, the Planning Commission initiated applications;and proceedings to amend the Zoning Code to replace the SE Overlay Zone'with the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone; rescind Resolution tJo. PC2000-14 (a resolution of intent to the SE Overlay Zone); approve the form of The Platinum Triangle Development Agreement, rescind the resolution approving the Anaheim Staiiium Area Master Land Use Plan, approve The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and approve associated zoning .'reclassifications. (6) On Augus{9, 2004, Planning Commission considered the actions listed in Paragraph 5 and recommended thafCty Council approve all of said actions. (7) Following the August 9, 2004 Planning Commission meeting, the City Attorney's Office iietermined that because the Planning Commission had approved Resolution No. PC2000-14ti (a resolution of intent to the SE Overlay Zone), that the'Commission, not the City Council, was the "appropriate body to rescind the resolution: Therefore; the Planning Commission's Resolution No. PC2004-80, which recommended that the. City Council rescind. Resolution No. PC2000-14, was riot forwarded to the City Council for their consideration. (8) On AugusC97, 2004, City Council considered and approved the actions listed in Paragraph 5, except the. request to rescind the resolution of intent to the SE Overlay Zone. Ordinances associated;with the PTMU Overlay Zone and the approved zoning reclassifications were :subsequently adopted on August 24, 2004! (g) Following the approval of the above actions, the Planning Director initiatetl Zoning Code rAmendment No. 2004-00035,'pursuant to subsection .020 (Text Amendment) of Section (18.76.030 (Initiation) in order to7eplace references to the Anaheim Stadium Area and the SE Overlay Zone with The Platinum Triangle and the PTMU Overlay Zone and provide'consistency between Title 18 and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. ` DISCUSSION: (10) The request to rescind the two aforementioned Planning Commission resolutions (see Paragraph 2A} pertains to the resolution of intent to the SE Overlay Zonediscussed;in Paragraph 3. A resolution of intent isthe first step in the zoning reclassification'of aproperty. In order to take advantage of this reclassification, property owners must finalize he reclassification of their property to the new zone. As intlicated above, only three property owners' chose to finalize their properties o the SE Overlay Zone. As part of the associated zoning reclassifications referreii to in Paragraph 5, these three properties were reclassified from the SE Overlay Zone to zones consistent with each property's;General Plan designation and current land: use. Since the SE Overlay Zone has been replaced and superseded i~ its entirety in Title 1t3 with the PTMU Overlay Zone and, as indicated in Paragraph 7 above, the Planning Commission is the appropriate body to rescind Resolution No. PC2000-14. Staff is requesting that Planning Commissioh rescind tesolution Nos. PC2000-14 (the resolution of intenfto the SE Overlay Zone) and PC2004-60"(the Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission Septembet 20, 2004 Item No. 12 Planning Commission resolution recommending hat the City Council rescind the7esolution`of intentitd the SE Overlay2one). (11) The request to amend Title 18 referred to in Paragraph 2B is summarized below.' The summaries are cross-referenced to the Section numbers in the attached draft ordinance. The specific amendments inthe draft ordinance are shown in bold texf with deletions strask-eat and additions underlined. SECTION 1. This amendment pertains to signs in the PR (Public Recreational) Zone and replaces references to the "Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan" with "The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan" and the "SE Overlay Zone" with the "PTMU Overlay Zone" SECTION 2. This amendment corrects the date The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan was approved by City Council (the correct date is August 17, 2004; not August'16, 2004). SECTION 3. This amendment motlifies Table 20-B (Accessory Uses and Structures: The Platinum Triangle;Mixed Use (PTMU),Overlay2one) to delete a reference to Section 18.40.050 (Special Area Setbacks) under special provisions for fences'and walls:. Section 18.40.050 only applies'to property within The Platinum Triangle,that does not develop: under the' PTMU Overlay Zone provisions. SECTION 4. This amendment modifies Table'20-H (Structural Setbacks Abutting Public' Rights-df-Way, Private Streets and Alleys: The Platinum Triangle Mized Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone) to change he permitted encroachments for Ground Floor Commercial uses within the minimum setback area required along State College Boulevard from 4 feet to 8 feet consistent with The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. SECTION 5. This amendment pertains to properties located within both The Platinum Triangle and the: South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor (SABC) Overlay Zone. This section of the SABC Overlay Zone is amended to remove the reference to the!SE Overlay Zone and to require that development of the subjecfproperties'conform to`Section 18.40.050.: {Special Area Setbacks) which`sets forth setback requirementsconsistenfwith The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. SECTION 6. This amendment pertains to minimum setback requirements adjacent to the public eight-of-way for properties within The Platinum Triangle which are developed under zoning classifications other than the PTMU Overlay Zone. Minimum setback requirements havebeen adjusted to reflectthe street cross-sections in The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. In all cases the minimum setback requirement is equal to or less than the previous: minimum setback requirement. References totfie SE Overlay Zone'are changed to The.Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone. SECTION 7. This amendment modifies Table 90-A (Zone Correspondence) and indicates that the PTMU Overlay Zone replaces and: supersedes the former SE Overlay Zone, SECTION 8. This amendment deletes the definition for the Anaheim StadiumArea from Chapter 18.92 (Definitions).; The Platinum Triangle is defined in Chapter 18.20 (PTMU Overlay Zone).::! ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (12) On May 25, 2004; the Anaheim City Council certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330 ("FEIR No. 330")under Resolution Nd 2004-94 in connection with the adoption'of the citywide General Plan and'Zoning Code Update Program'and related projects and determined tfiatsaid Final Environmental Impact Report fully complies with the Califorhia Environmental Quality Act Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20; 2004 Item No, 12 i {"CEQA") and is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for Zoning Code" Amendment No. 2004-00029 arid for future discretionary actions described in Envirdnmental Impact Report No. 330, including follow-up actions. The rescission of Resolution Nos. PC2004- 80 and PC2000-00014 and adoption of Zoning Code:Amendment No.2004-00035'are such actions. (13) Staff has reviewed the Initial Study for the Proposed Actions listed in paragraph (2) of this report, a copy of which is on fife in the: Planning Department; and has determined that FEIR No. 330, previously dertified by the City Council forthe General Plan arid Zoning Code Update and related 'projects, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring. Plan No. 106. for The Platinum Triangle, are adequate to serve`as the required environmental documentation for the' Proposed Actions and satisfy all of the requirements'of CEQA; and thaYno further ehvironmental 'documentation needrbe prepared for the Proposed Actions. RECOMMENDATION: (14) Staff recommends that, unless additional dr contrary'informatidn is received during the public hearing, and based upon the evidence submitted td'the Commission, including the'evidence ' presented' in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented of the public'hearing that the Commission take the following actions: (A) By; motion, as lead agency for the'Proposed Actions, based uportits independent review of the InitiaLStudy prepared in connection with the Proposed Actions (Miscellaneous Case No, 2004-00087 and Zoning; Code Amendment Np. 2004-00035) and analysis whether the Proposed Actions may cause any additional significant effect on the environment which was not previously examined in FEIR No. 330; and associated mitigation monitoring plans, unless additional or contrary information is received during the; public hearing, find and determine, basetl upon said Initial Study and the evidence received at the public hearing, that no additional significant effectwill result from the proposal, no new mitigation measures or alternatives may be required, and'that the Proposed Actions are within the Scope of FEIR No. 330, and that he previously-certified Final EIR No. 330 and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for'The Platinum Triangle are in compliance with CEOA and the State and. City CEQAt Guidelines and are adequate to serve as the'required`environmental documentation for the Proposed Actions and satisfy'all of the requirements of CEQA; and, than no further environmental documentation need be prepared for the. Proposed Actions. `Moreoveras individual development projects and infrastructure improvementsare proposed to implement The Platinum Triangle,Master Land Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone;: Initial Studies for those projects shall be prepared in compliancewith CEQA`requirements to tletermine whether additional environmental documentation wil(need robe preparetl. (B) By resolution: (Attachment D), based on the findings contained therein, rescind the following two Planning,Commissidn Resolutions: (i) ! Resolution No. pC2004-80 (a resolution of the Anaheim City Planning Commission recommending that the City Council rescindthe resolution of intent to the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone) (Resolution No. PC2000-14) (Miscellaneous Case No: 2004-00082). (ii) Resolution No, PC2000-14 (a resolution of intent to reclassify certain properties within the Anaheim Stadium Area td the Sports Entertainment'(SE)'Overlay ' Zone) (Reclassification No. 99-00-15). (C) By'motion, recommend'that the City Councifadopt theattached draft ordinance (Attachment C) amending various sections'of the Anaheim Municipal Cdde'to replace Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission September 20, 2004 Item No: 12 references to the Anaheim Stadium Areaand the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone with The Platinum Triangle and the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone and provide oohsistehcy with The Platinum Triangle,Master Land Use Plan. x Page 5 Resolution No. PC2004-80 RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-80 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RESCIND THE RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO THE SE (SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT) OVERLAY ZONE (RESOLUTION NO. PC2000-14) (MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2004-00082). WHEREAS, on February 14, 2000, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC2000-14 amending Resolution No. PC2000-9 in its entirety, Hunt pro tunc, adopted in connection with Reclassification No. 99-0015 for real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as those certain properties located in the approximately 807 acres bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west, and the Southern California Edison Company right-of-way on :the north, and known as the "Anaheim Stadium Area" and further depicted in Attachment A to this Resolution; and WHEREAS, said Resolution provided for the exclusion of the above-described properties from the "CO" Commercial, Office and Professional Zone, "CL" Commercial, Limited Zone, "CH" Commercial, Heavy Zone, "ML" Limited Industrial Zone, "PR" Public Recreational Zone and "RS-A-43,000" Residential/Agricultural Zone, and to incorporate said described properties into the "GC(SE)" Commercial, Office and Professional- Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone, "GC(SE)" Commercial, Limited-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone, "CH(SE)" Commercial, Heavy-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone, "ML(SE): Limited Industrial-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone, "PRISE)" Public Recreational-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone and "RS-A- 43,000(SE)" Residential/Agricultural-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone; and WHEREAS, upon reclassification, each of the above properties would be subject to the land use and development standards established by Chapter 18.50 (now Chapter 18.20) "Sports Entertainment Overlay (SE) Zone" of the Anaheim Municipal Code for the underlying Development District; and WHEREAS, on May 25, 2004., the City Council of the City of Anaheim adopted Resolution No. 2004-95 approving General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00419 in conjunction with the approval of Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00029, Reclassification No. 2004-00117, Amendment No. 5 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (SPN 2004-00023), Amendment No. 2 to the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SPN 2004-00024), and other related actions; and adopted Resolution No. 2004-94 certifying Final EIR No. 330, adopting a Statement of Findings and Facts and a Statement of Overriding Considerations and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Programs (Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 122 for the General Plan and Zoning Code Update, the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085a for the Anaheim Resort Expansion Area) associated with the project ("Final EIR No. 330"); and WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00419 provided for a comprehensive citywide General Plan Update which included redesignating land uses within an approximately 820-acre area generally bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west and the Southern California Edison Company right-of-way on the north (referred to "The Platinum Triangle") from Commercial Recreation and Business Office/Mixed Use/Industrial to Mixed Use, Office High, Office Low, Industrial, Open Space and Institutional, generally corresponding to the property subject to the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan, except for approximately 15 acres adjacent to the east side of the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway, north of Katella Avenue; and WHEREAS, the recently adopted General Plan envisions The Platinum Triangle as a thriving economic center that provides residents, visitors and employees with a variety of housing, employment, shopping and entertainment opportunities that are accessed by arterial highways, transit systems and pedestrian promenades (set forth in Goal 15.1 of the Land Use Element); and WHEREAS, the recently adopted General Plan includes policies in the Land Use Element and the Community Design Element to implement the vision for The Platinum Triangle include providing for more detailed planning efforts to guide the future development of The Platinum Triangle; encouraging mixed- use projects integrating retail, office and higher density residential land uses; encouraging a regional inter- modal transportation hub in proximity to Angel Stadium of Anaheim; maximizing and capitalizing upon the CR\PC2004-080 -1- PC2004-80 view corridor from the Santa Ana (I-5) and Orange (SR-57) Freeways; maximizing views and recreation and development opportunities afforded by the area's proximity to the Santa Ana River; developing a comprehensive Mixed-Use Overlay Zane and Design Guidelines to implement the vision for The Platinum Triangle; providing for a mix of quality, high-density urban housing that is integrated into the area through carefully maintained pedestrian streets, transit connections, and arterial access; developing a Public Realm Landscape and Identity Program to enhance the visibility and sense of arrival into The Platinum Triangle through peripheral view corridors, gateways, and specialized landscaping; developing a strong pedestrian orientation throughout the area, including wide sidewalks, pedestrian paths, gathering places, ground-floor retail, and street-level landscaping; encouraging extensive office development along the highly visible periphery of the area to provide a quality employment center; developing criteria for comprehensive property management agreements for multiple-family residential projects to ensure proper maintenance as the area develops and identify and pursue opportunities for open space areas that serve the recreational needs of Platinum Triangle residents and employees; WHEREAS, the adopted General Plan establishes a maximum development intensity for The Platinum Triangle for up to 9,175 dwelling units (at an intensity of up to 100 dwelling units per acre), 5,000,000 square feet of office space, slightly over 2;000,000 square feet of commercial uses, industrial development at a maximum floor area ration of 0.50 and institutional development at a maximum floor area ratio of 3.0; and WHEREAS, on July 12, 2004, the Anaheim City Planning Commission approved a motion to initiate the following applications and proceedings: Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00032 to replace the (SE) (Sports Entertainment) Overlay Zone with the (PTMU) {Platinum Triangle Mixed Use) Overlay Zone (including rescinding Resolution No. PC2000-14, which approved the (SE) Overlay Zone); Miscellaneous Case Nos. 2004-00082, 2004-00083, 2004-00084 and 2004-00085 to replace the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan with The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (including rescinding Resolution No. 99R-39, which approved the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan) and to adopt a standard Development Agreement to apply to development within the PTMU Overlay Zone; and, Reclassification Nos. 2004-00127, 2004-00128, 2004-00129 and 2004-00130 to reclassify properties within The Platinum Triangle to the (PTMU) (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay) Zone and the O-H (High Intensity Office) and O-L (Low Intensity Office) Zones to reflect General Plan designations (the "Proposed Actions"); and WHEREAS, the City's Planning Consultant, City Staff and the City Attorney's Office have prepared a proposed replacement to Chapter 18.20, entitled "Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone", designated as Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00032, copies of which have been provided to the Anaheim City Planning Commission, including certain corrections and omissions thereto which are set forth in the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated August 9, 2004, attached as Attachment "A" to Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2004-79; and WHEREAS, the Platinum Triangle Overlay Zone will, if adopted, amend Chapter 18.20 "Sports Entertainment Overlay (SE) Zone" of the Anaheim Municipal Code, in its entirety; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on August 9, 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 state law, to hear and consider evidence for and against the Platinum Triangle Overlay Zone and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and 1. That the adopted (SE) Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone is not consistent with the Goals and Policies and vision for The Platinum Triangle set forth in the recently adopted citywide comprehensive General Plan Update (General Plan Amendment No. 2D04-00419). 2. That rescinding the resolution of intent to reclassify the above-described properties to the (SE) Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone is required in conjunction with adoption of the new Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone fpr The Platinum Triangle to implement General Plan Goals and Policies. 3. That, by Resolution No. PC2004-79, Planning Commission has recommended that the City Council amend the Zoning Code to replace the (SE) (Sports Entertainment) Overlay Zone (Ordinance No. -2- PC2004-80 5673 pertaining to Chapter 20 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) with the (PTMU) (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use) Overlay Zone. 4. That, by Resolution No. PC2004-86, Planning Commission has recommended that the City Council approve Reclassification No. 2004-00130 to reclassify certain properties described in said Resolution that have finalized to the (SE) Overlay Zone to the following Zones: I(SE) (Industrial -Sports Entertainment Overlay) to I (PTMU) (Industrial -Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay) Zone; I(SE) ((Industrial -Sports Entertainment Overlay) Zone to O-L (Low Intensity Office) Zone; and, O-L (SE) (Office Low -Sports Entertainment Overlay) Zone to O-L (Low Intensity Office) Zone to be consistent with the corresponding General Plan designations for the subject properties. 5. That 3 people spoke in opposition to the subject request; 2 people spoke with concerns but were not in opposition or in favor, and one person spoke unrelated to the subject request. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to rescind the resolution of intent to the (SE) (Sports Entertainment Overlay) Zone (Resolution No. PC2000-14) (Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00082) in conjunction with the proposed Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00032, Miscellaneous Case Nos. 2004-00084 and 2004-00085 and Reclassification Nos. 2004-00127, 2004-00128, 2004-00129 and 2004-00130; and did recommend, by motion, that the City Council, as lead agency for the Proposed Actions, based upon its independent review of the Initial Study prepared in connection with the Proposed Actions (Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00032, Miscellaneous Case Nos. 2004-00082, 2004-00083, 2004-00084 and 2004-00085 and Reclassification Nos. 2004-00127, 2004-00128, 2004-00129 and 2004-00130) and analysis whether the Proposed Actions may cause any additional significant effect on the environment which was not previously examined in FEIR No. 330, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Programs, unless additional or contrary information is received during the public hearing, find and determine, based upon said Initial Study and the evidence received at the public hearing, that no additional significant effect will result from the proposal, no new mitigation measures or alternatives may be required, .and that the Proposed Actions are within the Scope of FEIR No. 330, and that the previously-certified Final EIR No. 330 and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle are in compliance with CEQA and the State and City CEQA Guidelines and are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the Proposed Actions, including the subject proposal, and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA; that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for the Proposed Actions. Moreover, as individual development projects and infrastructure improvements are proposed to implement The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, the PTMU Overlay Zone and the O-H and O-L Zones, Initial Studies for those projects shall be prepared in compliance with CEQA requirements to determine whether additional environmental documentation will need to be prepared. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Resolution No. PC2000-14 approving a resolution of intent to the (SE) (Sports Entertainment Overlay) Zone be rescinded. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of August 9, 2004. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures", "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 ELEANOR MORRIS( SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) -3- PC2004-80 I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on August 9, 2004, by the following vote of the members thereof: - -°- AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BUFFA, EASTMAN, FLORES, O'CONNELL, ROMERO, VELASOUEZ NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VANDERBILT-LINARES IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 2004. (ORIGINAL SIGNED BY ELEANOR MORRIS) SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2004-80 ATTACHMENT A -5- PC2004-80 Figure 1 i ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2004.00032 AMEND THE ZONING CODE TO REPLACE THE (SE) (SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT OVERLAY) ZONE (ORDINANCE NO. 5673 PERTAINING TO CHAPTER 20 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE) WITH THE (PTMU) (PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE OVERLAY) ZONE. MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2004-00065 APPROVE AS TO THE FORM OF THE STANDARD PLATINUM TRIANGLE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2004-00082 :+~. >: RESCIND THE RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO THE (SE) (SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT OVERLAY) 'ZONE (RESOLUTION NO. PC2000-14). noomoo e o The Platinum Triangle 4 oo omm8 Date: August 9, 2004 Scale: Graphic 1409a ~esoiut~o~, ~o. ~c2ooo-1~ RESOLUTION NO. PC2000-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. PC2000-9 IN ITS ENTIRETY, NUNC PRO TUNC, , . ADOPTED IN CONNECTION WITH RECLASSIFICATION NO. 99-00-15 WHEREAS, the Anaheim City 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 those certain properties located in the approximately 807 acres bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west, and the Southern California Edison Company right-of-way on the north, and known as the "Anaheim Stadium Area"; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on January 19, 2000 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 reclassification 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 determinelhe following facts: 1. That this is acity-initiated proposal to establish a resolution of intent to reclassify certain properties within the approximately 807-acre Anaheim Stadium Area to the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone; and that said properties are currently located in the following zones: "CO" Commercial, Office and Professional, "'CL" Commercial, Limited, "CH" Commercial, Heavy, "ML" Limited Industrial, "PR" Public Recreational and "RS-A-43,000" Residential/Agricultural 2. That each of these properties is located in one of the following Development Districts: Arrowhead Pond District, Gateway District, Gene Autry District, Katella Corridor District and Sportstown District, as described in the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan which was adopted by the Anaheim City Council and is on file with the Planning Department. 3. That each of these properties will, upon reclassification, be subject to the land use and development standards established by Chapter 18.50 "Sports Entertainment Overlay (SE) Zone" of the Anaheim Municipal Code for the underlying Development District. 4. That the Anaheim General Plan designates subject properties for Business OfficelMixed Use/Industrial land uses and for Commercial Recreation land uses; and that this resolution of intent to reclassity such properties to the Sports Entertainment Overlay (SE) Zone is consistent with the General Plan designations for the area and with the Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan adopted by the City Council 5. That ordinances to rezone specific parcels to the Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone will not be adopted until the underlying property owners request finalization of said zoning, as conditioned herein and specified in Section 18.50.040 "Implemeritation" of Chapter 18.50 "Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone." 6. That the proposed reclassification of subject properties is necessary and/or desirable for the orderly and proper development of the Anaheim Stadium Area and the community. 7. That the proposed reclassification of subject properties does properly relate to the zones and their permitted uses locally established in close proximity to subject properties and to the zones and their permitted uses generally established throughout the community. CR3666as.doc -1- PC2000-14 8. That one concerned person spoke at the public hearing; 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 establish a resolution of intent to reclassify certain properties from the "CO" Commercial, Office and Professional, "CL" Commercial, Limited, "CH" Commercial, Heavy, "ML" Limited Industrial, "PR" Public Recreational and "RS-A-43,000" Residential/Agricultural zones to the Sports Entertainment "(SE)" Overlay Zone on those certain properties located in the 807-acre area bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west and the Southern California Edison Company right-of-way on the north, and further identified as the Anaheim Stadium Area; and does hereby determine that the previously certified Environmental Impact Report No. 321 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the subject request. NOW, THEREFORE, BE tT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby approve the subject Petition for Reclassification to exclude the above-described properties from the "CO" Commercial, Office and Professional Zone, "CL" Commercial, Limited Zone, "CH" Commercial, Heavy Zone, "ML" Limited Lndustrial Zone, "PR" Public Recreational Zone and "RS-A- 43;OD0" Residential/Agricultural Zone, and to incorporate said described properties into the "CO(SE)" Commercial, Office and Professional-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone, "GC(SE)" Commercial, Limited- Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone, "CH(SE)" Commercial, Heavy-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone, "ML(SE)" Limited Industrial-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone, "PRISE)" Public Recreational-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone and "RS-A-43,000(SE)" Residential/Agricultural-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone, upon the following condition which is hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of subject properties in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the Ctty of Anaheim: That prior to introduction of an ordinance to reclassify any parcel or parcels located in a Development District (other than Existing District), as defined in Chapter 18.50 "Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone" of the Anaheim Municipal Code, the following shall be submitted to the Planning Department in accordance with Section 18.50.040 "Implementation" of Chapter 18.50: (a) Letter from the property owner (or property owners where applicable) or the property owner's authorized agent requesting reclassification to the (SE) Overlay Zone. (b) Current title report or preliminary title report showing the legal vesting of title and con#aining a legal description of the property. (c) Map of the property (including scale and dimensions). (d) Filing fee in an amount as specified by resolution of the Anaheim City Council. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicants' compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth... Should any such 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 Wulf 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- PC2000-14 THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of February 14, 2000. (Original signed by Phyllis R. Boydstunl CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: (Original signed by Margarita Solorio) SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Margarita Solorio, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on February 14, 2000, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ARNOLD, BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, KOOS, NAPOLES, VANDERBILT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 2000, (Original signed by Margarita Solorio.) SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 3- PC2000-14 Draft ®rdinance ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE - WHEREAS, on May 25, 2004, the City Council of the City of Anaheim adopted Resolution No. 2004-95 approving General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00419 in conjunction with the approval of Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00029, Reclassification No. 2004-00117, Amendment No. 5 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (SPN 2004-00023), Amendment No. 2 to the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SPN 2004-00024), and other related actions; and in conjunction therewith adopted Resolution No. 2004-94 certifying Final EIR No. 330, adopting a Statement of Findings and Facts and a Statement of Overriding Considerations and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Programs (Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 122 for the General Plan and Zoning Code Update, the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085a for the Anaheim Resort Expansion Area) associated with the project ("Final EIR No. 330"); and WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00419 provided for a comprehensive citywide General Plan Update which included redesignating land uses within an approximately 820-acre area generally bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west and the Southern California Edison Company right-of--way on the north (referred to "The Platinum Triangle") from Commercial Recreation and Business Office/Mixed Use/Industrial to Mixed Use, Office High, Office Low, Industrial, Open Space and Institutional, generally corresponding to the property subject to the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan, except for approximately 15 acres adjacent to the east side. of the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway, north of Katella Avenue; and WHEREAS, the recently adopted General Plan envisions The Platinum Triangle as a thriving economic center that provides residents, visitors and employees with a variety of housing, employment, shopping and entertainment opportunities that are accessed by arterial highways, transit systems and pedestrian promenades (as set forth in Goal 15.1 of the Land Use Element); and WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004, the City Council of the Ciry of Anaheim adopted Resolution No. 2004-178 approving The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use. Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00084) as an implementation tool to realize the City's vision for The Platinum Triangle in conjunction with the approval of Zoning Code. Amendment No. 2004-00032, the form of The Platinum Triangle Standazd Development Agreement (Miscellaneous Case No, 2004-00085), rescission of the Anaheim Stadium Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00083) and associated Zoning Reclassifications (Reclassification Nos. 2004-00127 through 2004-00130); and WHEREAS, on August 24, 2004, the City Council of the City of Anaheim adopted Ordinance No. 5935, pertaining to Zoning Code Amendment No.2004-00032, which replaced Chapter 20 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (formerly the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone) in its entirety with the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone, and Ordinance Nos. 5936 and 5937 pertaining to associated Zoning Reclassification Nos. 2004-00129 and 2004-00130; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 18.76 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, provisions of Title 18 may be amended to enhance and preserve the general welfaze when adopted by an ordinance of the City Council in the manner prescribed bylaw; and WHEREAS, pursuant to subsection .020 of Section 18.76.030 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, the Planning Director did initiate an amendment to Title 18 for the purpose of replacing references to the Anaheim Stadium Area and the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone with The Platinum Triangle and The Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone and to provide consistency between Title 18 and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission, having reviewed the text amendments initiated by the Planning Director, and having considered the evidence submitted in the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated September 20, 2004 pertaining to the text amendments, did recommend, by motion, that the City Council approve Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00035; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), on September 20, 2004, the City Planning Commission, as lead agency for Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00087 (the Rescission of Resolution Nos. PC2004-80 and PC2000-14) and Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00035 (the "Proposed Actions"), based upon its independent review of the Initial Study prepazed in connection with the Proposed Actions, and analysis whether the Proposed Actions may cause any additional significant effect on the environment which was not previously examined in Final EIR No. 330, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Programs, did find and determine, based upon said Initial Study and the evidence received at the public hearing, that no additional significant effect will result from the proposal, no new mitigation measures or alternatives aze required, and that the Proposed Action is within the Scope of Final EIR No. 330, and that the previously-certified Final EIR No. 330 and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle aze in compliance with CEQA and the State and City CEQA Guidelines and aze adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the Proposed Actions, including the subject proposal, and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA; that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for the Proposed Actions. Moreover, as individual development projects and infrastmcture improvements aze proposed to implement The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, the PTMU Overlay Zone and the 0-H and O-L Zones, Initial Studies for those projects shall be prepared in compliance with CEQA requirements to determine whether additional environmental documentation will need to be prepazed. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes recommendations to the City Council regarding Zoning Code Amendments; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipa] Code to further implement the General Plan and to enhance and preserve the ` general welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1 That subsection 1$.14.030.120 of Section .030 of Chapter 14 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: .120 Additional Provisions for Accessory Uses in "PR" Zone. The provisions of this section apply in addition to the provisions in Table 14-B above. The following accessory uses may be conducted only where incidental to and integrated within a primary use complex: .1201 Concession stands, restaurants and shops; 1202 Athletic equipment shops; 1203 Specialty and souvenir shops; .1204 Such other compatible uses as may be permitted from time to time by the City Council. .1205 Signs; provided however, that any sign owned, operated or maintained by an entity other than the City of Anaheim shall be permitted only if a conditional use permit for such sign is first approved pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 18.66 (Conditional Use Permits). Notwithstanding the foregoing, within the area subject to Area Development Plan No. 120, signs shall be as approved by the City Council, provided the City Council fmds such sign(s) to be{a-) compatible with the other uses and signs in Sportstown Anaheim and'"` ~~ •~~~r,,...,,°~°~ •- ~~'~ ~"'• 1•,.l~D,l;v~ a ,.., ~,,. c,...«" :...7,,. A....1,..:,,, c..,,l:...,. A _,... The Platinum Trianele Master Land Use Plan, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the Citv Clerk. .,:1.,1,7,.:,, t1.., DL,., .,:..,. T,..,.. _......., h. u~`6r., 71.,.. ~,..,.» a 1~INirS; arm .B~ Tlic C~ t ~ 71' t ~ 1 '{,,,,1 C.,,.ti,.,. ~ uT:..t..',.t .. ri~o~~:rcoir'n m."~sr-7crbcici-iocn-ii~TSCCr+.~x. :.-marricc .03 Ta,.. • l,.r..,,... 7•„_ uc:...,..~r •., )1. ,, ~.n,,..•,,,, ~-. ',l,.r_,,.. e.._ [.IC b [¢rliiic.T2~~aT~L'TR~DC b i~Q'QVivc-fil2cT[OT tl}f-~p3. w .....e . ............... v...a 7.. ..ff /A„ ., d: A ,.4 s"„ C4.,A: A.. SECTION ~ That Section 18.20.020 of Chapter 20 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, .and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 1$.20.020 APPLICABILITY. .010 The Platinum Triangle comprises approximately eight hundred twenty (820) acres generally bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west, and the Southern California Edison Company Easement on the north. The PTMU Overlay Zone covers an area consisting of approximately three hundred and seventy-five (375) acres within The Platinum Triangle, as depicted in Figure 3 (General Plan Designations) of The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan approved by the City Council on August 167, 2004, and on file in the Office of the City Clerk, said Figure 3 is incorporated herein by this reference. .020 Applicable Regulations. The provisions of this chapter shall supersede the corresponding regulations of the underlying zones, except as provided below. .030 Option to Use Underlying Zone. The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to pazcels that have been or are proposed to be developed entirely under the underlying zone, provided that all requirements of the underlying zone aze met by the project except as specifically approved otherwise by variance or other official action by the City. SECTION 3 That Table 20-B of Chapter 20 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: Table 20-B P Permitted by Right ACCESSORY USES AND STR UCTURES: C Conditional Use Permit Required THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE N Prohibited MIXED USE (PTMU) OVERLAY ZONE GF Ground Floor Commercial PTMU GF Special Provisions Amusement Devices P Subject to Chapter 4.14 (Amusement devices) Animal Keeping P Subject to Section 18.38.030 (Animal keeping) Antennas-Private Transmitting P Subject to Section 18.38.040 (Antennas -private transmitting) Antennas-Receiving P Subject to Section 18.38.050 (Antennas-receiving) Caretaker Units C Subject to Section 18.38..090 (Caretaker units) Day Care-Large Family C Subject to Section 18.38.140 (Large family day care homes) Day Care-Small Family P Fences & Walls P &^~'°~;-taS.°^~t,°s: 1 Own "`:".~pcz•is:-r.;e:::ethuehs)-LThis use may occur on a lot with or without a primary use Home Occupations P Subject to Section 18.38.130 (I-tome occupations) Landscaping & Gardens P Subject to Chapter 18.46 (Landscaping and screening) Mechanical Utility and Equipment- P Subject to Section 18.38.160 (Mechanical and utility equipment- Ground Mounted ground mounted) Mechanical Utility and Equipment - P Subject to Section 18.38.170 (Mechanical and utility equipment- RoofMounted roof mounted) and Section 18.20.150 (Design standards) of this chapter Murals P/C Permitted when not visible from right-of--way or adjacent properties. Conditional use where visible from any public right-of--way or adjacent properties. Parking Lots & Garages Portable Food Carts Recreation Buildings & Structures Signs Solar Energy Panels Vending Machines P C P GF P Subject to Chapter 18.44 (Signs) and section 18.20,160 (Signs) of this chapter P Must be mounted on the roof and, if visible From the street level, must be parallel to the roof plane P Shall be screened from view from public rights-of--way and shall not encroach onto sidewalks SECTION 4 That Table 20-H of Chapter 20 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal -- - -- Code be, and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: Table 20-H STRUCTURAL SETBACKS ABUTTING PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY, PRIVATE STREETS AND ALLEYS: THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE (PTMU) OVERLAY ZONE Permitted Street Minimum Setback Encroachments Required Landscape Katella 18 feet Patios: 8 feet =The area between residential patios and the Avenue sidewalk/walkway (see below) shall be fully Residential landscaped buildings: 3 feet* =Adjacent to ground floor commercial uses, up to 80% of the setback area may be paved Ground floor = A date palm matching the date palm in the public commercial: 4 feet right-of--way in spacing and height shall be installed 5 feet from the right-of--way as indicated on the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan State =South of Gene Autry Way : 13 feet Patios: 8 feet ° The area between residential patios and the College =North of Gene Autry Way to railroad sidewalk/walkway (see below) shall be fully Boulevard grade separation: 16 feet Residential landscaped m North of railroad grade separation: buildings: 3 feet* o Adjacent to ground floor commercial uses, up to 80%' 20 feet Ground floor of the setback area may be paved A 2.5' walkway shall be provided adjacent to ROW, ' commercial: 48 scored to match adjacent sidewalk and an easement feet provided to the City, north of Gene Autry Way to the . railroad grade separation Gene Autry 12 feet Patios: 5 feet ~ The area between residential patios and the Way sidewalk/walkway (see below) shall be fully Residential landscaped buildings: 3 feet* Adjacem to ground floor commercial uses, up to 80%'_ of the setback area may be paved Ground floor o A 2,5' walkway shall be provided adjacent to ROW, ' commercial: 5 feet scored to match adjacent sidewalk and an easement provided to the City * Residential buildings may encroach into the street setback area for no more than 30% of the length ofthe street elevation. Table 20-H (Continued) STRUCTURAL SETBACKS ABUTTING PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY, PRIVATE STREETS AND ALLEYS: THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE (PTMU) OVERLAY ZONE Permitted ;et Minimum Setback Encroachments Required Landscape ngewood West of State College Blvd: 12 feet Patios: 8 feet • The area between residential patios and the :nue sidewalk/walkway (see below) shall be fully Easrof State College Blvd: I5 feet Residential buildings: 3 feet* Ground floor commercial: 8 feet landscaped • Adjacent to ground Floor commercial uses, up to 80% of the setback area may be paved • A 2.5' walkway shall be provided adjacent to ROW, scored to match adjacent sidewalk and an easement provided to the City, east of State College Blvd. glass 14 feet Patios: 8 feet • The area between residential patios and the sidewalk ~d shall be fully landscaped Residential • Adjacent to ground floor commercial uses, up to 80% buildings: 3 feet* of the setback area may be paved Ground floor commercial: 3 feet Iroad 10 feet None • Setback area shall be fully landscaped W rket ] 0 feet Ground floor • A maximum 30% of setback area may be landscaped :et commercial: 4 feet nnector 10 feet Patios: 7 feet • The area between residential patios and the sidewalk eets/ shall be fully landscaped fight Residential • Adjacent to ground floor commercial uses, up to 80% cle/ buildings: 3 feet* of the setback area may be paved vote Ground floor eets commercial: 3 feet eys 10 feet Patios: 2 feet • A minimum 4-Foot-wide pedestrian walkway shall be provided parallel to the alley. Residential buildings: 2 feet* Ground floor commercial: 2 feet :eways 25 feet None • Setback area shall be fully landscaped SECTION 5 That subsection 18.24.030.020 of Section .030 of Chapter 24 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: .020 Exceptions. With the exception of the requirements specified below, the regulations of this chapter shall not apply to parcels being developed entirely in compliance with the development standards of the underlying zone and where an ordinance has not been adopted to reclassify property into the (SABC) Overlay Zone, provided that: .0201 All requirements of the underlying zone are being met by the project, except as specifically approved otherwise in conjunction with a conditional use permit, variance or administrative adjustment permitted pursuant to Chapter 18:66 (Conditional Use Permits), Chapter 18.74 (Variances), and Chapter 18.62 (Administrative Reviews). .0202 Off=premise sale of alcohol is prohibited in the (SABC) Overlay Zone except (i) as an accessory use to a hotel or (ii) markets or grocery stores having an interior building floor area of greater than thirty thousand (30,000) square feet. .0203 Except as provided in subsection 18.40.060.080 (Automatic Exemptions) of Chapter 18.40 (General Development Standards), where a building permit is sought for any development project in the SABC Overlay Zone, landscaping shown on the South Anaheim Boulevard Master Plan of Landscaping ("The "Master Plan") as approved by the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency on August 29, 2000, shall be planted in the size and at the spacing described in the Master Plan. Landscaping plans shall be submitted to the Planning Director and the Executive Director of Community Development for a determination that the proposed plan is consistent with the Master Plan. The Planning Commission may grant vaziances from the requirements of the Master Plan pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 18.74 (Variances). .0204 Any signs or billboazds installed or erected shall comply with the provisions of Section 18.24.120 (Sign Standazds), except as that the following shall be applicable to business signs permitted within commercial or industrial zones: .O1 Properties located south of Ball Road. Freestanding signs up to twenty five (25) feet in height in conformance with Section 18.44.080 (Freestanding and Monument Signs- General) shall be permitted subject to the approval of a conditional use permit pursuant to Chapter 18.66 (Conditional Use Permits). .02 Properties located north of Ball Road. Signage shall be limited to freestanding or monument type signs in conformance with Section 18.44.100 (Freeway-Oriented On-Site Signs). .0205 All applications submitted for projects that lie within the (SABC) Overlay Zone area and that also lie within the boundazies of the Commercial/ Industrial Redevelopment Project Area shall be forwazded to the Community Development Department for review. The Executive Director of Community Development shall review each application, meet and consult with the applicant with respect to the neighborhood compatibility and design features of the proposed project, °"' and propose changes where necessary to promote high quality urban design. The Executive Director of Community Development shall propose, the Planning Commission shall review, and the Redevelopment Agency shall adopt design guidelines to assist in the review of applications. .0206 Properties located east of the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) and south of the Southern California Edison transmission line right-of--way shall comply with the fellc~wind standazds set forth in Section 18.0.050 (Special Area Setbacks) C--kapte+ ._ _ i•, -ve IUIU 1f y .0207 Properties within the Anaheim Colony, which is defined as the azea bounded by North Street, East Street, South Street, and West Street, shall be subject to The Anaheim Colony Vision, Principles and Design Guidelines. SECTION 6 That Section 18.40.050 of Chapter 40 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 173.40.050 SPECIAL AREA SETBACKS. .O10 Minimum Setbacl: Requirements Every building, building site, addition equal to twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the gross area of an existing building or building site fronting on the following streets, shall have an open setback area extending for the full width of the property. This setback shall be parallel to the centerline of the street and shall be measured from the planned highway right-of--way line as designated on the circulation element of the General Plan and shall be of such depth as indicated in Table 40-A (Special Area Setbacks) below. Table 40-A Streets Anaheim Way Cerritos Avenue west from Douglass Road to the Southern Califomia Edison Company easement Douglass Road south from Cerritos Avenue to Katella Avenue Gene Autry Way west from State College Boulevard to the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) Howell Avenue west from Katella Avenue to State College Boulevard Katella Avenue west from the east city limits to the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) Lewis Street south from the Southern California Edison Company easement to Anaheim Way Orangewood Avenue west from the east city limits to the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) State College Boulevard south from the Southem California Edison Company easement to the south C7ty limits Minimum Setbacks 20 20 2912 ?912 20 ?918 20 ?812 feet (west of State Colle a BIvd1 IS feet (east of State College Blvd) ~eryt-as-pr-evided-He4ew T/ feet Wwhere the underlying zone is "PR" Public Recreation?,-the ~r~+nentun:~etE>ne1:-sl~al! `^ ,-~- ;;-:~R l3 feet (south of Cene Antrv Wav) 16 feet (north of Gene Autrv Wav to [he Railroad Grade Senuration) 20 Ceet Inorth ofthe Railroad Grade Sena ration)~xeept-es-pr-evidet} below 15 feet '~rvhere the underlying zone is "PR" Public Recreation, ttre-minFnwn} Orange Freeway (State Route 57) south from the Southern 25 California Edison Company easement to the south City limits, including any freeway transition road and on-ramp or off-ramp ` .020 Landscaping of Setback Areas. Required landscaping shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 18.46 (Landscaping) and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use flan. For properties within the boundaries of the Platinum Trian~lc Mixed Use (PTMLII Overlay Zone, all required structural setbacks and yards adjacent to public streets and arterial highways shall be landscaped and permanently maintained with lawn, ground cover, shrubs and trees as specified in Suhseetieat ru ~r~rn~~ ~c~tti,,,,~- r ..,.a ........:..... ..v Chapter 18.20 (c..,...... r.,.,.....,:....,,..,« PTMLI Overlay Zone)-trn~--as3Pe..:`'^a :^ 'ti^ "n~..,.. n.~,..«..~, ....arozlt: n~ri==n r~..:.~,.r...,... r,... a.,, c..,...«.. r, ... .......:.......... rcr. ~ n..,,..~,... ~,...,. .030 Permitted Encroachments into Setback Areas. Permitted encroachments into setback areas shall be the same as in the underlying zone. SECTION 7 That Table 90-A of Chapter 90 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: Table 90-A ZONE CORRESPONDENCE Single-Family Residential Zones Current FormerZonin Code RH-1 Sin le-Famil Hillside, Residential RS-HS-43,000 Residential, Sin le-Famil Hillside RH-2 Sin le-Famil Hillside, Residential RS-HS-22,000 Residential, Sin le-Famil Hillside RH-3 Sin le-Famil Hillside, Residential RS-HS-]0,000 Residential, Sin le-Famil Hillside RS-1 Sin le-Famil ,Residential RS-10,000 Residential, Sin le-Famil RS-2 Sin le-Famil ,Residential RS-7200 Residential, Sin le-Famil RS-3 Sin le-Famil ,Residential RS-5000 Residential, Sin le-Famil RS-4 Sin le-Family, Residential No Corres ondin Former Zone Multiple-Family Residential Zones Current Former Zonin Code RM-1 Multi le- Fami] ,Residential No Corres ondin Former Zone RM-2 Multi le- Famil ,Residential RM-3000 Residential, Multi le-Famil RM-3 Multi le- Famil ,Residential RM-2400 Residential, Multi le-Famil RM-4 Multi le- Famil ,Residential RM-1200 Residential, Multi le-Famil RM-4 Multi le-Family, Residential RM-1000 Residential, Multi le-Family Commercial Zones Current FormerZonin Code CG General Commercial CL Commercial, Limited Former Zone Inco orated into CG Zone CG Commercial, General Former Zone Inco orated into CG Zone CH Commercial, Hea Former Zone Inco orated into CG Zone CL-HS Commercial, Limited -Hillside C-NC Nei hborhood Center Commercial No Corres ondin Former Zone Table 90-A ZONE CORRESPONDENCE Former Zone Incomorated into I Zone I MH I Heavv Inducrrial Public and Special Purpose Current FormerZonin Code OS O en S ace OS O en S ace PR Public Recreational PR Public Recreational SP Semi-Public No Corres ondin Former Zone T Transition RS-A-43,000 Residential/Agricultural Parkins:/Commercial and Parkins/Industrial Zones Current FormerZonin Code RM-3 Multiple-Family, Residential PD-C/RM- Parking District- 2400 Commercial/Multiple-Family Residential T Transition PD-C Parkin District-Commercial No Replacement Zone for Former Zone PLD-M Parking/Landscape District - Manufacturing Overlay Zones Current Former Zonin Code (SEA PTM U Sport'rCvrfier-ta+r;r~,".-o:~r•Iaf Platinum Triansle Mixed Use (SE) Sports Entertainment Overlay Ovcrl:rv (BCC) Brookhurst Commercial Corridor Overla (BCC) Brookhurst Commercial Corridor Overla (SABC) South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor Overla (SABC) South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor Overla (O) Oil Production Overla (O) Oil Production Overla (SC) Scenic Corridor Overla (SC) Scenic Corridor Overla (FP) Flood lain Overla (FP) Flood lain Overla (MHP Mobile Home Park Overla MHP Mobilehome Park Overla (DMU) Downtown Mixed-Use Overla (DMU) Downtown Mixed-Use Overla (Mll) Mixed Use Overlay No Corres onding Former Zone Specific Plan Zones The names of the specific plan zones did not chans;e -the chapter numbers chanced as indicated Cha ter Number Title Current Former S ecific Plan No. 87-1 (The Hi hlands 18.100 18.70 S ecific Plan No. 88-1 S camore Can on) 78.102 18.71 S ecific Plan No. 88-2 (Summit) 18.104 18.72 5 ecific Plan No. 88-3 (PacifiCenter) 18.106 18.73 S ecific Plan No. 90-1 (Festival) 18.108 18.74 S ecific Plan No. 90-2 East Center Street Develo ment) 18.110 18.75 S ecific Plan No. 90-4 (Mountain Park 18.112 18.76 S ecific Plan No. 90-3 (C ress Can on Rescinded 18.77 S ecific Plan No. 92-I (Disne land Resort) 18.114 18.78 S ecific Plan No. 92-2 Anaheim Resort 18.116 18.48 S ecific Plan No. 93-I (Hotel Circle) 18.118 18.79 Current I FormerZonirr2Code Table 90-A ZONE CORRESPONDENCE Specific Plan No. 94-1 (Northeast Area) 18.120 18.1 lp SECTION 8 That Section 18.92.040 of Chapter 92 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby amended to delete the definition of "Anaheim Stadium Area" to read as follows: "Accessory." A structure, building, or a use which is subordinate to, and incidental to, that of the main building or use which shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the main building or use. "Accessory Living Quarters." See Chapter 18.36 (Types of Uses). "Acres, Gross." The overall acreage of an azea within the boundazies of a legal parcel which includes all roads, except arterial highways as measured at their ultimate right-of--way width. "Acres, Net." The overall acreage of an azea excluding public and private streets and alleys. "Alcohol, Off-sale." The sale of alcoholic beverages to consumers for consumption off the premises where sold, in accordance with a valid off=sale license issued by the State of California. "Alcohol, On-sale." The sale of alcoholic beverages to consumers for consumption on the premises where sold, in accordance with a valid on-sale license issued by the State of California." "Alley." A public vehicle right-of--way providing a secondary means of access to abutting property. "Amusement Device." Any game, exhibition, shuffleboazd game, or amusement or recreational device, or any mechanical or electronic amusement device or machine which, upon the insertion of a bill, coin, slug or token in any slot or receptacle attached to such device or machine or connected therewith, operates or which may be operated for use as a game, contest or amusement, with the exception of machines for the dispensing of music. "Amusement Device Arcade." Any premises containing five (5) or more amusement devices, or any premises wherein not less than twenty-five percent (25%) of the public floor area is devoted to amusement devices, whether or not said devices constitute the primary use or an accessory use of the premises. "Anaheim Colony Historic District." A district of the City of Anaheim established by City Council Resolution No. 97R-194, which is bounded by North Street, West Street, South Street, and East Street. "Anaheim Stti~Iiutrt-Area." 'Fkc~:nri~e~im~tad;m:.-~:-ea-trteans-tl~ .«,.~.. any . ,.s s6., rms.. r.,.....,~„a ti. so.,, c.....,. ~..., o:.,,... ,... ~r.,, .~.j.j.: ::. ::...~.~ .,.,, a~=.-s:.c~.r~nna-ci.c-c,vu11... !',I:e.. r,J• r ~a t ~ , ~7.....`t...7 ., •• trvvirciri-icier p-iah.,l.,.l nC.,., ..t. i.`.. a....a..:., a!1 1 a , ,_.,._.... ~l .~ _ - - Il'.~m~-a~_«ta 11 ~r~G~'~PfifulZn~:aT.,..t 71.,......:.. ~ P .1. A 1. C 7' A ^~If1F*P^ 1 . ...1 R1.. DI 't 1. I 1 l 4'1 1. s ~I~iiiriziarb-ncp~A-I'ti}1@j7~ ' "Annexation." The addition of a land area to an existing city or special district with a resulting change in the boundaries of the annexing jurisdiction. "Apartment." One (1) or more rooms in amultiple-family dwelling, occupied or suitable for occupancy as a residence for one (1) family. "Apartment Building." A building or cluster of buildings containing multiple- family dwelling units in which the dwelling units aze intended to be rented or leased to the occupants. "Arterial Highway." A roadway used primarily for through traffic that is designated by one of the following terms on the Planned Roadway Network map in the General Plan: Scenic Expressway, Resort Smart .Street, Stadium Smart Street, , Major Arterial, Primary Arterial, Hillside Primary Arterial, Secondary Arterial, Hillside Secondary Arterial, Collector Street and Hillside Collector Street., , "Automobile Wrecking," The dismantling or wrecking of used motor vehicles, trailers or similaz vehicles. "Awning." A roof-like structure that projects from the wall of a building for the purpose of shielding a doorway or window from the elements and may or may not be capable of being retracted into the face of the building. SECTION 9 SEVERABILITY The City Council of the City of Anaheim hereby declares that should any section, pazagraph, sentence or word of this ordinance of the Code, hereby adopted, be declared for any reason to be invalid, it is the intent of the Council that it would have passed all other portions of this ordinance independent of the elimination herefrom of any such portion as may be declared invalid., SECTION 10 SAVINGS CLAUSE Neither the adoption of this ordinance nor the repeal of any other ordinances of this City shall in any manner affect the prosecution for violations of ordinances, which violations were committed prior to the effective date hereof, nor be construed as a waiver of any license or penalty or the penal provisions applicable to any violations thereof. The provisions of this ordinance, insofaz as they aze substantially the same as ordinance provisions previously adopted by the City relating to the same subject matter, shall be construed as restatements and continuations, and not as new enactments. SECTION 11 PENALTY It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to violate any provision or to fail to comply with any of the requirements of this ordinance. Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of this ordinance or failing to comply., with any of its requirements shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not exceeding One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or by imprisonment not exceeding six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each such person, firm or corporation shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each day during any portion of which any violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance is committed, continued or permitted by such person, firm or corporation, and shall be punishable therefore as provided for in this ordinance. Except as may otherwise be expressly provided, any person who violates any provision of this ordinance is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished in the manner provided in Section 1.01.370 (Violations of Code- Penalty) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. THE FOREGOING ORDIANCE was introduced at a regulaz meeting of the City Council of the City of Anaheim held on the day of , 2004 and thereafter passed and adopted at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the day of , 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CITY OF ANAHEIM By: MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM Recorr~rnended Resolution RESOLUTION NO. PC2004-000 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO RESCIND RESOLUTION NOS. PC2004-80 AND PC2000-14 (MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2004-00087). WHEREAS, on February 14, 2000, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC2000-14 amending Resolution No. PC2000-9 in its entirety, Hunt pro tunc, adopted in connection with Reclassification No. 99-00-15 for real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as those certain properties located in the approximately 807 acres bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west, and the Southern California Edison Company right-of-way on the north, and known as the "Anaheim Stadium Area" and further depicted in Attachment A to this Resolution; and WHEREAS, said Resolution provided for the exdlusion of the above-described properties from the "CO" Commercial, Office and Professional Zone, "CL" Commercial, Limited Zone, "CH" Commercial, Heavy Zone, "ML" Limited Industrial Zone, "PR" Public Recreational Zone and "RS-A-43,000" Residential/Agricultural Zone, and to incorporate said described properties into the "GC(SE)" Commercial, Office and Professional- Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone, "GC(SE)" Commercial, Limited-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone, "CH(SE)" Commercial, Heavy-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone, "ML(SE)" Limited Industrial-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone, "PRISE)" Public Recreational-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone and "RS-A- 43,000(SE)" Residential/Agricultural-Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone; and WHEREAS, upon reclassification, each of the above properties would be subject to the land use and development standards established by Chapter 18.50 (now Chapter 18.20) "Sports Entertainment Overlay (SE) Zone" of the Anaheim Municipal Code for the underlying Development District; and WHEREAS, on May 25, 2004, the City Council of the City of Anaheim adopted Resolution No. 2004-95 approving General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00419 in conjunction with the approval of Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00029, Reclassification No. 2004-00117, Amendment No. 5 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (SPN 2004-00023), Amendment No. 2 to the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SPN 2004-00024), and other related actions.; and adopted Resolution No. 2004-94 certifying Final EIR No. 330, adapting a Statement of Findings and Facts and a Statement of Overriding Considerations and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Programs (Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 122 for the General Plan and Zoning Code Update, the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0085a for the Anaheim Resort Expansion Area) associated with the project ("Final EIR No: 330"); and WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00419 provided for a comprehensive citywide General Plan Update which included redesignating land uses within an approximately 820-acre area generally bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west and the Southern California Edison Company right-of-way on the north (referred to as "The Platinum Triangle") from Commercial Recreation and Business OfficelMixed Use/Industrial to Mixed Use, Office High, Office Low, Industrial, Open Space and Institutional, generally corresponding to the property subject to the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan, except for approximately 15 acres adjacent to the east side of the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway, north of Katella Avenue; and WHEREAS, the recently adopted General Plan envisions The Platinum Triangle as a thriving economic center that provides residents, visitors and employees with a variety of housing, employment, shopping and entertainment opportunities that are accessed by arterial highways, transit systems and pedestrian promenades {set forth in Goal 15.1 of the Land Use Element); and WHEREAS, the recently adopted General Plan includes policies in the Land Use Element and the Community Design Element to implement the vision for The Platinum Triangle include providing for more detailed planning efforts to guide the future development of The Platinum Triangle; encouraging mixed- use projects integrating retail, office and higher density residential land uses; encouraging a regional inter- CR\PC2004-0 -1- PC2004- modal transportation hub in proximity to Angel Stadium of Anaheim; maximizing and capitalizing upon the view corridor from the Santa Ana (t-5) and Orange (SR-57) Freeways; maximizing views and recreation and development opportunities afforded by the area's proximity to the Santa Ana River; developing a ---- comprehensive Mixed-Use Overlay Zone and Design Guidelines to implement the vision for The Platinum Triangle; providing for a mix of quality, high-density urban housing that is integrated into the area through carefully maintained pedestrian streets, transit connections, and arterial access; developing a Public Realm Landscape and Identity Program to enhance the visibility and sense of arrival into The Platinum Triangle through peripheral view corridors, gateways, and specialized landscaping; developing a strong pedestrian orientation throughout the area, including wide sidewalks, pedestrian paths, gathering places, ground-floor retail, and street-level landscaping; encouraging extensive office development along the highly visible.. periphery of the area to provide a quality employment center; developing criteria for comprehensive property management agreements for multiple-family residential projects to ensure proper maintenance as the area develops and identify and pursue opportunities for open space areas that serve the recreational needs of Platinum Triangle residents and employees; WHEREAS, the adopted General Plan establishes a maximum development intensity for The Platinum Triangle for up to 9,175 dwelling units (at an intensity of up to 100 dwelling units per acre),. 5,000,000 square feet of office space, slightly over 2,000,000 square feet of commercial uses, industrial development at a maximum floor area ratio of 0.50 and institutional development at a maximum floor area ratio of 3:0; and WHEREAS, on July 12, 2004, the Anaheim City Planning Commission approved a motion to initiate the following applications .and proceedings: Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00032 to replace the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone with the Platinum Triangle (PTMU) Overlay Zone (including rescinding Resolution No. PC2000-14, which approved the resolution of intent to the SE Overlay Zone); Miscellaneous Case Nos. 2004-00082, 2004-00083, 2004-00084 and 2004-00085 to replace the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan with The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (including rescinding Resolution No. 99R-39, which approved the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan) and to adopt a standard Development Agreement to apply to development within the PTMU Overlay Zone; and, Reclassification Nos. 2004-00127, 2004-00128, 2004-00129 and 2004-00130 to reclassify properties within The Platinum Triangle to the PTMU Overlay Zone and the O-H (High Intensity Office) and O-L (Low Intensity Office) Zones to reflect General Plan designations; and WHEREAS, on August 9, 2004, the Anaheim City Planning Commission adopted resolutions recommending the City Council of the City of Anaheim approve Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00032 (Resolution No. PC2004-79), rescind the resolution of intent to the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone (Resolution No. PC2004-80), rescind the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan (Resolution No. PC2004-81), adopt The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Resolution No. PC2004-82) and approve associated reclassifications (Resolution Nos. PC2004-83 through PC2004-65); and WHEREAS, prior to City Council review of the rescission of the resolution of intent to the. Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone (Resolution No. PC2000-14), it was determined that since the Planning Commission approved Resolution No. PC2004-14, the Planning Commission was the appropriate body to rescind said resolution and therefore, the Planning Commission's resolution (Resolution No. PC2004-80) recommending that the City Council rescind Resolution No. PC2000-14 was not forwarded to the City Council for their consideration; and WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004, the City Council of the City of Anaheim adopted Resolution No. 2004-178 approving The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-p0084) as an implementation tool to realize the City's vision for The Platinum Triangle in conjunction with the approval of Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00032, the form of The Platinum Triangle Standard Development Agreement (Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00085), rescission of the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00083) and associated Zoning Reclassifications (Reclassification Nos. 2004-00127 through 2004-00130); and WHEREAS, on August 24, 2004, the City Council of the City of Anaheim adopted Ordinance No. 5935, pertaining to Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00032, which replaced Chapter 20 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code {formerly the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone) in its entirety with the. -2- PC2004- Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone, and Ordinance Nos. 5936 and 5937 pertaining to associated Zoning Reclassification Nos. 2004-00129 and 2004-00130; 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 state law, to hear and consider evidence for and against the rescission of Resolution Nos. PC2004-80 and PC2000-14, in conjunction with consideration of Zoning Code Amendment No. ZGA2004-00035, 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 adopted (SE) Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone is not consistent with the Goals and Policies and vision for The Platinum Triangle set forth in the recently adopted citywide comprehensive General Plan Update (General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00419). 2. That rescinding the resolution of intent to reclassify the above-described properties to the (SE) Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone is required in conjunction with adoption of the new Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zane for The Platinum Triangle to implement General Plan Goals and Policies. 3. That the Planning Commission, and not the City Council, is the appropriate body to rescind Planning Commission resolutions. 4. That, by Ordinance No. 5935, the City Council amended the Zoning Code to replace the (SE) (Sports Entertainment) Overlay Zone (Ordinance No. 5673 pertaining to Chapter 20 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) in its entirety with the (PTMU) (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use) Overlay Zone. 5. That, by Ordinance No. 5937, the City Council approved Reclassification No. 2004-00130 to reclassify certain properties described in said Resolution that have finalized to the (SE) Overlay Zone to the following Zones: I(SE) (Industrial -Sports Entertainment Overlay) to I (PTMU) (Industrial -Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay) Zone; I(SE) ((Industrial -Sports Entertainment Overlay) Zone to O-L (Low Intensity Office) Zone; and, O-L (SE) (Office Low -Sports Entertainment Overlay) Zone to O-L (Low Intensity Office) Zone to be consistent with the corresponding General Plan designations for the subject properties. 6. That persons indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition to the proposal; and that correspondence was received in opposition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), on September 20, 2004, the City Planning Commission, as lead agency for Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00087 (the rescission of resolution Nos. PC2004-80 and PC2000-14) and Zoning Code Amendment No. ZCA2004-00035 (the "Proposed Actions"), based upon its independent review of the Initial Study prepared in connection with the Proposed Actions, and analysis whether the Proposed Actions may cause any additional significant effect on the environment which was not previously examined in FEIR No. 330, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Programs, found and determined, based upon said Initial Study and the evidence received at the public hearing, that no additional significant effect will result from the proposal, no new mitigation measures or alternatives are required, and that the Proposed Actions are within the Scope of FEIR No. 330, and that the previously-certified Final EIR No. 330 and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle are in compliance with CEQA and the State and City CEQA Guidelines and are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the Proposed Actions, including the subject proposal, and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA; and, that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for the Proposed Actions. Moreover, as individual development projects and infrastructure improvements are proposed to implement The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, the PTMU Overlay Zone and the O-H and O-L Zones, Initial Studies for those projects shall be prepared in compliance with CEQA requirements to determine whether additional environmental documentation will need to be prepared. -3- PC2004- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby rescind the following two resolutions: (i) Resolution No. PC2004-80 (a resolution of the Anaheim City Planning Commission recommending that the City Council rescind the resolution of intent to, the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone) (Resolution No. PC2000-14) (Miscellaneous Case No. 2004-00082) (ii) Resolution No. PC2000-14 (a resolution of intent to reclassify certain properties within the Anaheim Stadium Area to the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone) (Reclassification No. 99-00-15). THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission .meeting of September 20, 2004. CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on September 20, 2004., 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 2004. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION CR\PC2004- .doc -4- PC2004-