PC 2007/01/08rr~oss~ e~~~
®i~aday, 3anu~ay ~ 2007
Council Chamber, City Hall
200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California
® Chairman: Gail Eastman
® Chairman Pro-Tempore: Kelly Buffa
® Commissioners: Stephen Faessel, Cecilia Flores
Joseph Karaki, Panky Romero, Pat Velasquez
® Call To Order
Preliminary Plan Review 1:00 P.IVI.
• Staff update to Commission on various City developments and issues
(As requested by Planning Commission)
• Preliminary Plan Review for items on the January 8, 2007 agenda
For record keeping purposes if you wish to make a statement ~egarding anv item
on the agenda please complete a speaker card in advance and submit it to the
sec~etaiv
® Recess To Public Hearing
® Reconvene To Public Hearing 2:30 P.flA.
® Pledge pf Allegiance
® Public Comments
® Consent Calendar
® Public Hearing Items
® Adjournment
You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following
e-mail address: planninacommissionra~anaheim net
H:ldocslclericallagendas1010807.doc 01 /08/07
Page 1
Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 2:30 P.M.
Public Comments:
This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the
Anaheim .Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public hearing
items.
Consent Calendar:
The items on the Consent Calendar will be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate
discussion of these items prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless members of the Planning
Commission, staff or the public request the item to be discussed and/or removed from the Consent
Calendar for separate action.
Reports and Recommendations
1A:(a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED)
(b) VARIANCE NO. 2005-04653
(Tracking No. VAR2006-04704)
Agent: Alan Nguyen, 15401 Firmona Avenue, Lawndale, CA
90260
Location: 1380 and 1400 East Burton Street: Property is
approximately .8-acre consisting of two properties, located
155 feet on the south side of the terminus of Burton Street.
Request for a retroactive time extension to comply with conditions of Project manner
approval for apreviously-approved 4-lot, 4-unit detached single-family QnixonQanaheim.net)
subdivision with waiver of minimum lot width and minimum lot area.
1B.(a) CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 323
(PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED )
(b) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4171
(Tracking No. CUP2006.05143)
Agent: Erinn O'Day, Robertson Properties Group, 120 North
Robertson Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90048-3102
Location: 1500 North Lemon Street: Property is approximately 27
acres, located at the southeast corner of Lemon Street and
Durst Street (La Curacao).
Request to determine substantial conformance with previously-
approved site and elevation plans and review final landscape plans for Project Planner,
a previously-approved commercial retail center of regional QpramirezQananeim.ner)
significance.
H:ldotslclerical\agendas1010807.doc ~ 01/08/07
Page 2
IVlin
1C. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission
Meeting of October 30, 2006. (Motion)
Continued from the November 13, 27, .and December 11, 2006, Planning
Commission meetings. -
1D. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission
Meeting of November 13, 2006. (Motion)
Continued from the November 27, 2006, and December 11, 2006, Planning
Commission meetings.
1E. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission
Meeting of November 27, 2006 (Motion)
Continued from the December 11, 2006, Planning Commission meeting.
1F. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission
Meeting of December 11, 2006. (Motion)
H: \docs\cle rical\ag e n dos\010807. do c
01/08/07
Page 3
P lit Hearing Items•
2a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 1
2b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05141
Owner: Byzantine Catholic Bishop, 995 North West Street,
Anaheim, CA 92801-4305
Agent: John Austin, Trillium Consulting, 5912 Bolsa Avenue, Suite
202, Huntington Beach, CA 92649
Location: 995 North West Street: Property is approximately 2.5
acres, having frontages of 222 feet on the west side of
West Street and is located approximately 597 feet south of
the centerline of La .Palma Avenue.
Request to permit a stealth building-mounted telecommunications facility
and accessory ground-mounted equipment in conjunction wikh an existing
church facility.
Continued from the October 16, November 13, and December 11, 2006, Planning Project Planner
Commission meetings. (kwong2@anaheim.net)
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. .
H:\dots\clericallagendas\010807.doc 01/08/07
Page 4
3a.
3b,
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
` Advertised as Mitioation Monitoring Plan No 137a
Owner: Irvine Land Company, 550 Newport Center Drive, Newport
Beach, CA 92660
Agent: Irvine Community Development Company, Attention: John
Sherwood, 550 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA
92660
Location: Property consists of an approximately 168-acre portion of
the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 area located
southwest of the southern terminus of Gypsum Canyon
Road, generally bordered on the west by the Eastern
Transportation Corridor (SR-241) and on the north by the
Riverside Freeway (SR-91).
Specific Plan Amendment No. 2006-00046 - To amend the Mountain
Park Specific Plan to replace a 4-way roundabout intersection at
Mountain Park Drive and Gypsum Canyon Road with a 3-way stop
(Mountain Park Specific Plan, Amendment No.3).
Miscellaneous Permit No. 2006-00171 -Review and approval of a
Development Area Plan for Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain
Park Specific Plan.
Final Site Plan No. 2006-00010 -Review and approval of a final site plan
for Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan.
Tentative Tract Map No. 17020 - To establish a 153 numbered and 31"`
lettered lot residential subdivision encompassing 145 single-family
detached residential lots, 3 Large-Lots to allow a maximum of 275 single-
family detached"` residential units for financing or conveyance purposes
only, a private recreation facility, private neighborhood park, private entry
structure, a public fire station, a trail staging area with a convenience
store, open space lots and public and private streets.
Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 2006-00003 -Review and approval
of a master specimen tree removal permit to remove up to 700 trees.
These trees would be replaced at a 20:1 ratio in Development Areas 4, 5,
and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan.
"Advertised as "29" "* Advertised as "attached"
Continued from the December 11, 2006, Planning Commission meeting.
Specific Plan Amendment Resolution No. _
Miscellaneous Resolution No.
Final Site Plan :Resolution No.
Specimen Tree Removal Resolution No.
H:ldocs\clerica I\agen d as1010807. d oc
°roject Planner:
'skoehmQanaheim. nett
01/08/07
Page 5
FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2006-00010
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17020
SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL NO 2006-00003
4a.
4b.
4c.
Owner: Robert H. HormTrust, 935 Lotus Circle, San Dimas, CA
91773
Agent: Scott Richards, SADI LLC, 5939 Monterey Road, Los
Angeles, CA 90042
Location: 111-125 West Elm Street: Property is approximately 0.76-
acre, having a frontage of 210 feet on the north side of Elm
Street and is located 167 feet west of the centerline of
Anaheim Boulevard.
Request to modify the "affordability" component, add a third incentive, and
amend/delete conditions of approval pertaining to an affordability
agreement and sewer improvements between the applicant and the City,
for apreviously-approved 52-unit affordable apartment complex with a
density bonus and incentives for (a) minimum lot size, (b) minimum width
of pedestrian accessways', and (c) required dedication and improvement.
Request to review final elevation plans for apreviously-approved,.52-unit,
affordable apartment complex with density bonus and incentives.
Added incentive.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
5a.
5b.
Owner: Target Corporation, 1000 Nicolett Mall. TPN-0910,
Minneapolis, MN 55403
Agent: Beth Aboulafia, Hinman & Carmichael, LLP, 260 California
Street, Suite 1001, San Francisco, CA 94111
Location: 8148 East Santa Ana Canvon Road• Property is an
irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of
approximately 9.48 acres located at the northwest corner of
Roosevelt Road and Monte Vista Road (The Anaheim Hills
Festival Center -Target).
Request fpr Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity to permit
sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption within an existing
retail store.
Public Convenience or Necessity Resolution No.
H: \docs\cle rical\ag a nda s\010807. doc
Project Planner.
Qpramirez@ anaheim. net)
Project Planner:
Qnixon@anaheim.net)
01/08/07
Page 6
6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
6b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
6c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 2006-05164•
Owner: 508 North East Street, LLC, 508 North East Street,
Anaheim, CA 92807
Agent: Greg Howell, 20561 Suburbia Lane, Huntington Beach, CA
92646
Location: 508 North East Street: Property Is approximately 1.15
acres and is located at the northeast corner of Sycamore
Street and East Street (La Reina Market).
Request to permit the expansion of an existing legal non-conforming
market with sales of beer and wine tornff-premises consumption and to
establish land use conformity for an existing legally non-conforming
commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking
Spaces. Project Planner:
(kwong2@anaheim. net)
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
7a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
7b. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO.
2006-00031
Owner: Lincpln & Euclid LLC, 255 South Euclid Street, Anaheim,
CA 92802
215 South Euclid Street, LLC, 215 South Euclid Street,
Anaheim, CA 92802
Agent: Doug Couper, Greenberg Farrow Architecture, 1920 Main
Street, # 1150, Irvine, CA 92614
Location: 101-215 South Euclid Street and 1732 West Lincoln
Avenue: Property is approximately 10.4 acres, having a
frontage of 740 feet on the west side of Euclid Street, and
is located 65 feet south of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue
(Target).
Request Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity to permit
sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption within a proposed
grocery and retail store. Project wanner.
(kwong2@anaheim. net)
Public Convenience or Necessity Resolution No.
H:ldocslclericallagendas\010807.doc 01/08/07
Page 7
8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (READVERTISED)
8b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2006.00180
8c. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
8d CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05160
8e. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2005-226
Owner: Lien M. Hoang, 9938 Bolsa Avenue, #221, Westminster,
CA 92683
Agent: Duc Nguyen, MVI, Corporation, 11770 East Warner
Avenue, #216, Fountain Valley, CA 92708
Location: 606 East Orangewood Avenue• Property is approximately
0.33-acre, having a frontage of 85 feet on the south side of
Orangewood Avenue and is located 170 feet west of the
centerline of Spinnaker Street.
Reclassification No. 2006-00180 -Request reclassification of the
subject property from the T (Transition) zone to the RS-4 (Single-Family
Residential) zone, or a less intense zone.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05160 -Request to construct 3 single
family homes in the RS-4 zone, fronting on a private access easement
with waivers of (a) minimum lot depth abutting an arterial highway and (b)
lot frontage on a public or private street.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005-226 - To establish a 3-lot, 3-unit
detached single family residential subdivision.
Project Planner:
QnixonQanaheim.net)
Reclassification Resolution No.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
9a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 3
9b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 2006-05170
Owner: Home Depot USA, Inc., 3800 West Chapman Avenue,
Orange, CA 92868
Agent: Fletcher Wimbush, 431 Fair Drive, # 1203, Costa Mesa, CA
92626
Location: 800 North Brookhurst Street :Property is approximately
9.6 acres and is located at the northeast corner of
Gramercy Avenue and Brookhurst Street (Home
Depot/Kelly's Deli).
Request to permit awalk-up restaurant in conjunction with a home Project Planner.
improvement Store. pnixonpanaheim.net)
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
H:\does\clerical\agendas\010807.doc 01 /08/07
Page 8
10a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 3
10b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
10c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05167
Owner: Anaheim Christian Reformed Church, 530 North Dale
Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801-4819
Agent: Dick Van Eck, Anaheim, Christian Reformed Church, 3520
East Miraloma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92806
Location: 530 North Dale Avenue: Property is approximately 1.94
acres, and is located at the southeast corner of Crescent
Avenue and Dale Avenue (Anaheim Christian Reformed
Church).
Request to expand an existing church to permit a classroom addition with project Fianner
waivers of (a) minimum structural setback and (b) required dedication and (dnerrick@ananeim.net)
improvement of right-of-way.
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
11a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 3
11 b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05171 (READVERTISED)
Owner: Karl Sator Tr., 900 East Katella Avenue, Suite J, Orange,
CA 92867-5035
Agent: Mark Torreso, 10807 Rincon Drive, Whittier, CA 90606
Location: 3152 East La Palma Avenue. Unit H: Property is
approximately 11.5 acres, having a frontage of 450 feet on
the south side of La Palma Avenue and is located 445 feet
east of the centerline of Kraemer Boulevard.
Request to retain a theater and dance studio, Project Ptannen
(dherrick@anaheim. net)
Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
Adjourn To Monday, January 22, 2007 at 1:00 P.M. for
Preliminary Plan Review.
H:\docslclericallagendas1010807.doc 01/08/07
Page 9
CERTIFICATION OF POSTING
I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at:
12:00 D m January 5 2007
(TIME) (DATE)
LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND
// COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK
SIGNED: '~IL~C,~t' q ~r~Q t'.C ~Y
If you challenge any one of these City of Anaheim decisions In court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in a written
correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
.RIGHTS OF APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL FROM PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Any action taken by the Planning Commission this date regarding Reclassifications, Conditional Use
Permits and Variances will be final 22 days after Planning Commission action and any action regarding
Tentative Tract and Parcel Maps will be final 10 days after Planning Commission action unless a timely
appeal is filed during that time. This appeal shall be made in written form to the City Clerk, accompanied
by an appeal fee in an amount determined by the City Clerk.
The City Clerk, upon filing of said appeal in the Clerk's Office, shall set said petition for public hearing
before the City Council at the earliest possible date. You will be notified by the City Clerk of said hearing.
ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the Planning Department, (714) 765-5139. Notification no later than 10:00 a.m.
on :the Friday before the meeting wtll 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 Tele hone S stem at 714-765.5139.
H:\docslclerical\agendas\010807.doc 01/08/07
Page 10
SCHEDULE
2007
January 22
February 5
February 21 (Wed)
March 5
March 19
April 2
April 16
April 30
May 14
May 30 (Wed)
June 11
June 25
July 9
July 23
August 6
August 20
September 5 (Wed)
September 17
October 1
October 15
October 29
November 14 (Wed)
November 26
December 10
December 24
H:\dots\clerical\agendas\010807.doc 01/08/07
Page 11
Item No. 1A
t-
N
0
O
O
w
J
a
a
~ rwtwUOD AVE
U E a
1 D
ACH 4 y. r
1 DU CH ~V \
Variance No. 2005-04653
TRACKING NO. VAR2006-04704
Requested By: ALAN NGUYEN
1380 East Burton Street
Subject Property
Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 91
10208
RIVERSIDE FREEWAY (SR-91)
ROSEWOOD AVE
City of Anaheim
PLANNING ®EPA[2TMEIVT
January 8, 2007
Alan Nguyen
15401 Firmona Avenue
Lawndale, CA 90260
Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of
January B, 2007.
1. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
A. (a) CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED)
(b) VARIANCE NQ_2005-04653
VAR2006-04704)
Agent: Alan Nguyen, 15401 Firmona Avenue, Lawndale, CA 90260
Location: 1380 and 1400 East Burton Street: Property is approximately 8-acres
consisting of two properties, located on the south side of the terminus of Burton Street,
with a frontage of 155 feet on the south side of Burton Street.
Requests approval for a retroactive time extension to comply with conditions of approval for a
previously-approved 4-lot, 4-unit detached single-family subdivision with waivers of minimum lot
width and minimum lot area.
ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby determine that the previously-
approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the required documentation for this
request.
Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED,
that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve a retroactive extension of time to
comply with the conditions of approval for apreviously-approved variance to construct a 4-lot, 4-
unit detached single-family subdivision with waivers of minimum lot width and minimum lot area
for a period of one (1) year to expire on October 3, 2007, based on the following:
(i) That this is the first request for an extension of time and would not extend the entitlement
beyond the two extensions authorized by the Code.
(ii) That there have been no changes to the Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code that
would affect this project. No additional information or changed circumstances are present
which would contradict the facts used to support the required findings for approval of this
Conditional Use Permit.
(iii) That the property is being maintained in a safe, clean and aesthetically pleasing condition
with no unremediated code violations on the property, as confirmed by an inspection of the
property by the Community Preservation Division.
Sincerely,
Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary
Anaheim Planning Commission
VAR200SO4fi53_Exce rpl_PC010807j kn
200 Soulh Anaheim Boulevartl
P.0. Box 3222
Anaheim, California 92903
mwvenanennnei I TEL (714) 765-5139
Attachment - R&R 1-A
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF ANAHEIM
Conununity Preservation Divisia:
DATE: NOVEMBER 29, ?006
TO: JESSICA NIXON, ASSISTANT PLANNER
FROM: BILL SMALL, COMMUNITY PRESERVATION OFFICER
SUBJECT: 1400 E. BURTON (VAR2006-04704)
On November 28, 2006, I conducted an inspection of the property located at 1400 E. Burton St.
The inspection was in regards to a request for a time extension of Variance #2005-04653,
Tracking Case #2006-04704.
I inspected the property which consists of three parcels of land that abut the 91 Freeway. I
observed the property was vacant land enclosed by a chain link fence with green scrim attached.
I observed no violations at the time of my inspection.
If you have any further questions, please contact me at ext. 4478
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2005--"'
Attachment - R&R 1-A
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 2005-04653 BE GRANTED.
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Variance
for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California described as:
PARCEL A:- THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 2,
TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND
MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT pN THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST °
QUARTER, DISTANT SOUTH 89° 03' 42" EAST 300.00 FEET FROM THE
NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE
SOUTH 0° 11' 18" WEST 140.43 FEET; PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF
SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF LAND DESCRIBED
IN A DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED JUNE 7, 1955, IN BOOK
3093, PAGE 319, OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE,
THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES:
NORTH 89° 4T 33" EAST 120.83 FEET, NORTH 89° 01' 45" EAST 15.45 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 0° 11' 18" EAST 137.50 FEET PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY
LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID
NORTHWEST QUARTER ;THENCE NORTH 89° 03' 42" WEST. ALONG SAID LINE
136.25 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF THE FRACTIONAL WEST HALF OF
SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO SAN
JUAN CAJON DE SANTA ANA, PARTLY WITHIN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, AND
PARTLY WITHIN THE CITY OF FULLERTON, AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF
RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 10, MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF
SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on June 27, 2005, at 2:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60
"Procedures", to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed variance and to investigate and
make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and that said pubic hearing was continued to
the July 25, September 7, and October 3, 2005; Planning Commissian 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 petitioner proposes waivers of the following to construct four single-family
residences:
CR1PC2005-0 -1- PC2005-
(a) SECTION NO. 18.04:050 Minimum lot width (70 feet required along
Burton Street; 37 to 50 feet proposed)
(b) SEGTION NO. 18.04.040 Minimum lot area (7,200 square feet
required; 5 025 to 5 588 square feet proposed on
Lots 1, 2 and 3 proposed)
2. That the above-mentioned waivers (a) pertaining to minimum lot width and (b) pertaining to
minimum lot area are hereby granted based upon the irregular shape of the property combined with its
location on the curved portion of a cul-de-sac and also abutting the SR-91 (Riverside) Freeway, and further
on the basis that there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography,
location and surroundings which do not apply to other identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that
strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of the density enjoyed by other properties in the
identical zone and classification in the vicinity. The property frontage is approximately 175 feet, allowing only
two lots per Code requirement, each with a minimum lot width of 70 feet. The size of the two lots would be
17,554 square feet each, far greater than other single-family lots in the vicinity that are approximately 7,200
square feet each.
3. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the
property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to the property or class of
use in the same vicinity and zone.
4. That the requested variance Is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in
question.
5. That the requested variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health or safety or
to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located.
That "" indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposal to request waivers of (a) minimum lot width and (b) minimum lot area
to construct four single-family residences; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding
that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the
Negative Declaration together with any comments received dudng the public review process and further
finding on the basis of the Initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that
the project will have a significant effect on the environment
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does.
hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a
necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and
general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
(1) That prior to the issuance of the first building permit, any required relocation of City electrical facilities
shall be at the developer's expense. That landscape and/or hardscape screening of all pad-mounted
equipment shall be required and shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits.
(2) That roll-up garage doors shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. Said doors shall be
installed and maintained as shown on submitted plans.
-2- PC2005-
(3) That the driveways on Burton Street shall be reconstructed with 10-foot radius curb cut returns as
required by the City Engineer in conformance with .Engineering Standard No. 115. Said information
shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
(4) That plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval showing
conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436 and 470 pertaining to
parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and
maintained in conformance with said plans.
(5) That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to
the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval.
(6) That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or
abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through the Water Engineedng
Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department.
(7) That Variance No. 2005-04653 is hereby granted subject to the approval and recordation of Tentative
Parcel Map No. 2005-132, now pending.
(8) That prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the first dwelling unit or prior tp the
issuance of a building permit far the noise barrier wall, whichever occurs first, the property
owner/developer shall submit a final noise analysis to the Planning Services Division of the
Planning Department indicating compliance with the noise levels of Council Policy 542 or other
regulation in effect at the time of the issuance of building permits. That if substantiated by the
final noise analysis, a 10 foot high sound barrier wall, or other height as determined necessary by
the study, shall be constructed in the location shown on the approved site plan.
(9) That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications
submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning
Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 5, and as conditioned herein.
(10) That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, above-mentioned, shall be
complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted In accordance with
Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
(11) That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 9, above-mentioned, shall be complied
with.
(12) That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal
regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request
regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine
that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the
conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or
unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any
approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to
the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice prior to
issuance of a building permit or prior to commencement of the activity, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay
all charges shall result in the revocation of the approval of this application.
-3- PC2005-
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
October 3, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Procedures'
of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council
Resolution in the event of an appeal
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, ,Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on
October 3, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS;
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
,2005.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-4- PC2005-
7
Item No. 1B
vwH teua a ~
R
2
3 I ~ I
~
CUP 2 22
VAR
146 5 RCL 6fi-61-14
~
~
8 ORANGETHORPE WAY !
i
IND~
T~ RCL 53-54-3
VAR 21485
'. C-G IND UNITS
~ j I
i~ 0 I ~ I
i
I ~ CUP 1940 I I
1
~~
~
NEIGHBORH000
I
I
...
II SHOPPING CENTER I
~ ORANGE HROPE WAV I I
~ I 1NUUST IAL CENTER I I '
341 UNITS I I '
I
¢ DURST STREET i
~ zee• -
I ~-VACAN7I~
ORANGEFAIR AVE I -~~' ~`
~
~ , ~ RcL s9.a9 19
RCL 6fib7 t4 t
I MCDONALDS
~ < RCL53-543
T-CUP 2006-05143
CUP 2001-04456 3 y
I ~
TLUP 2001-04444
3
,
` ~ T-CUP 2001-04403
T-CUP 2001-04357
~ ~
° TCUP 2001-04343
~ ( CUP 4171
r'
~
~ .CUP 3994
777
CUP 3344 }, ~.
~
I
W 24 HOUR FfTNES9~" ' <, CUP 1414 t
~
r ~
~ VAR 2001-04458
3 a
~
~ ' t,
a=T SCW 2003-00022 s y
, c~,i-.,a scwza9z-09oz1 3
Z A ~ IOWES HOME
~ 9 m ,
~
- IMPROVEMENT
~
cL
~ 3.
WARE}IWSE
^
omv Si
X $ 3 h (
4 1
)
f
j .
4q p
3
~QY~u54 m
Q ft ~
x' ~.^'j 1
I m
~
m~ ,,,~ - ~ VACANT
~F
S
7
~
m
VNLL NO
m
Jf
~ tX X
/ ~
.* 3 yam. ~,/ E
UU U6~URd f
v r-
a
(((
Y
'
~
,
~
>
-
",~ x
t .r ~,
!!!
~4~0yW~POpp O~ -. ~`
- y~ ~ f
,(
- .
f
ANAHEIM CITY LIMITS n
~ (
' '3
e r.
~ RIVERSIDE
> FREEWgy
~ pp SZ.~ jp
Cll&002-04506
m PARKING LOT
UJ
I- f
W hh
F
d
RCL Sfi-S7-13 Z
I N
Q 1
Conditional Use Permit No. 4171 Subject Property
TRACKING NO. 2006-05143 Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 250'
Requested By: ERIN O'DAY O.S. No. 69
1500 North Lempn Street ~ozto
City of Anaheim
1,L,ANIVIIVG ®EPAI2TMENT
January 8, 2007
Erinn O'Day, Development Associate
Robertson Properties Group, Inc.
120 North Robertson Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90048-3102
Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2007.
1. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
B. (a)
(b)
Owner: Erinn O'Day, 120 North Robertson Boulevard, Los Angeles CA 90048-3102
Location: 1500 North Lemon Street: Property is 27 acres, is located at the
southeast corner of Lemon and Durst Streets, having frontages of 850 feet on the
east side of Lemon Street and 1,280 feet on the south side of Durst (La Curacao).
Request for determination of substantial conformance with previously-approved site and
elevation plans and review of final landscape plans for a previously-approved commercial
retail center of regional significance exhibits and review final landscape plans for a
previously-approved commercial retail center of regional significance.
ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and
MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby determine that the
previously-certified EIR No. 323 is adequate to serve as the appropriate environmental
documentation for this request.
commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve the request for
substantial conformance for Conditional Use Permit No. 4171 (Tracking No. CUP2008-
)5143) with previously-approved exhibits and review final landscape plans for apreviously-
3pproved commercial retail center of regional significance because the plans are consistent
Nith the intent of the originally-approved exhibits and the architecture, mass, scale, and
:olors of the existing commercial buildings on-site.
sincerely,
leanor Morris, Senior Secretary
lnaheim Planning Commission
;UP2006 05143_Excerpt_PC010607
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
P.0. Box 3222
Anaheim, California 92803
v:vnvanaheim.~°i TEL (714) 765-5139
i
RESOLUTION NO. PC2001-142
Attachment - R&R 1-B
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-166,
ADOPTED IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4171
WHEREAS, on August 8, 2000, Resolution No. 2000R-166 was adopted by the Anaheim
City Council to grant Conditional Use Permit No. 4171 and permit construction of a 281,133 sq.ft.
commercial retail center of regional significance, including a home improvement store, health club, three
drive-through fast food restaurants, two full-service. restaurants, amulti-tenant pad building, and a
freeway-oriented freestanding sign, and with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces on 26.3 acres
of property located at 1500 North Lemon Street; and
WHEREAS, on March 12, 2001, the Planning Commission approved a Phase One
landscape plan for permanent landscaping on a portion of the site; and that on August 7, 2001, the
Commission approved a Phase One sign program for construction of five freestanding signs, wall signage
for the home improvement stare, and conceptual wall signage for the remaining major tenants and pad
buildings; and
WHEREAS, the first development phase of this regional shopping center, a home
improvement store, is completed; that the property is zoned CL (Commercial Limited) and is located
within the Commercial/Industrial (North Central Area) Redevelopment Project Area; and that the Land
Use Element the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for General Commercial land uses; and
WHEREAS, the petitioner has requested modification of approved exhibits for the
previously-approved commercial retail center; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in
the City of Anaheim on September 24, 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 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 petitioner requests an amendment to this conditional use permit under authority of
the Anaheim Municipal Code to modify the exhibits far this previously-approved regional commercial retail
center; and that the modifications include one 3,699 sq.ft. drive-through fast food restaurant (Pad A), a
36,000 sq.ft. health club (Major E), and a 244,321 sq.ft. retail building at the east end of the property
anchored by the new home improvement warehouse retail store (Major A) with three additional tenant
spaces (Majors B, C and D).
2. That the proposed modifications will improve the mix of land uses on the property and will
reduce the number ofdrive-through lanes visible to Lemon Street while adhering to the originally
approved vision for this center.
3. That as conditioned herein, the size and shape of the subject site will be adequate to allow
the full development of the proposed uses and structures, as modified, in a manner not detrimental to the
particular area nor to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of Anaheim.
(Tracking No. CUP2001-04444)
CR5199PK.doc -1- PC2001-142
4. That, as conditioned herein, the traffic generated by the proposed uses, as modified, will
not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in
the area.
5. That three people spoke at the public hearing with concerns regarding truck traffic
circulation; that no one indicated their presence in opposition; and that no correspondence was received
in opposition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City
Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to modify exhibits for commercial retail center of
regional significance on an irregularly-shaped 26.3-acre property located at the southeast corner of Durst.
Street and Lemon Street, with frontages of 1,280 feet on the south side of Durst Street and 850 feet on
the east side of Lemon Street, and further described as 1500 North Lemon Street (Anaheim Gateway);
and does hereby determine that the previously-certified Environmental Impact Report No. 323 is
adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
hereby amend Resolution No. 2000R-166, adopted in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2715,
to approve the modified exhibits for the previously-approved commercial retail center of regional
significance;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission does hereby amend the
conditions of approval adopted in connection with Resolution No. 2000R-166, in their entirety, to read as
follows:..
1. That a Phase Two (final) Sign Program shall be submitted specifying wall sign locations, materials,
colors, wording and logos for Pad Building Nos. B and C, and for Major Tenants B, C and D, including
the specific wording and location of all directional and guide signs. The Phase Two Sign Program
shall be submitted to the Zoning Division for Planning Commission review and approval as a "Reports
and Recommendations" item.
2. That the advertising for any single tenant shall not appear on more than one (1) freestanding sign
with the exception of the freeway oriented sign.
3. That the banners on the eight (8) decorative monument structures shall not be used for advertising.
4. That the advertising of any single tenant shall not appear on both the freeway-oriented sign and
south elevation of the Major D tenant building.
5. That Phase Two (final) landscape plans specifying the provision for fully-improved permanent
planting on the CalTrans parcel at the southwest comer of the property, around the building pad and
parking lot south of the Lowe's building, on the restaurant pads adjacent to Lemon Street, and on the
pad at the southeast comer of Durst Street and Lemon Street, shall be submitted to the Zoning
Division for Planning Commission review and approval as a "Reports and Recommendations" item.
6. That the developer shall be responsible for compliance with all mitigation measures within assigned
time frames and any direct costs associated with the attached Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 113, as
adopted by the City of Anaheim and as required by Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code.
7. That a conditional use permit shall be obtained for any proposed outdoor seating or alcohol sales in
conjunction with the restaurant uses.
8. That irrigated landscaping coverage, including turt, hydroseeding, or groundcover, shall be provided
on the undeveloped portion of this property at the southeast corner of Durst Street and Lemon
Street, until such time as development commences on that undeveloped porticn.
-2- PC2001-142
9. That this development shall be limited to a maximum of eight (8) tenant spaces. The subdivision of
any retail space and/or the development of the vacant parcel at the southeast corner of Durst Street
and Lemon Street shall only be permitted by the application for, and approval of, a conditional use
permit by the Planning Commission.
10. That a landscaped earthen berm and/or a row of hedges shall be incorporated into the entire length
of the setback adjacent to Lemon Street with the exception of ingress/egress areas. Further; dense
landscaping shall be provided adjacent to Lemon Street to adequately screen the drive-through
lanes. Where possible, existing mature landscaping shall be preserved. Said information shall be
specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits..
11. That final site, floor, .and elevation plans for the two (2) freestanding full-service restaurants shall be
submitted to the Zoning Division for Planning Commission review and approval as a "Reports and
Recommendations" item.
12. That all roof-mounted equipment shall be visually screened from the public rights-of-way and
surrounding properties in compliance with Section 18.44.030.120 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
13. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage usea
14. That if public telephone service is installed, the telephones shall only be installed inside the
restaurants or retail buildings.
15. That the property shall be permanently maintained it 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.
16. That the existing mature trees in the planter along Lemon Street frontage shaltbe retained where
possible: Said information shallbe specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
17. That no exterior vending machines shall be permitted within the view of the public rights-of-way.
18. That the landscaping planters shall be permanently maintained with live and healthy plants.
19. That the locations for future above-ground utility devices including, but not limited to, electrical
transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications and cable devices., etc.., shall be shown
on the plans submitted for building permits. Said plans shall also identify the specific screening
treatment of each device (i.e., landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access
points, etc.) and shall be subject to review and approval by the appropriate city departments.
20. 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
21. That an on-site trash truck tum-around area shall be provided in accordance with Engineering.
Standard Detail No. 610 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Streets and Sanitation Division.
Said turn-around area shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits..
22: That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and approval
showing conformance with Engineering Standard No. 137 pertaining to sight distance visibility for the
sign or wall/fence locations.
23. That all drive-through lanes shall be reviewed and approved by the City Traffic and Transportation
Manager.
-3- PC2001-142
24. That the owner shall comply with City of Anaheim Ordinance No. 5209 and Resolution No. 91 R-89
relating to the Transportation,Demand Management (TDM) strategies by joining and participating in
the Anaheim Transportation Network and developing a TDM program consistent with the
demographics of the labor force.
25. That a plan shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and
approval showing the loading space for trucks in conformance with Code Section 18.06.060.
26. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and approval
showing conformance with the current versions of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436, 601 and.
602 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be
developed and maintained in conformance with said plans.
27. That gates shall not be installed across any driveway in a manner which may adversely affect
vehicular traffic in the adjacent public streets. Installation of any gates shall conform to Engineering
Standard Plan Nc. 609 and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Traffic and
Transportation Manager.
28 That three (3) foot high street address numbers shall be displayed on the flat area of the building
roofs in a contrasting color to the roof material; provided that 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.
29. That prior to the commencing operation of these businesses, valid business licenses shall be
obtained from the Business License Division of the City of Anaheim Finance Department.
30. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in locations acceptable to the Public
Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, and in accordance with approved plans on file
with said Department: Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be
readily identifiable from adjacent streets or highways> The walls of the storage areas shall be
protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum one (1) gallon
sized clinging vines planted on maximum three (3) foot centers, or tall shrubbery. Said information
shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
31. That the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped with decorative lighting of sufficient
power (recommended minimum of two [2] foot-candles) 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 adjacent properties,
and that said lighting information shall be specified on the plans submitted for building permits..
32. That all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the buildings shall be
fully screened by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials; and that such
information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
33. That window signage shall not be permitted.
34. 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 Revision No. 1 of Exhibit Nos. 1 through 9, Final Plan Nos. 1 through 5
(Phase One Landscape Plans), Final Plan Nos. 6 through 18 (Phase One Freestanding and Lowe's
Building Signage Program), Final Plan Nos. 19 through 25 (Fast Food Drive-Through Restaurant
Pad Building Sign Program), and Final Plan Nos. 26 through 33 (Health Club Pad Building Sign
Program), and as conditioned herein.
-4- PC2001-142
35. That prior to the issuance of a building permit or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25,
26, 28, 30, 31 and 32, above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
36. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 2, 4 and 34, above-mentioned,
shall be complied with.
37. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that
it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Cade 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.
38. That within a period of one (1) month from the date of this resolution, irrigated landscaping coverage,
including turt, hydroseeding, or groundcover, shall be provided on the undeveloped portions of this
property at the south end of the home improvement store and on the vacant parcels adjacent to the
Lemon Street frontage.
39. That within a period of one (1) month from the date of this resolution, a paved driveway shall be
provided at the south end of the home improvement store to allow for truck and vehicular access.
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 ail 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 count 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 24, 2001.
CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Fernandes, 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 24, 2001, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ARNOLD, BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, KOOS, VANDERBILT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: EASTMAN
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
2001.
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-5- PC2001-142
Ite-n No.2
- ~ 1 onT LnR6 u I VAR i66 ~ 1~ I-~I
`
\ GV IV:~~
- - -
- ~ - LA PALMA A
VENUE
T
C C' 1yG163S4-495 L G.
G~ 59b0 ~ ~
~
RS-2
1 U EACH RCL 63-64-38 ~UpvARBn 1UT'I
C
CUP 701 '
`CpLpp
GG LICUOR 1,1,ED
RCL 5fi-59{5 STORE
VAR 6fi5
MEDICAL FACILITY
Fyg-1
U LO
TA R
fi5 ~ M'
WPt p p
PL
c' CUP 996 U
PN
NU Nw r ~ VAR 669
~ ~~ N a
rt ~ o ~ CONVALESCENT
o
U HOSPITAL
~ RS-2
~ 1 DU EACH
' O
RS-1
GH
R$-2
RCL 69-90.03 VpR ~
1 DV
CUP 1660 ~ gT22
5 OOZ Z
VAR 4036 00
DG~DR 1 DU EACH PU-(UMW 0(~
G~'RE
R
~
GH
~
~ VP
.
Rs•1
DV
CUP 2006-05141 ~ . , N ~ 1
CUP 3699
g_p 1J (P
~
DU C CHURCH ~
Q
1~
G f F ~11 G y CA
~~~
~ ~ '~ soo'"" ~ ~ m fir' ~s
~ z ~ RS-1 a = n
l ~f J!f •: 61
RS-2 ~
RCL 77-78-56 RS-1
VAR 3008 VAR 2242
RS-1
10U C
~
'
1 DU EACH G
A
~
mn
AGES 2 RK RS 1 VPR 3M1TZOG Y
!-21 n~
3T1
APR
11
RK 2
~ ENTRADA CIR ~pR 1411
VAR 3187
PR 1411
V
RS-1
VAR 2516 1 DU EACH
VAR 2300 vPg3013 0
C
SAGE PARK RS-1 VAR 4126 ~
VAR zvm VAR 200304594 G
H Vpp3
1 y 1 DU EAC y
m VPF
= N
I RS-1 ..
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05141 Subject Property
Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Requested By: BYZANTINE CATHOLIC BISHOP Q.S. No. 61
995 West North Street ioiao
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05141
:Requested By: BYZANTINE CATHOLIC BISHOP
995 West North Street
Subject Property
.Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 61
fotao
Dale of Aerial Photo:
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission.
January 8, 2007
Item No. 2
2a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION =CLASS 1 (Motion)
2b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 2006-05141 (Resolution)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This irregularly-shaped, 2.5-acre property has a frontage of 222 feet on the west side of
West Street and a maximum depth of 500 feet and is located approximately 597 feet soutfi
of the centerline of La Palma Avenue (995 North West Street.- Byzantine Catholic Church).
REQUEST:;
(2) The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit to permit a stealth building-
mounted telecommunications facility and accessory ground-mounted. equipment in
conjunctidh with an existing church facility under authority of Code Sections ;
18.04.030.040.0402 (Antennas=Telecommunications- Stealth Building-Mounted) and
18.38.060.
BACKGROUND:
(3) This request was continued from the October 16, November 13, and'December 11, 2006,
Planing Commission meetings to alldw the applicant and staff to work do the location and
design of the facility.
(4) This property i5 currently developed with the Byzantine Catholic Church and is zoned RS-1
(Single-Family Residential). The Anaheim General Plan`designates this property for Ldw
Density Residential land uses. Properties to the north, east (across. West Street), south and
west (across Carbon Creek Channel). are also designated for Low Density. Residential land
uses,. properties to the northwest (across Carbon Creek Channel) are designated
Commercial - Neighborhdod Center`
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: `
(5) The following zoning actions pertaiKto this property:
(a) Zoning`Code Amendment iJo. 2006-00048 (to amend the Zoning Code pertaining.
to telecdmmunications facilities in single-family residential zones) was adopted by
the City Council`on September 21 2006.
(b) Conditional Use Permit No. 3699 (to permit an 8,355 square foot church, a 2-story
6,950 square foot 2-story social hall with basement and a 30-foot high bell tower
with waiver of maximum structural height, minimum front yard setback, minimum
setback of institutional uses adjacent to a residential zone, minimum rear yard
setback, permitted accessory buildings, permitted sighs and required parking lot
landscaping) was approved by the City Council on September 27, 1994.
(c) Variance No. 1830 (waivers of (1) minimum lot width and (2) minimum front
setback) was approved by the Planning Commission on September 26, 1966:
Srcup2006-05141 klw.doc Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 2
because the proposed installation is out of proportion with the existing building: In order for
the applicant to explore additional alternatives such as a redesign of the existing belttower
or the: installation of antehnas within a religious icon; staff recommends a continuance of this
request to redesign the facility:
FINDINGS:
(15) 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 conditibnnexist:
(a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the
Zoning Code; or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsectidn .030 (Unlisted Uses
Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority);
(b) That the use will hot adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and
develbpment of the area ih which it is proposed td be located;
(c) Thafthe size and'shape of the site forthe use inadequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental td the particular area
or to the health'ahd safety;
(d) That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burdehLpon the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; ahd
(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 df the City of
Anaheim.
RECOMMENDATION:
(18) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission; including the evidence
presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing,
the Commission continue this item to the February 5, 2007; meeting far the applicant td
work with staff to explore other design alternatives for the telecommunications facility.
1, That this teledommunications facility shal(be limited to a maximum of three (3) sectors with no
more than four (4) panel antennas on each sector fdr a total'of twelve (12)antennas and
accessoryground-mounted equipment. The antennas shat(be limited to en overallheight of 37
feet. No additional antennas or equipment cabinets shall be permitted without approval from the
City. Sold information shall be specifically shown oh the plans submitted by building permits.
2. That the antennas shall be finished and painted to match the roof screen. Said information shall
be specifically shown on the plans submitted forbuilding permits:
Page 5
l
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 2
3. That the walls of the ground-mounted enclosure shallbe protected from graffiti opportunities by
-the use of plant materials such as a minimum 1-gallon size clinging vines planted on a maximum
3-foot centers'or tallshrubbery: Said :information shall be specifically showh on the plans
submitted for building permits.
4. That all equipment, including supply cabinets and power meter shall be screened from the public
right-of-way: In addition, thecable connecting the equipment shall be underground and shall not
be visible to the public: Said information shall be specifically showh on plans submitted for'
building permits.
5. That the Operator shall ensure that the facility's installation and choice of frequencies will not
interfere within the 800 MHz radio frequencies required by the City of Anaheim to provide
adequate spectrum capacity for public safety and related purposes.
6. That before activating this facility, the Operator shall submit 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 conducted by the Communications Divtsioh of the Orange County Sheriffs Department
or a Division approved contractor at the expense of the Operator.
7. That the Operator shall provide a 24-hour telephone number to the Planning. Services Division (to
be forwarded to the Fireend Police Departments) to which interference problems may be
reported, and shall resolve all interference complaints within 24 hours..:
8. That the Operator shall ensure that any of its contractors, sub-contractors or agents, or any other
user of the facility, shall comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
9. That should this telecommunications facility be sold, the Planning Services Division shall be
notified within 30 days of the close of escrow.
10. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the applicant's expense.
Landscape and/or landscape. screening of all pad mounted. equipment shall be required and shall
be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
11. That the portion of the property being leased to the telecommunications carrier shall be
permanently maintained in en 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 discovery:.
12: That the materials used for the parapet screen be similar in design color and texture to the
existing building and that a final inspection is required.
13. Thafthe subject property shall be developed substantially ineccordance with the plans and
specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim bylhe petitioner and which plans ere on file with
the Planning Department marked Exhibits Nos. f through 4 and as conditioned herein.
14. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 10; above mentioned, shall be
complied with.. Extensions of further time to complete said conditions. may be granted in
accordance with Seotion 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
Page 6
1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 2
15. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Conditions Nos. 6, 7, 12, and 13 above
mentioned, shall be complied with:
16. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director
upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfiesthe
original intent and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification cdmplies with the Anaheim
Municipal Code and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward
establishment of the use or approved development.
Page 7
ITEM N0, 3
f'
~. ,
Specific Plan No. 2006-00046 Mountain Park (SP90-4)
Final Site Plan No. 2006-00010 Subject Property
Tentative Tract No. 17020 Date: January 8, 2007
Speciman Tree Removal No. 2006-00003 Scale: 1" = 2400'
Miscellaneous No. 2006-00171 Q.S. No. 232, 233, 237, 238
Requested By: IRVINE LAND COMPANY 239, 243, 244, 249
250
Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 zata
ALL PROPERTIES ARE FN THE SCENIC CORRIDOR (SC) OVERLAY ZONE.
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE SCENIC CORRIDOR (SC) OVERLAY ZONE.
Specific Plan No. 2006-00046
Mountain Park (SP90-4)
Final Site Plan No. 2006-00010 Subject Property
Tentative Tract No. 17020 Date: January 8, 2007
Speciman Tree Removal No. 2006-00003 Scale: 1"= 2400'
Miscellaneous No. 2006-00171 Q.S. No. 232, 233, 237, 238
Requested By: IRVINE LAND COMPANY 239, 243, 244, 249
250
Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 za~4
1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January B, 2007
Item No. 3
3a. FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO 33Y (PREVIOUSLY
CERTIFIED), AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO 137b* (Motion)
3b. AMENDMENT N0:3 TO THE MOUNTAIN PARK
SPECIFIC PLAN NO 90-4 (SPN2006-00046) (Recommendation Resolution)
3c: DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENTAREAS 4 AND 6 (Motion)
(M IS2006-00171)
3d: FINAL SITE PLAN NO: 2006-00010 (Motion)
3e. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO 17020 (Motion)
3f. SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO 2006-00003 (Motion)
Advertised as Mitigation Monitoring Plan No 137a
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION'
(1) The Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 area encompasses 3,001 acres located
generally in Gypsum Canyon, south of the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway, in Orange County,
California. The majority of the project site is in the jurisdiction of the City of Anaheim;
however, open space areas in the southern- and eastern-most portions of the project site
are jn unincorporated County of Orange jurisdiction in the City of Anaheim's sphere-of-
influence. SR-91 is immediately north of the project site, and the SR-241 .bisects the site
into eastern and western egments:, Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park
Specific Plan area conssf of approximately 168 acres located southwest of the southern
terminus of Gypsum Canyon Road; generally. bordered on the vest by the Eastern
Transportation Corridor (SR-241). and on the north by the Riverside Freeway (SR-91).
Development Area 5 consists of approximately 291 acres located south of the SR-91
Freeway, east of the Gypsum Canyon Road interchange::
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of the following:
(a) Amendment No: 3 to the Mountain Park Soecific Plan No 90-4 (SPN2006 000461
- Request to amend the Mountain Park Specific Plan to replace. a 4-way
roundabout intersection at Mbuntain Park Drive and Gypsum Canydn Road with a
3-way stop sign-controlled intersection:
(b) Development Area Plan for Develooment Areas 4 and 6 (Miscellaneous No 2006
00171 -Request for review and approval of a Development Area Plan for
Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan.
(c) Final Site Plan No: 2006-00010 -Request for review and approval of a final site
plan for Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan.
(d) Tentative TracC Mao No. 17020 -Request to establish a 153 numbered and 31 *'
lettered lot residential subdivision encompassing 145 single-family detached
residential lots, 3 Large-Lots to allow a maximum of 275 single-family detached***
residential units for financing or conveyance purposes only, a private: recreation
facility; private neighborhood park; private entry structure, a public fire station, a
trail staging area with a convenience store, open space lots and public and private
streets:
sr-spn2006-00046gk
Paged
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 3
(e) Specimen Tree Removal Permit No: 2006-00003 -Request far review and
approval of a master specimen tree removal permit to Yemove up to 700 trees.
These trees would be replaced at a 20 to f ratio in Development Areas 4, 5;'ahd 6. ';
**Advertised as "29" ***Advertised as "attached"
BACKGROUND:
(3) The projecfsite is zoned SP90-4 (SC) (Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4, Scenic:
Corridor Overlay) and is currently undeveloped with the exceptioh of an approximately 300-
acre sand and grave(mining operation (dosed in January 2004 -currently under
reclamation) located south of the SR-91 Freev/ay, east of the Gypsum Canyon Road
interchange.:
. (4) Oh August 23, 2005; the City Couhcil adopted Resolution Nos: 2005-175 and 2005-177
approving Amendmeht No. T to he Mouhtain Park Specific Plah'No: 90-4 and certifying
Environmental impact Report Nd> 331 td provide for the development of a residential
community with up td'2,500'residentialUnits; a fire station, public trails,'a trail staging area,
a concession store/interpretive center, a school site,' a public community park and open
space. The City Couhcil subsequently adopted Ordihance NoS: 5993 and'5994 to amend
the Specific Plan Zone and'establish revised zoning ahd develdpmentstandards as partbf
`Chapter 18:112 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
(5) On May 9, 2006 the City Council'adopted 12esolutiodNo. 2006-089 approving Amendment
' No: 2 to the Mountain Park Specific Plan 90-4 amending conditions of approval; following
Plahhing Commission recommendation for approval pn March 20; 2006, in conjuhctioh with
approval of a Development Area Plan, Final Site Plan No:2006-00004, Tehtative Tract
Map Nd. 16665'and Specimen. Tree Removal Permit No: 2006-00001 to establish a
residential subdivision encompassing 14Ssmgle-family detached residehtiat whits, an
elementary school site, a public park site;open spaceldts, putilic and private streets and a
water reservoir site within Development Areas 3 and 7 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL'
Amendment No. 3 to the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 (SPN2006-00046)
(6) .The applicant requests modifications to various Specific Plan exhibits tncrder to replace a
4-way roundabout intersection at Mountain Park Driveand Gypsum Canydn Road with a 3-
way stop sign-controlled intersection. The roundabout was originally intended to provide
adequate capacity far afour-way intersection at Gypsum Canyon Road and Mountain Park
Drive in lieu of a traffic signaC This modification reflects a change bf design preference on
the part of the applicant.
(7) The applicant has submitted a traffic analysis evaluating the adequacy of the proposed
mddifications to the 7oundaboutintersectidh'and street cross-sections to serve traffi6
volumes fdr the Mountain Park project and ahticipatetl build-outof the General Plah: Staff
fias reviewed the trafficanalysis and concurs with the'conclusions of the analysis that the
proposed modificatidnswill'alldw for adequate vehicular circulation within Mountain Park.
(8) The following exhibits of the Mountain Park Specific Plan will be amended as follows:
L Exhibit 6 -Vehicular Circulatioh Plah and Section Kev Map: Modify to remove the
roundabout and the eastbound private street connecting to Development Area 5:
Page t
a
Staff Report to the
Planning Commissiori
January 8, 2007
Item No. 3
2. 'Exhibit 7C -Road Sections F - H: Modify Road Section H from a 2-lane to a 4-
lane road.
3. Exhibit 7J-.Traffic Calming Features Remove this exhibit from the Specific Plan
in its entirety.
4. Exhibit 8A - Landscaoe Conceot Plan- Modify td remdve the eastbound private
street connecting to Development Area 5.
5. ExhibitBB -Manufactured Slooes Modify to remove the eastbound private street
connecting to Development Area 5.
6. Exhibit 12A = Gradirig Cohceot and Section Kev Map Modify to remove the
eastbound private street connecting to Development Area 5.
Develdoment Area Plari for Develooment Areas 4 and 6 (Miscellaneous No 2006 00171)
(9) The Mountain Park Specific Plan, Exhibit 3, "Development Plan" (Attachmentl to the
report), depicts the conceptual boundaries of each of the Development Areas, the general
location of the fire station, trail staging area; private recreation center; and the
correspbnding land use designations and implementation zohes. Prior to approval of the
first tentative subdivision map fdreachDevelopmentArea, the applicant is required to
submit detailed Development Area Plans identifying the subdivision map boundaries, the
size ahd location bf the fire station, trail stagfng area and private recreation center and the
oonfiguratiorrand acreage' df each zoning district with a'statisticafsummary identifying the
number of detached and/or attached dwelling units ih each district: Thee Code7equres the
Planning Commission review the DevelopmentArea Plah ata ndticedpublid hearing and
make a determination whether the Plan is in conformance with the8pecific Plan.
(10) The applicant has submitted a DevelopmenfArea Plan (DAP Exhibit No. 1) for Areas 4' and
6 which indicates the following:
a. Development Area 4 is located east of SR-241, south of Santa Ana Canyon Road;
This Area is designated for Low-Medium Residential land uses (permitting up to 16
dwelling' units peracre) and will be implemented: by the RMP-4 Zone which permits
single-family detached dwelling units on a minimum Idt and pad size df 3,375 square
feet and RMP-Szohe whichpermits single-familydetached cluster dwelling units
with a minimum site area per dwelling unit of 2,100 square feet. Lot numbers 1
through 145 will cdnsisfgf single-familydetactted dwelling units do lots ranging from
a minimum of 4,084 up to 9,609 square feet in area. Lots 146 through 148 are
large-lots foFconveyance purpose5only that will be subject to future builder
tentative tract maps. These lots will consist df a maximum of 275 single-family
detached clusterresidential unitss Access to residential uses within the
Development Area will be provided from Mountain Park Drive via Gypsum Canyon
Road and Weir Cahyonroad: A 2.4-acre private community center and a 0.8-acre
private neighbdrhood park are also located ih this Area.
b. Development Area 6 is located at the northwest corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road
and Gypsum Canyon Road; south' of SR-91 i This area is designated for Institutional
lahd'uses and willbe implemented by the PRMP (Public Redreatohal Mountain
Park) Zane.. This area cdnsists of 1.6'and 1.1-acre parcels td be dedicated to the
City of Anaheim fdr a city fire statidmand trail staging area;, respectively: The trait
staging area parcel also indludes arr area designated for a future concession store,
as required by the Specific Plan.: The trail staging area is for the Gypsum Canyon
Creek Trail, a part of the Orange County Harbors, Beaches and Parks trail system.
This trail will be available to pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians. The landscaped
..Page 3
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 3 ;
lettered lots in this Development Area will be owned and maintained by Caltrans
andlor the future homeowner's association:
(11) Staff has reviewed the suomitted plans and determined that they have been prepared in
compliance with the Specific Plan, including Chapter 18.112 (Mountain Park Specific Plan
No. 90-4) of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
Tentative Tract Mao No. 17020 and Final Site Plan No: 200 6-000 1 0
(12) The applicant has submitted a tentative tract map (TTM Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2) to develop a
total of 145single-family detached residential unitsand 275 single-family detached.
residential cluster units: The single-family detached residential unit lot and pad sizes are in
conformance with the RMP-4 Zone requirements as described iN paragraph (11) of this
report. TNe lot widths rahge fram 41 to 95 feet iN conformance with Code requirements (a
minimum 40-foot lot width is required as measured at the front building setback line)..
(13) Lots 146, 147, and 148 are large-lots that are for cohveyance purposes only. These lots
are zoned RMP-5 which allows amaximum of 275single-family residential cluster units.
Vehicularaccess is provided from private streets "H" through "L" which encircle a 0.8-acre
private Neighborhood park described aslot 149. Subsequent builder subdivision maps
and final site plans are required in order. to develop these lots: The remaining lots 150-153
include the fire station; concession storelot, guard house oh Gypsum' Cahyon Road and
the community center.; She 31 lettered lots include landscape; slope and open space areas
and private'streets.
{14) In accordance with the Specific Plan conditions of approval (Condition No. 6 of Ordinance
No. 5993), the applicant Nas submitted the following ihformatiomantl plans for review and
approval in conjunction with the tentative tract map:
c. Topographidmap (TTM Exhibit Nos: i and 2) - Theseexhibits, which identify the
proposed elevatiohs of the lots and: depicfthe slope areas to be graded, have been
prepared in aodordahoe with the grading plans and slope ezhibitsevaluated in EIR
No:331 and the slope exhibits iN the Specific Plan document.
d. Landscape plans (TTM Exhibit Nos: 5 though 7) -These exhibits indicate the extent
and type of proposed landscaping; including existing vegetation that will be retained.
The applicant has also'submitted sections showing how the manufactured slopes,
fuel.modification areas and streetscape will be landscaped in compliance with the.
Landscape Concept Plan and associated exhibits in the Specific Plan.
e. Vehicular circulation plans (shown on the tentative tract map - TTM Exhibit Nos. 1
and 2) -These exhibits indicate the type and locationcf planned roadways;
including public roads (the realignment of Santa Ana Canyon Road and the
extension of Gypsum Canyon from its current terminus to the entranoebf the gated
development] and private roads (all streets within the residential Neighborhoods and
Mountain Park Drive (Street."A") from Gypsum Cahyon Road to the SR-241 over
crossing). The gated entry oh Gypsum Canyon Road will serve private streets "A"
through "L" and future Development Areas 1,`2; and 5 (east and south of the
' proposed tentative map boundary):. The private streets wilt tie owned and
maintained by the future homeownersessociation.
Page 4
l
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 3
f. Fence and wall plans (TTM Exhibit No: 8) -The fence and wall plans include the
design and placement of communitywalls, internal privacy walls and tubular steel
view fences (including sections) as identified below:
(i) Community Wall with vines: Plans indicate a 6-foot high;'earth tone
split face or slump stone block wall, planted with clinging vines to
-eliminate graffiti opportunities: These walls face the public/private
streets and open space areas.
(ii) Internal Privacy Wall: Plans indicate a 6-foot high, earth tone split face
or slump stone block wall; to be constructed do property Tines between
individual residential lots: ;
(iii) Tubular Steel View Fence:. Plans indicate 6-foot high, tubular steel view
fence with split face or slump stone pilasters, intended td provide a
fence with a view, along the rear property line of lots thatrear upon.
private open space lots. r
g• Sign plans -The Specific Plan requires sign plans to be submitted in conjunction
with the tentative tract map, Site Plan or Development Plan dr pursuant to a
separate Conditional Use Permit. The applicant has indicated that they will submit
proposed sign plans ata later date with a Condittonat Use Permit.
(15) The applicant is also required to submit a Final Site Plan (FSP Exhibit No. 1) prepared in
conformance with the Specific Plan for Planning Commission's review ahd approval prior to
or concurrent with the processing of the tentative tract map. For single-fatuity detached
residential zones, the Code permits the Final Site Plan to depict the:"typical" building
fdotprint for each proposed unit.. The Final Site Plan°submitted by the applicant indicates a
typical "conceptual" footprint whichconforms to the required building setbacks: The
applicant indicates that building designs have not beert finalized:: Therefore, staff has
included a condition of approval on the Final Site Plan (Condition No: 1) requiring the
submittal of fiha(building footprints; Floor plans; roof pfahs; elevations and color renderings
for review and approval by the Planning Commissionasa Reports and Recommendations
item: Final Site Plans for Lots 146 through;448 wilt be submitted in conjunction with the
subsequent. builder subdivision maps:
(16) Staffhas reviewed the Tentative Tract Map and Final Site Plan and has determined that
with the .incorporation of the recommended conditions of approval, the map is dohsistehf
with the General Plan; the Specific Plan as proposed for amendment under this request,
and further, that the Final Site Plan. inconsistent with the Specific Plan zoning and
development standards.
~ecimen Tree Removal Permit No 2006-00001 (Development Areas 4 5 and 61
(17) The applicant is requesting .approval to remove 320 California Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia)
specimen trees located in Development Areas 4 and 6, and 59 California Live Oaks from
Development Area 5, and replace the trees with a total df 8,241 trees .from the City's
Replacement Tree List and from the Mountain Park Specific Plan Tree List (SPT Exhibit
Nos. 1 and 2). The Mountain Park Specific Plan requires that trees are replaced at a 4 to 1
ratio from the City's Replacement Tree List; and ata 16 td 1 ratio from the Mountain Park
Specific Plan Tree List for a totatreplacement ratio of 20 to 1:' The removal of 373 trees
would result in the need to plant 7,460 new trees. The applicanYis proposing to plant an
additional 781 trees beyond the required amount. Development Area 5 is included in this
Page s
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 200T
Item No. 3
request in order td evenly distribute replacement trees throughout the subject development
areas: The specific placement of trees. in Development Area 5 will be shown on future
entitlement requests for that area: All replacement trees will be planted as specified in the
Mountain Park Tree List and willbe shown on Final Landscape Plans to be submitted with
building permits consistent with3he Specimen Tree Removal Permit.
(18) The. Specific Plan requires a Specimen Tree Removal :Permit to be processed prior to
approval of each mass gradtngplen to the Specific Plan area. If the specimen trees to be
removed are located withih graded areas identified in the Specific Plan Conceptual Grading
Plan. (Appendix C of the Specific Plan)and if the removed trees are `replaced in accordance
with the. Specific Plan requirements (Section 18.112.070.040 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code), the Code states that the removal permit shall be approved:
(19) Staff has reviewed the submitted plans and has determined thafthe treesproposed for
removal are located in the grading areas identified' in the Specific Plan document and that
the proposed tree replacement is in conformance with the Code requirements. Further,
FEIR No. 331 addressed the environmental impacts of the removal of specimen trees
throughout the project site, including within Development Areas 4, 5 and 6.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(20) On August 23; 2005, in conjunction with the approvalof Amendment No. 1 to the Mountain
Park Specific Plan; the City Council certified Final Environmental Impact Report No, 331
(FEIR No: 331); adopted a Statement of Findings ahd Facts'and Overriding Considerations
and adopted Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) No: 137 (City Council Resolution No.
2005-175): The City Councilfurther determined that FEIR No:331 was prepared in'
compliance with the California EnvironmentalOualityAct (CEQA)'and was adequate to
serve as the required environmental documentation for Amendment No: 1 to the Mountain
Park Specific Plan' and related actions: to implement the plan: The Initial Study'ihdicates
that no additional impacts above those dowered in FEIR No. 331 would result from the
proposed project actions; therefore, staff has determined that FEIR No: 331 is adequate to
serve asthe required environmental documentation for the proposed projectactions and
satisfies aII theYequiremehts df CEQA; and that no furtherenvirohmentaldocumentaticn
need be prepared. for he proposed actions!' Applicable mitigation measures from MMP No.
137 which pertain to Development Areas 4 and 6 have been incorporated into Mitigation
Monitoring Plan No. 137b (on file in the Planning Department).
FINDINGS:
(21) Before the Commission grants any specific plan amendment, it must make a finding of fact
that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist:
(a) That the property proposed far the specific. plan has unique site characteristics
such as topography, location or surroundings that are enhanced by special land
use and developmentstandards;
(b) That the specific plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan
and with the purposes; standards and land use guidelines therein;
(c) That the specific plan results in development of desirable character that will be
compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding.
neighborhood; and,
Page 6
7
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission.
January 8, 2007
Item No. 3
(d); That the specific plan respects environmental; aesthetic and historic resources
consistent with economic realities.
(22) The State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code, Section 66473.5) makes it mandatory
to include in all motioh5approving; or recommending approval ofa tract map; a specific
finding that the proposed Subdivision together with its design and improvement is
consistent with the City's General Plan.
Further, the law requires that the Commission/Council make any of the following findings
when denying or recommending denial of a tract map:
(a) That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable General and Specific
Plans.
(b) That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with
:applicable General and Specific Plans.
(c) That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development;
(d) Thatthe site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
(e) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish
or wildlife or their habitat.
(f) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause
serious public health problems.
(g) That the designbf the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with'.
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property
within the proposed subdivision.
(23) Zoning Code Section 18.18.040.050 states that as a prerequisite td grantingany permit to
destroy any specimen tree, the Planning Commission or City Council may impose
cohditions and shall make one (1) or more of the following findings:
(a) That principles of good forest management will :best be served by the proposed
destruction;
(b) That a reasonable and practical development of the property on which the tree is
located requires destruction of the tree or trees,;
(c) That the character of the immediate neighborhood in respect to treescape will not
be materially affected by the proposed destruction;
(d) That the topography of the building site renders destruction reasonably necessary;
or
(e) That tegard for the safety of persons or property requires the destruction.
The Mountain Park Specific Plan (Section 18.112.070) further states that the purpose of the
Specimen Tree Removal Permit for the Mouhtain Park area is to document the number of
existing trees to be removed and the number of new trees to be planted. If the specimen
trees are located within graded areas as identified in Appendix C, Conceptual Grading
Page 7
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 3
Plan, ahd if the removed trees are replaced in accordance with Section 18.112.070A40
requiring a 20 to 1 replacement ratio from specified tree lists] said Section states that the
tree removal permit shall be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
(24) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the
public hearing and, based upon its review and consideration of Final EIR No. 331,
Mitigation Monitoring Program 13Tahd Mitigation Monitoring Plan No: 137b and the
evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence'presented in this
Staff Report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission take the following actions as iridioated ih the attached resolutohs'and
excerpts including the findings and conditions contained the~etn:
(a) By motion, determine and recommend that the City Couhcil determine that the
. previously certified EIR No: 331, Mitigatibn Monitoring Program No. 137 and
Mitigation Monitorng Plah No: 137b are adequate tb'serve as the required
environmental documentation for the Project Actions:
(b) By resolution, recommend that the City Council approve Amendment No. 3 to the
Mountain.Park.Specific Plan Noi 90-4 (SPN2006-00046):
(c) By motion, approve Development Area Ptah for Development Areas 4 and 6
(M IS2006-00171).
(d) By motion, a rove Final Site Plan No. 2006-00010.
(e) By motion, approve Tentative Tract Map Na 17020.
(f) By motion, ap rove Specimen Tree Removal Permit No: 2006-00003.
Page 8
Attachment 1
Mountain Park Specific Plan -Exhibit 3, "Development Plan"
Legend
~~ Law-Medium Hllh
L-
=,_: Law-Medium Resi
.,
O Open Sperm
Insdtutianal
® School
Q Fla Station
Pahlic Cnmmuniry Park
® Private Neighharhvad Padc
Pmma Recaafivn Center
DAS DavetapmentAm3
RMP3 ImplemenT;tivn Zane
~~~~
Mountain Park Specific Plan (SP90-4, Amendment No. i)
Idot To Scale
~8~~~ ~
k7orch 71, 2005
~~-2
[DRAFT]
'RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--""
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT
NO. 3 TO THE MOUNTAIN PARK SPECIFIC PLAN'NO. 90-4 (SPN2006-
00046), AMENDING THE SPECIFIC PLAN TO REPLACE A 4-WAY
ROUNDABOUT INTERSECTION AT MOUNTAIN PARK DRIVE AND
GYPSUM CANYON ROAD W ITH A 3-WAY STOP SIGN-CONTROLLED
INTERSECTION. -
WHEREAS, on August 27, 1991, the City Council of the City of Anaheim adopted Resolution
Nos. 91 R-263 and 91 R-264 approving the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 (including a Public Facilities,
Plan and Zoning and Development Standards) to provide for the development of an approximate 3,179-acre site
(the "Mountain Park area") located within the County of Orange in the City of Anaheim's sphere-of-influence and
generally bordered on the north by the Riverside Freeway (SR-91) and the Gypsum Canyon Road interchange.;
on the west b~ The Summit of Anaheim Hills and Sycamore Canyon developments in the City of Anaheim and.
as further described in Attachment A of City Council Resolution 91 R-263. The Specific Plan includes zoning
and development standards, design guidelines and a public facilities plan, and permits the development of up to
7,966 residential dwelling units, 179 acres of commercial uses, schools, parks and public facilities and provides
for hiking and riding trails and open space areas; and
WHEREAS, on September 10, 1991, the City Council .adopted Ordtnance No. 5253 to reclassify
the property tc the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 Zone and Ordinance No. 5254 to establish the zoning
and development standards for the specific plan as part of Chapter 18.76 of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, on May 26, 1992, 2,339 acres of the Mountain Park site were annexed to the City.
of Anaheim, with the remaining site acreage remaining as unincorporated land in the County of Orange; and
WHEREAS, on May 25, 2004, the City Council, by its Resolution No. 2004-95, adopted a
comprehensive update to the General Plan for the City of Anaheim and as :part of said update and at the request
of the property owner, the density in the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 area was reduced to 2,500
residential dwelling units and the land uses were amended to provide for a fire station, a ..park site, a school site,
trails and open space.
WHEREAS, on August 23, 2005, the City Council adopted Resolution Nos. 2005-175 and 2005-
177 approving Amendment No. 1 to the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 and certifying Environmental
Impact Report No. 331 to provide for the development of a residential community with up to 2,500 residential
units, a fire station, public trails, a trail staging area, a concession storelinterpretive center, a school site, a
public community park and open space consistent with the updated General Plan. The City Council
subsequently adopted Ordinance Nos. 5993 and 5994 to amend the Specific Plan Zone and establish revised
zoning and development standards as part of Chapter 18.112 of the Anaheim Municipal; and
WHEREAS, on May 9; 2005, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006-089 approving
Amendment No. 2 to the Mountain Park Specific Plan to revise certain conditions of approval. The City Council
subsequently adopted Ordinance No. 6026 to amend the Specific Plan conditions of approval found in
Ordinance No. 5993.
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition from the legal
property owner ("The Irvine Company') for Amendment No. 3 to the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 to
amend the Mountain Park Specific Plan exhibits pertaining to the replacement of a 4-way roundabout at the
intersection of Mountain Park Drive and Gypsum Canyon Road with a 3-way stop sign-controlled intersection;.
and;
WHEREAS, the property owner has also submitted applications requesting approval of a
development area plan for Mountain Park Development Areas 4 and 6; a final site plan fpr Development Areas 4
and 6; a tentative tract map to establish a 153 numbered and 31 lettered lot residential subdivision
encompassing 145 single-family detached residential lots, 3 Large-Lots to allow a maximum of 275 single-family
detached residential units for financing or conveyance purposes only, a private recreation facility, private
neighborhood park, private entry structure, a public fire station, a trail staging area with a convenience store,
Cr\PC2007-0 -1- PC2007-
open space lots and public and private streets; and that tiie applications submitted by The Irvine Community
Development Company are hereinafter referred to as the "Proposed Project Actions"; and
WHEREAS, the Mountain Park Specific Play No. 90-4 area consists of approximately 3,001
acres including 2,161 acres which have been annexed to the City of Anaheim and 840 acres of unincorporated.
land located within the County of Orange in the City of Anaheim's sphere-of-influence (an additional
approximately 172 acres which was also annexed to the City of Anaheim and which bisects the western portion
of the Mountain Park site have been developed with the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-241):° The
property description is set forthrn Exhibit 1 to this Resolution and incorporated herein as if set forth in full; and,
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission Cid hold a public hearing at the Anaheim Civic
Center, Council Chambers, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, in the i;ity of Anaheim on December 11, 2006, at
2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60 and 18.7, to hear and consider evidence for and
against said proposed amendment and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection
therewith; and that said public hearing was continued to the January 8 2007; Planning Commission meeting;
and
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission., after die consideration, inspection,
investigation and study made by itself and on 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 Mountain Park Specific Plan Nd. 90-4, Amendment No. 1 has unique site
characteristics such as topography, location or surroundings as described in the Specific Plan identified as
Exhibit A on file in the City of Anaheim Planning Department and in Volume I! of FEIR No. 331 that are
enhanced by special land use and development standards; and
2. That the proposed Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4, Amendment No. 3 is consistent with
the goals, objectives and policies of the Anaheim General Plan, including the standards and land use guidelines
provided therein; and
3. That the proposed amendment to the Specific Plan would result in development of a desirable
character by permitting land uses which are compatible with both the existing and proposed development in the
surrounding neighborhood; and, that future development of the property would be enhanced by the special land
use and development standards set forth in the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4, as amended; and,
4. That the specific plan respects environmental, aesthetic and historic resources consistent with
economic realities
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS: That the Anaheim City Planning
Commission has reviewed the Proposed Project Actions, including Amendment No. 3 to the Mountain Park
Specific Plan No. 90-4, and did find and determine and recommend that the City Council find and determine,
pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), based upon its independent
review and consideration of the previously-certified Final EIR No: 331 and Mitigation Moni~~ring Program No.
137 (certified by the City Council pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 2005-175) and the evidence received
at the putilic hearing, that the previously-certified FEIR No. 331 together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No.
137 are in compliance with CEQA and the State and City CEQA Guidelines .and are adequate to serve as the
required environmental documentation for this Amendment to the Mountain Park Specific Plan and satisfy all of
the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this
Amendment. Applicable mitigation measures from MMP No. 137 which pertain to Development Areas 4 and 6
have been incorporated into Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 137b (on file in the Planning Department).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, pursuant to the above findings, the Anaheim
Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council of the City of Anaheim approve.
Amendment No. 3 to the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 as follows:
-2- PC2007-
a
Amend the Mountain Park Specific Plan 90-4 to modify and/or remove the following Specific Plan
Exhibits (included as Exhibits 2 through 7 to this resolution):
2. Exhibit 6 -Vehicular Circulation Plan and Section Kev Map• Modify to remove the roundabout
and the eastbound private street connecting tg Development Area 5.
3. Exhibit 7C -Road Sections F - H: Modify Road Section H from a 2-lane to a 4-lane road
4. Exhibit 7J -Traffic Calming Features• Remove this exhibit from the Specific Plan in its entirety.
5. Exhibit 8A - Landscaoe Concept Plan: Modify to remove the eastbound private street
connecting to Development Area 5.
6. Exhibit 8B -Manufactured Slooes~ Modify to remove the eastbound private street connecting to
Development Area 5.
7. Exhibit 12A -Grading Conceot and Section Kev Mao' Modify to remove the eastbound private
street connecting to Development Area 5.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find
and determine that adoption of this resolution is expressly predicated upon compliance with each and all of the
conditions hereinabove set forth. Should such any 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
approval herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to
the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to
the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in
delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2007. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of
the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures.
ATTEST:
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM .PLANNING COMMISSION
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim 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 January 8, 2007, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS;
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
2007
IN WITNESS WHEREOF., I have hereunto set my hand this day of
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING GOMMISSION
-3- PC2007-
Exhibit 1
LEGAL DESCRIPTI0A'
MOUNTAIN PARK SPECIFIC PLAN AREA
ALL THAT LAND SITUATE IN THE STATE OF CAl_IFORNL4, COUNTY OF ORANGE,
PARTLY IN THE CITY t)F ANAHEIM AND PARTLY IN UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY,.
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
ALL OF BLOCK 26, TOGETHER WITH PORTIONS OF BLOCKS 23,24, 25, 27, 2R, 29, 30, 34,
35, A_ND 35 OF IRVINE'S SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 1,
PAGE 88 OF MISCEL].ANEOUS RECORD MAPS IIV THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY.
RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS;
BEGINNING AT AN ANGLE POINT IN THE EXISTING BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AS ESTABLLSHF.D BY TIIE "(AMENDED) OAK HILLS RANCH ANNEXATION
TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM", SATD POINT BEING THE SOUTHEASTERLY TERMINUS OF
THAT CERTAIN COURSE DESCRIBED IN SAID ANNEXATION AS "S 27° 08' 00" L• 1,914,00
FEET" FOR THE. EASTERLY LINE OF THE FELIPE YORBA (PARCEL ?) AND THE..
TEODOCIO YORBA (PARCEL 1) ALLOTMENTS IN THE DECREE OF PRRTlT10N OF THE
RANCHO SANTIAGO DE SANTA ANA RECORDED IN BOOK "B" OF NDGMENTS OF THE
17 t" IUDiCIAL DISTRICT COURT OF CALIFORNIA IN SAID COUNTY;
THENCE NORTH 25°43'47" WEST 2964.60 FEET ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE AND SAID
EXISTING BOUNDARY AS ESTABLISHED BY SAID ANNEXATION AND BY THE
"(AML•NDED) WALLAC:E RANCH ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM"; THENCE,
LEAVING SAID EXIS'f1NG BOUNDARY, NORTH 81°56'26" WEST 43.53 FEET TO THE
SOUTHERLY LINE Ol~ THE LAND DESCRIBED IN TH): DEED TO THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA RECORDED IN BOOK 2208, PAGE 13S'"OF OPPICIAL;RECORDS 1N 'CHE
OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY RECORDER' THENCE SOUTH 82°21'50" EAST 43.32 FEET
ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE TO SAID EXISTING BOUNDARY; THENCE
NORTH 25°43'47" WES'J' 94.59 FEET ALONG SAID EXISTING BOUNDARY TO THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF PARCEI. 1 OF THAT CL-RTAAV PROPOSED RELINQUISHMENT OF
A PURT10_d OF SAI~rI'A ANA CA.1~'YON ROAD (ROUTE 91 HIGI3WAY) AS SHOWN ON
STATE OF CALIFORNIA DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS RIGHT OF WAY MAP NOS. F1840,
M:\MoppmgWS7\011schonl d~sz annexNlTRV-PRK•PROJ.doc
Si18h0U5
Page I of 5
Exhibit 1
F1841 AND F1B42 F1LIiD APRIL 16, 1973 IN BOOK 8, PAGES 30 THROLIGH 42 OF
HIGHWAY MAPS, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE, LEAVING SAID EXISTING'
BOUNDARY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE, THE FOLLOWING COURSES:
SOUTH S2°21'49" EAST 1114.95 FEET TO TILE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE
CONCAVE SOUTHERLI', HAVING A RADIUS OF 3999.00 FEET, EASTERLY 389..73 FEET
ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL, ANGLE OF 5° 35' 02",
SOUTFi 7G°4G'47" EAST 557.39 FEET AND SOUTH 79°37'36" EAST 311.6D FEET TO THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN LAND DESCRIBED IN THE EXCEPTION TO
PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO THE STATF. OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED MARCH 8, 1971 1N
BOOK 9563, PAGE 74~ OF OFFICIAL RECORDS IN THE OFfi1CE OF THE COUNTY
RECOILOER OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE, LEAVING THE BOUNDARY OF SAID
PROPOSED RELINQUISHMENT ALONG THE NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY LLNES OF
SAID EXCEPTION, THE FOLLOWING COURSES: CONTINUING SOUTH 79°19'39" EAST
35G.7G FEET, SOUTH 77° l0' 44" EAST 385.66 FEET TO TI3E BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADITJS OF 375.00 FEET. EASTERLY 211.1&
FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 32° 15' 36", NURTH 70° 33'
40" EAST 1G0.70 FEET, AND SOUTH 19°26'20" EAST 180.34 FEET TO SAID NORTHERLY.
L1NE OF PARCEL 1 OF THE PROPOSED RELINQUISHMENT; THENCE, LEAVING THE
BOUNDARY OF SAID EXCEPTION, NORTH 70° 33' 40" EAST 80.00 FEET ALONG SA1D
NORTHERLY LINE TU THE SOUTI•IDRLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED
RECORDED 1N BOOK 9563, PAGE 744 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE, LEAVING THE
BOUNDARY OF SAID PROPOSED RELINQUISHMENT ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE,
THE FOLLOWING COURES: NORTH 35°15'43" EAST 129.79 FEET, NORTH Ol°31'34" WEST
388.04 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY,
HAVING A RADIUS OF 125.00 FEET, EASTERLY 128.89 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE
THROI]Gli A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 59° 04' 42", AND NORTH 57°33'08" EAST 566.63 TEST
TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RECORDED JULY 24, 1951 [N BOOK 2208, PAGE 136 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS;
TT•IENCE, LEAVING T1iE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 1 OP THE DEED RECORDED TN
BOOK 9543, PAGE 744 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, ALONG SAID LAST MENTIONED
50UT13ERLY L1A'E, THE FOLLOWING COURSL•S: NORTH 89°1717" EA51' 56,41 FEET,
NORTH 71°48'28" EA57' 1178.97 FEET, NORTH 33°13'11" EAST 246.88 FEET,
NORTIi G7°20'16" EAST' 660.80 FEL^T, NORTH 52°25'37" FAST 273.54 FEET,
M•\M9ppingMS7\Q?vchooldi°i °nnza\MTN-PRK-PROJ.d°c
SH 012(105
Page 2 of 5
Exhibit 1
NORTH 35°34'15" EAST 313.69 FEET "f0 THE BEGINNING OF ANON-TANGENT CURVE
CONCAVE NOR1'HWES'CERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2050.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO
SAID CURVF. REARS SOUTH 43°11'22" EAST EASTERLY 61.70 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1° 43' 28", NORTH 45°05'10" EAST 43.24 FEET TO TIIE
BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS
OF 1250,00 FEET, EASTERLY 876.66 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH n CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 40" 11' 00", NORTH 85°16!10" EAST .377.7:6 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A
TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 2950.00 FEET,.
EASTERLY 259.15 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
5°02'00", SOUTH 69°41'50" EAST 636.38 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2050.00 FEET, EASTERLY 385.82
FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGI3 A CENTRAL ANGi.E OF 70" 4T 00", AND
NORTH 79°31'10" EAST 66.15 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL 2 OF SA1D
DL-ED RECORDED 1N BOOK 9563, PAGE 744 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE, LEAVING
THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 2208, PAGE 138
OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, ALONG SAID LAST ABOVE M]=NTIONEp SOUTHERLY LINE,
THE FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTH 72°06'05"L•A5T 714.63 FEET. AND
SOUTH 57°51'11" EAST 428.50 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 30;
THENCE, LEAVING T]iE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 2, SOUTH. 40° 48' 3]" WEST
60285 FEET ALONG SAID 50UTI3EASTERLY L1NE AND THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE
OF SAID BLOCK 27, T'O 'THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF YARCEL 1 OF LOT LINE.
AD]USTMENT NO. LL 85-22 RECORDED AUGUST 15, 1985 AS INSTRUMENT N0. 85=
304375 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTH 49 ° 11' 43" EAST 5280.01 FEET
ALONG .THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 TO THL• SOUTHEASTERLY
LINE OF SAID BLOCI: 27; THENCE SOUTH 40°48' 18" WEST 2510.00 FEET ALONG THE
SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 27 TO THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF
PARCEL 3 OF SAID LOT LINE AD]USTMENT N0. LL 85-22; THENCE SOUTH 49° 11' 43"
EAST 3839.05 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 3; THfiNCE,
LL-AVING THE BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO_ LL 85-22,
SOUTH 2G°04'10" WEST 1199.21 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 84° 43' 34" WEST 652.76 FEET;
THENCE- SOUTH 46° Z:i' 04" WEST 1698.96 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87°35' 16" WEST 760.67
FEET; THENCE SOUTIi 58° 18' 25" WEST' 1560.76 FEET; THL-NCE SOUTH 32°0722" WEST
1357.66 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 43°07'24" WEST 431.57 FEET; THENCE
M~iMappmgt4k7t~'_~scho°I disc nnnexiM'f~-PKK•PROJ.d°c
5/Ill/?UU~
Page 3 of 5
Exhibit 1
SOUTIi G8°]5'37" WEST 877.41 FEET; THENCE 50UTH 75° 44' 39" WEST 629.8 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 67°52'~k5" WEST 969:34 FEET; THENCE NOR"1'H 4G°01'19" WEST 1267.33
FEET; T'HEN'CE NOR'1'li 29°15'04" WEST 561.89 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 53°34'44° WEST
G40.02 FEET; THENCE NORTH 39°21'20" WEST 698.85 FEET; THENCE NORTTT 56°11'59"
WEST 725.04 FEET; THENCE SOL'I'H 89°31'25" WEST 600.02 FEET; THENCE
NORTH 09°5.6'10" EAST' 837.64 T"EET; TPLENCE NORTI3 04°15'28" WEST 471.30 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 30°42'42"WEST 587.39 FEET; Ti~ENCE NORTH 09°56'22" WEST 984.78
FEET; THENCE NORTTt 04°33'40" EAST 817.59 FEET; THENCE NORTH 14°55'49" WEST
620.97 FEET; THENCE NORTH 68°31'20" WEST 327.76 FEET; TfIENCE NORTH 35°19'49"
WEST 484.17 FEET; THENCE NORTH 19°42'06" WEST 786.02 FEET; THENCE
NORTH 81°41'19" WES'C 449.72 FEET; THENCE NORTH 5~ 21'53" WEST 243.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 81°1703" WEST 532.11 FEET TO SAID EX[STAIG BOUNDARY OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM, AS ESTABLISHED BY SAID "(AMENDED) OAK HILLS RANCIi
ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM", SAID EXISTING BOUNDARY BEING THIi
SOUTHEASTERLY LINF. OF SAiD LAST MENTIONED ANNEXATION; THENCE
NORTH 35°50'38" EAST 3182.01 FEET ALONG SAID EXISTING BOUNDARY AND SAID
SOUTHEASTERLY LINE TO THAT CERTAIN ANGLE POINT TN TFIE SOUTHEASTERLY
LAZE TRACT NO. 15128, PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 776 PAGES 17 THROUGI3 19 OF
MISCELLANEOUS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY RECORDER, SAID'ANCLE
POINT BEING DISTANt "N35°50'22"E 110.94"' FROM TH& MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER
OF SAID TRACT NO. 15128; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY TRACT LINE THE
FOLLOWING COURSES: NORTH 73°00'16" EAST 11.50 FEET, NORTH 43°00'16" EAST
127.00 FEET, NORTH 2')°l3'iG" EAST 379.84 FEET AND NORTH 74°50'16" EAST 33.42 FEET
TO SAID EXISTING BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF ANAIiEIM, AS ESTABLISHED BY SAID
"(AMENDED) OAK HILLS RANCH ANNEXATION SAID EXISTING BOUNDARY BEING
THE SOUTHEAST`LRLY LINE OF SAID LAST MENTIONED ANNEXATION; THENCE
NORTH 35°50'38" EAST' 2264.16 FL•ET ALONG SAID EXISTING BOUNDARY AND SAID
SOUTHEASTERLY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THLRL^ FROM THOSE PORTIONS INCLUDED WITHIN THE LAND
CONVEYED TO 'fi•Ll: FOOTHILL/EASTERN TT:ANSPUR'1'Af10N CORRIDOR AGENCY
DESCRIBED IN PARCL'LS 300260-2, 300261-2, 300261-3, 300261-4 AND 3002G2-2 OF THAT
M ~Msppmg~a87~U2~sclt°°I dirt 3nncxlMTN-PRK-PROJ.doc
sno~anns
Page4of5
Exhibit 1
CERTAIN AMENDED AND RESTATED GRANT DLED RECORDED OCTOflER l4, 1998 AS
INSTRIIMEN'f NO, 19980694409 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PORTIONS INCLUDED WITTIIN PARCEL L OF
THAT CERTAIN PROPOSED RELINQUISHMENT OF A PORTION OF .SANTA ANA
CANYON ROAD (ROUTE 91 HIGHWAY) AS SHOWN ON STATE OF CALIFORIv'lA
DNISION OF HIGHWAYS RICH"f OF WAY MAP NOS. F1840, F1841 AND F1842 F1LED
APRIL 16, 1973 IN BOOK 8, PAGES 30 THROUGH 42 OF HIGHWAY MAPS, AND A5 SA10
SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD IS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF RECORD OF SURVEY 95-1039
FILED IN BOOK 169 PAGES 1 THROUGH 24, INCLUSIVE OF RECORD OP SURVEYS,
BOTH IN SAID OFFICE OF'tHE ORANGE COUNTY RECORDER.
AS SHOWN ON THE EXHIBIT "B" PLAT ATTACHED FIERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE
MADE A PART' HEREOF,
DATED THIS l OT'H DAY OF MAY, 2005
JERRY L. USEL'fON, L.S. 5347
LICENSE L•?+PIR.ES 12-31-OS
E1~.12/31/05
M \M3ppingWn7\Q2tschool duc onnex\M'f~-PRK-PROlooc
iilor_ous
Page 5 of 5
7
Exhibit 1
SANTA ANA CANYON POAp
pCL 9002917
NCC ~.I. z Eooa 28
w.sr e~waummos.~. oa
\~
~
r
a~';s >4i~t
~'Q h~ Y`'~'ao
'
~
~4R'
1 /
N
b_
1
Pv
> OP, ?ors
~ 19
r
~
~re>N~ ?gy~~'~ r
6~
~
~l~Cr tl>~ 9~~~~~ \
' N
>ry0 ~p i. \\
+y'~ ~j
9
Cr ~G 2tl
'Y
~y0 '~i~ • ~
a> . o
W
~
°;s •
~
r
~~ J
U:
e
i
~Y
~ o
-1 \
°b
O
76' ~9A.
~
zs
\
\
o
N
\
\ O
W ~
V
~ ~\
/
/
/ \
~ Zs'
/ SR-at
32
(upi~ ~wKCBtI
K N¢. we z xw
~,NP 90 xsi. ea :rArmaom.,, oN
~o~~ F
\ \
PCL 990292-2
37
28
/ / \ ~ t ~
n
J ~.-~
~a A
PeNffi. II
NEC XY. 2 Iaai
st5f. lq a1LafL6MLr, ¢p '~
26
Q
~ O
6
O
3
29
2
O
F
a
~
r
a ~
\ ~
/
~ a /
~ '
' '
'
2400
0 2400
48DD
36
~ GRAPHI SCALE: 1" = 2400'
e ~{~~~~~ Ear D6Tls" 5/02/05
F SC
l~ ~+~- 8ark SCALE: ~"=24D0'
lll,
I g D 1 1 l E B l p q $p$Qj~(.' P~ /~ ~: 487.2.56
16785 Van Rartnan, 5•~n 700, (nine, G6fe~giq DieOe
lel DaD n71.1900elyggD ~)•5715•.i.n. fmooe com ,~^,~`,~'_ ,,',y
/>uiWWiiEi! CNVM~
1 ®F 1
a
m° ° 6
g_ I
8
e
a
e
0
e
B
®b® R
~ a®°°@
A
Legend
low-Medium Hillside ResdenHOl
Lew.Medbm Density Residanttvl
Open Spoce
Inslifutivnvl
DA Development Fvea
a Mvdi(ied Hillside Pnmvry
-_-~.' Modified Hillside Secvndvry
Mvdifed Hillside Collector
°°®°° City o(Mvhelm Limits
Sheet Cms-Sedivn
Q Gvfed E.nance
O
- Toll Rood Overcressing
O Tv!I Rcad lnferchvnge
5~ shoot
QF Fire Smlivn
Cammvnlty Park
~e~a~a~~w~ ~a~c~@~4a®o~ ~9w~ ~ ~~~~o®~ het
Mountain Park Specific Plan (SP90-A, Amendment No. IJ
Nat To Scale
~~ab6~ 6
vember 75, 2006
~ ~ ~ a _ 6
R/W R/W
1' SIDEWALK MAY MEANDER
IN LANDSCAPE SETBACK
Modified fiIllslde Colle<or
d] S'
MOUNTAIN PARK DRNE - PRNATE (Looking North & East)
ww IYW
1' SIDEWALK MAY MEANDER
IN LANDSCAPE SETBACK
Modfied Nills(de Collector
Roae! Sections F - !~ Exhibit 7C
Mountain Park Specific Plan (SP90-4, Amendment No. 1) onoberzo,soob
wm ro scale
S.R. 241 BRIDGE OVERCROSSING - PRNATE (Looking Eost)
GYPSUM CANYON ROAD - PRNATE (Looking South)
W
O
K
Q
a
z
z
0
PLANTING
IL~~I~B"d®e FlRE APPARANS~ ~CUNC. SLAB If~28 -~~
WEIGHT REQUIREMENT
i STP.EET ME}UNTA®LE ~EDIAfN
_ NOT TO SCALE
_J SIDEWALK NOTE: A DRIVEABLE MEDIAN IS A PAVED MEDIAN
~~,~' MOUNTABLE MEDIAN ABUTTING A ROLLED CURB. THE PAVEMENT
SURFACE MUST SUPPORT EMEP.GENCY VEHICLES
~~ LANDSCAPED PARKWAY/MEDIAN AND SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
II-21
~_A.v
~cr..,...:c.
~i
Legend `"
Open Space
Unoivded Fuel Mcd'iicafion Areas
L~_'~ fvlanuiocmmd Elopes
~
r l Pssidenlia! Neigficori:aods
Gypsum Creek
I Cezlvmfion Area
r~~---~~
G^ ~1 ®
L
! Major Sheehcope
.-. desenoir
emmoa CiNof An¢heir.. &.+undory
~O Typiml Ee,9io~u
-' =m--~a
of
e
H
E
G
c
e
ft6 f E ory4~ 4
g ee v«e3
Q. C E ~~C¢~e
(e Pj ¢. FE
E E Eo
e
O~ ¢ ¢0~0
4 ® u~
2 ¢~w~cQ~06
k
H
'~ ~
~l ~
., s
amP
a
b
s
1
8
&m
N 5
@~
z ® ~ Q
C g°j
~ 6 Q
o a o
ga
'
a
~
s
0
v. s
N'b
6 a~
g. g.
& o '. 8.
8
8
B ~
i
~ g
9g
~
6 0 F
H eep o®
®
L
®p NDTE:
iHI51iAGRAPHIC REPREEENTATION OFAPIANNING
ENGIiJEEGING COIJCEPi. FINAL OEEIGIJ SOLUTIONS
R9L BE P?OPOEEEI ANO RENEVJEO AE PART OF
EUBEEOUENi FAN A~FROVAL.
~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~e~~ ~Gw~
Maunfain Park Specific Plan (SP°0-4, Hmendnenf No. iJ
Rlovecoa4er i 5,
Fins $o SE44E
~;
~~
~~ ; ~ ~~~
„~: ' '` 111
_ ~~~~ ~4 ~
OEVELOPMEMT
AREA v
ner:~, z
~®reu~~c8aerad 51®pe,~ ~rdsi~R9 RBI
Aounfain Pork Spod/ic Plan (SP90-d, Amendment No. 1 J ~e~+r,~96,9w
Emin Y'e IVAM
i
Mpuntain Park Specific Plan (SP90-4, Amendment No. 1)
on®me~ am, ammo
Nae Se Scale
i
c: vieianalieim.ner
City of Anaheim
hLANNING I3EPAR'i`MENT
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2007.
January 8, 2007.
John Sherwood
Irvine Community Development Company
550 Newport Center Drive
3a.
3b.
(SPN2006-00046)
3c. DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT AREAS 4 AND 6
IMiszoos-oo~7~)
3d. FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2006-00010
3e. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17020
3f. SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. 2006-00003
Owner: Irvine Land Company, LLC., 550 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach,
CA 92660
Agent: John Sherwood, Irvine Community Development Company, 550 Newport
Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Location: Multiale Proaerties: The Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 area
encompasses 3,001 acres located generally in Gypsum Canyon, south
of the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway, in Orange County; California. The
majority of the project site is in the jurisdiction of the City of Anaheim;
however, open space areas in the southern- and eastern-most portions
of the project site are in unincorporated County of Prange jurisdiction in
the City of Anaheim's sphere-of-influence.' SR-91 is immediately north of
the project site; and the SR-241 bisects the site into eastern and western
segments.:
Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan area
consist of approximately 168 acres located southwest of the southern
terminus of Gypsum Canyon Road, generally bordered on the west by
the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-241) and on the north by the
Riverside Freeway (SR-91). Development Area 5 consists of
approximately 291 acres located south of SR-91, east of the Gypsum
Cahyon Road interchange:
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
P.O. Bax 3222
Anaheim, Calilornia 92803
TEl (714)765-5139
Project
Actions: Amendment No. 3 to the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4
(SPN2006-000461- Request to amend the Mountain Park Specific Plan° -
to replace a 4-way roundabout intersection at Mountain Park prive and
Gypsum Canyon Road with a 3-way stop sign-controlled intersection.
Development Area Plan for Development Areas 4 and 6
(Miscellaneous No. 2006-001711- Request for review and approval
of a Development Area Plan for Development Areas 4 and 6 of the
Mountain Park Specific Plan.
Final Site Plan No. 2006-00010 -Request for review and approval of a
final site plan for Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain :Park
Specific Plan.
Tentative Tract Mao Nd. 17020 -Request to establish a 153 numbered
and 31 lettered lot residential subdivision encompassing 145 single-
family detached residential lots, 3 Large-Lots to allow a maximum of 275
single-family detached residential units for financing or conveyance
purposes only, a private recreation facility, private neighborhood park,
private entry structure; a public fire station, a trail staging area with a
convenience store, dpen space lots and public and private streets.
Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 2006-00003 -Request for review
and approval of a master specimen tree removal permit to remove up to
700 trees. These trees would be replaced at a 20 to 1 ratio in
Development Areas 4, 5, and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan.
ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and
MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the Project
Actions, including Miscellaneous No. 2006-00171 pertaining to the pevelopment Area Plan
for Development Areas 4 and 6, and does hereby determine that based upon its independent
review and consideration of the previously-certified FEIR No: 331 together with Mitigation
Monitoring Program No. 137 (for the Specific Plan Amendment) and Mitigation Monitoring
Plan No. 137b (for the remaining actions) and the evidence received at the public hearing,
that the previously certified EIR No. 331, Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 137 and
Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 137b are in compliance with CEQA and the State and City
CEQA Guidelines and are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation
for the Project Actions and satisfy all the requirements of CEQA, and that no further
environmental documentation need be prepared for the Project Actions. Applicable mitigation
measures from MMP No. 137 which pertain to Development Areas 4 and 6 have been
incorporated into Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 137b (on file in the Planning Department).
Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve the Development
Area Plan for Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan (MIS2006-
00171)based on the finding that the Development Area Plan is consistent with the Specific
Plan, including Chapter 18.112 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, and subject to the following
condition of approval:
That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and
specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are
on file with the Planning Department marked DAP Exhibit No. 1 (Development Area
Plan for Development Areas 4 and 6).
7
Sincerely,
Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary
Anaheim Planning Commission
cc: John Sherwood, Irvine Community Development Company, 550 Newport Center Drive,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
MIS20p6-00171_Excerpt_
City of Anaheim
[PLANNING DEPAI2TIVIENT
Vn9ctaf1d1e~Fl1.n9I
January 8, 2007
John Sherwood
Irvine Community Development Company
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Following is an excerpt from the .minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of
January 8; 2007:
3a.
3b.
(SPN2006-00046)
3c:` DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT AREAS 4 AND 6
jMIS2006-00171)
3d. FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2006-00010'
3e. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO: 17020
3f. SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. 2006-00003
Owner: Irvine Land Company, LLC., 550 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach,
CA 92660
Agent: John Sherwood, Irvine Community Development Company, 550 Newport
Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Ldcation: Mul£ple Proaerties: The Mountaih Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 area
encompasses 3,001 acres located generally in Gypsum Canyon, south
of the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway, in Orange County, California. The
majority of the project site is in the jurisdiction of the City of Anaheim;
however, open space areas in the southern-'and eastern-most portions
of the project site are in unincorporated County of Orange jurisdiction in
the Cityof Anaheim's sphere-of-inFluence. SR-91 is immediately north of
the project site; and the SR-241 bisects the site into eastern and western
segments.
Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan area
consist of approximately 168 acres located southwest of the southern
terminus of Gypsum Canyon Road; generally bordered on the west by
the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-241 jand on the north by the
Riverside Freeway (SR-91): Development Area 5 consists of
approximately 291 acres located south of SR-91, east of the Gypsum
Canyon Road interchange.
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
P.B. Box 3222
Anaheim, California 92803
TEL (714)765-5139
Project
Actions: Amendment Nc. 3 to the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4
{SPN2006-000462- Request to amend the Mountain Park Specific Plan -
to replace a 4-way roundabout intersection at Mountain Park Drive and
Gypsum Canypn Road with a 3-way stop sign-controlled intersection.
No. 2006-001711- Request for review and approval of a Development
Area Plan for Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific
Plan.
Final Site Plan No. 2006-00010 -Request for review and approval of
a final site plan for Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park
Specific Plan.
Tentative Tract Mao No. 17020 =Request to establisfl a 153 numbered
and 31 lettered lot residential subdivision encompassing 145 single-
family detached residential Tots, 3 Large-Lots to allow a maximum of 275
single-family detached residential units for financing or conveyance
purposes only, a private recreation facility, private neighborhood park,
private entry structure, a public fire statioh, a trail staging area with a
convenience store, dpen space lots and public and private streets.
Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 2006-00003 -Request for review
and approval of a master specimen tree removal permit to remove up to
700 trees. These trees would be replaced at a 20 to 1 ratio in
Development Areas 4, 5, and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan.
ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and
MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the Project
Actions, including Final Site Plan No. 2006-00010, and does hereby determine that based
upon its independent review and consideration of the previously-certified FEIR No. 331
together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 137 (for the Specific Plan Amendment) and
Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 137b (for the remaining actions) and the evidence received at
the public hearing, that the previously certified EIR No. 331, Mitigation Monitoring Program
No. 137 and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 137b are in compliance with CEQA and the State
and City CEQA Guidelines and are adequate to serve as the required environmental
documentation for the Project Actions and satisfy all the requirements of CEQA, and that no
further environmental documentation need be prepared for the Project Actions. Applicable
mitigation measures from MMP No. 137 which pertain to Development Areas 4 and 6 have
been incorporated into Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 137b (on file in the Planning
Department).
Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
CARRIED,. that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve Final Site Plan No.
2006-00010 for Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan based on the
finding that Final Site Plan No. 2006-00010 is in conformance with the Mountain Park
Specific Plan No. 90-4, subject to the following conditions: ,
That prior to the issuance of the first building permit for any single-family detached
residential units in the RMP-4 Zone, the property owner/develpper shall submit final
building footprints, Floor plans, roof plans, elevations and color renderings to the
Planning Department for the review and approval by the Planning Commission as a
Reports and Recommendations item. Plans shall be prepared to the satisfaction of
the Planning Department and in compliance with the Mountain Park Specific Plan,
Residential Design Guidelines and Residential Architecture Guidelines,
2. That prior to the approval of any subsequent builder tentative tract or parcel map for
any lots in the RMP-5 zone (single family detached cluster residential), the property
owner/developer shall submit final site plans including building footprints, floor plans,
roof plans, elevations and color renderings to the Planning Department for the review
and approval of the Planning Commission at a duly noticed public hearing. Plans
shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Planning Department and in compliance
with the Mountain Park Specific Plan, Residential Design Guidelines and Residential
Architecture Guidelines.
That prior to the issuance of building permits, the property ownerldevelopershsll
submit plans to the Department of Public Works, Streets and Sanitations Division,
indicating that each parcel shall have adequate storage space to accommodate
curbside trash collection (minimum three (3) barrels per parcel), and further, that
each parcel shall provide trash barrel .access to and from the storage location to
curbside.
That prior to issuance, of building permits, the property ownerldeveloper shall provide
plans to the Department of Public Works, Streets and Sanitation Division, indicating
that the width of all pedestrian access gates on lots within the tract map shall be wide
enough to accommodate trash barrels.
5. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and
specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the .applicant and which plans are
on file with the Planning Department marked FSP Exhibit No. 1 (Final Site Plan) and
as conditioned herein.
Sincerely,
Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary
Anaheim Planning Commission
cc: John Sherwood, Irvine Community Development Company, 550 Newport Center Drive, Newport
Beach, CA 92660
FSP2006-00010_Excerpt_
City of Anaheim
I~LANNING I~EPAI2TIVIE(~1'I'
mvnvanxheimnel
January 8, 2007
John Sherwood
Irvine Community Development Company
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2007.
3a. CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RFPnRT nIn 331 /PRF\/Irll IRI V CFRTI FIFfY1
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f:
Owner: Irvine Land Company, t_LC., 550 Newport Center Drive, Newport
Beach., CA 92660
Agent: John Sherwood, Irvine Community Development Company, 550
Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Location: Multiple Properties: The Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 area
encompasses 3,001 acres located generally in Gypsum Canyon, south
of the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway,'in Orange County, California. The
majority of the project site is in the jurisdiction of the City of Anaheim;
however, open space areas in the southern- and eastern-most portions
of the project site are in unincorporated County of Orange jurisdiction
in the City of Anaheim's sphere-of-influence. SR-91 is immediately
north of the project site, and the SR-241 bisects the site into eastern
and western segments.
Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan area
consist of approximately 168 acres located southwest of the southern
terminus of Gypsum Canyon Road, generally bordered on the west by
the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-241) and on the north by the
Riverside Freeway (SR-91). Development Area 5 consists of
approximately 291 acres located south of SR-91, east of the Gypsum
Canyon Road interchange:
290 Soulh Anaheim Boulevard
P.O. Box 3222
Anaheim, California 92803
TEL (714) 765-5139
Project
Actions: Amendment No. 3 to the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4
(SPN2006-000461-.Request to amend the Mountain Park Specific - < -
Plan to replace a 4-way roundabout intersection at Mountain Park
Drive and Gypsum Canyon Road with a 3-way stop sign-controlled
intersection.
Development Area Plan for Development Areas 4 and 6
(Miscellaneous No. 2006-00171) -Request for review and approval of
a Development Area Plan for Development Areas 4 and 6 of the
Mountain Park Specific Plan.
Final Site Ptan No. 2006-00010 -Request for review and approval of a
final site plan for Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park
Specific Plan.
Tentative Tract Map No. 17020 -Request to establish a 153
.numbered and 31 lettered lot residential subdivision
encompassing 145 single-family detached residential lots, 3
Large-Lots to allow a maximum of 275 single-family detached
residential units for financing or conveyance purposes oNy, a
private recreation facility, private neighborhood park, private
entry structure, a public fire station, a trail staging area with a
convenience store, open space lots and public and private
streets.
Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 2006-00003 -Request for review
and approval of a master specimen tree removal permit to remove up
to 700 trees. These trees would be replaced at a 20 to 1 ratio in
Development Areas 4, 5, and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan.
ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion., seconded by Commissioner XXX and
MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the Project
Actions, including Tentative Tract Map No. 17020, and does hereby determine that based
upon its independent review and consideration of the previously-certified FEIR No. 331
together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 137 (for the Specific Plan Amendment)
and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 137b (for the remaining actions) and the evidence
received at the public hearing, that the previously certified EIR No. 331, Mitigation
Monitoring Program No. 137 and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 137b are in compliance
with CEQA and the State and City CEQA Guidelines and are adequate to serve as the
required environmental documentation for the Project Actions and satisfy all the
requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared
for the Project Actions. Applicable mitigation measures from MMP No. 137 which pertain to
Development Areas 4 and 6 have been incorporated into Mitigation Monitoring Plan No.
137b (on file in the Planning Department),. ,
Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve Tentative Tract
Map No. 17020, to establish a 153 numbered and 31 lettered lot residential subdivision
encompassing 145 single-family detached residential lots, 3 Large-Lots to allow a
maximum of 275 single-family detached residential units for financing or conveyance
purposes only, a private recreation facility, private neighborhood park, private entry
structure, a public fire station, a trail staging area with a convenience store, open space lots
and public and private streets within Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park
Specific Plan based on the finding that pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5 (a)
the proposed tentative tract map including the design and improvement of the proposed
subdivision, is consistent with the General Plan and the Mountain Park Specific Plan No.
90-4 (as proposed for amendment pursuant to Amendment No. 3 to the Mountain Park
Specific Plan No. 90-4), and (b) the site is physically suitable for the proposed type and
density of development and therefore would not cause public health problems or
environmental damage, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the Final Map shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and
the Orange County Surveyor and then shall be recorded in the Office of the Orange
County Recorder.
2. That prior to the approval of the final tract map for Development Areas 4 and 6, the
property owner/developer shall submit a Trail Implementation Plan for review and
approval by the Planning Department; Planning Services Division, Department of
Public Works, Development Services Division, Community Services, Parks Division
and the County of Orange Resources and Development Management Department,
Harbors, Beaches and Parks Division. The Trail Implementation Plan shall include
the final design, including ultimate width, surface cover, fencing materials, etc. for
the Gypsum Canyon Creek Regional Riding and Hiking Trail. An offer of
dedication of trail easements to the County of Orange shall occur concurrently with
recordation of final tract or parcel maps. Trail improvement shall be completed
prior to the first final building and zoning inspection.
3. That prior to the approval of the final tract map, the property ownerldevelopershnll
submit a design and maintenance plan to the Department of Public Works for
review and approval for the proposed public naturalized drainage course and water
quality basin (or an equivalent City-approved treatment control BMP). The design
and maintenance shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Department of Public
Works and shall address the ownership of the proposed water quality basin (or
equivalent City-approved treatment control BMP), responsible parties for the on-
going maintenance, and any proposed cost sharing mechanisms acceptable to the
Department of Public Works between the property owner/develop and/or
Homeowners Association and the City of Anaheim.
4. That in the event that multiple final maps are filed based on the tentative map, the
property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer to dedicate Santa Ana Canyon
Road, public portions of Gypsum Canyon Rcad, the fire station site, trail staging
area/concession store site, and public utility easements across the backbone
private streets as depicted on the tentative tract map, on the first final map.
5. That prior to approval of the final tract map, the property owner/developer shall
demonstrate compliance with Conditions Nos. 4b,10, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28,
39, 45, 46, 50, 53, 54, 56, 62 and 63 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4,
as set forth in Ordinance No. 5993.
6. That the property owner/developer shall be held responsible for compliance with
the mitigation measures and for implementation of the project design features and
standard conditions identified in Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 137b in compliance
with Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. Furthermore, the property
owner/developer shall be responsible for any direct costs associated with the
monitoring and reporting required to ensure implementation of those mitigation
measures, project design features and standard conditions identified in Mitigation
Monitoring Plan No. 137b.
- - - - - - m -
7. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans
and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which - -
plans are on file with the Planning Department marked TTM Exhibit Nos. 1 through
9 and as conditioned herein.
8. That prior to final tract map approval, Condition Nos. 2, 3 and 5, 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.
9. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only
to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim 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.
10: That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be .amended by the
Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is
established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the
modification complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code and (iii) the applicant has
demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved
structure.
Sincerely,
Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary
Anaheim Planning Commission
cc: John Sherwood, Irvine Community Development Company, 550 Newport Center Drive,
Newport Beach, CA 92660.
TTM17020_Excerpt_
® _ _
3
vrv+uvannheimnet
City of Anaheim
I~LANNING DEPARTMENT
January 8, 2007
John Sherwood
Irvine Community Development Company
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2007.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d. FINAL SITE PLAN NO. 2006-00010
3e. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17020
3f. SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. 2006.00003
Owner: Irvine Land Company, LLC., 550 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach,
CA 92660
Agent:- John Sherwood, lrvine Community Development Company, 550 Newport
Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Location: Multiple Properties: The Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 area
encompasses 3,001 acres located generally in Gypsum Canyon, south
of the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway, in Orange County, California. The
majority pf the project site is in the jurisdiction of the City of Anaheim;
however, open space areas in the southern- and eastern-most portions
of the project site are in unincorporated County of Orange jurisdiction in
the City pf Anaheim's sphere-of-influence. SR-91 is immediately north of
the project site, and the SR-241 bisects the site into eastern and western
segments..
Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan area
consist of approximately 168 acres located southwest of the southern
terminus of Gypsum Canyon Road, generally bordered on the west by
the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-241) and on the north by the
Riverside Freeway (SR-91 ). Development Area 5 consists of
approximately 291 acres located south of SR-91, east of the Gypsum
Canyon Road interchange.
200 3oulh Anaheim Boulevard
P.0. Box 3222
Anaheim, Calilornia 92803
TEL (714) 7fi5~5739
Project
Actions:
(SPN2006-00046)-Request to amend the Mountain Park Specific Pfam°
to replace a 4-way roundabout intersection at Mountain Park Drive and
Gypsum Canyon Road with a 3-way stop sign-controlled intersection.
Development Area Plan for Development Areas 4 and 6 (Miscellaneous
No. 2006-001711- Request for review and approval of a Development
Area Plan for Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific
Plan.
Final Site Plan No. 2006-00010 -Request for review and approval of a
final site plan for Development Areas 4 and 6 of the Mountain Park
Specific Plan.
Tentative Tract Mao No. 17020 -Request to establish a 153 numbered
and 31 lettered lot residential subdivision encompassing 145 single-
familydetached residential lots, 3 Large-Lots to allow a maximum of 275
single-family detached residential units for financing or conveyance
purposes only, a private recreation facility, private neighborhood park,
private entry structure; a public fire station, a trail staging area with a
cohvenience store, open space lots and public and private streets.
Specimen Tree Removal Permit'No. 2006-00003 -Request for
review and approval of a master specimen tree removal permit to
remove up to 700 trees. These trees would be replaced at a 20 to 1
ratio in Development Areas 4, 5, and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific
Plan.
ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and
MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the Project
Actions, including Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 2006-00003, and does hereby
determine that based upon its independent review and consideration of the previously-
certified FEIR No. 331 together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 137 (for the Specific
Plan Amendment) and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 137b (for the remaining actions) and
the evidence received at the public hearing, that the previously certified EIR No. 331,
Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 137 and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 137b are in
compliance with CEQA and the State and City CEQA Guidelines and are adequate to serve
as the required environmental documentation for the Project Actions and satisfy all the
requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared
for the Project Actions. Applicable mitigation measures from MMP No. 137 which pertain to
Development Areas 4 and 6 have been incorporated into Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 137b
(on file in the Planning Department).
Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve Specimen Tree
Removal Permit No. 2006-00003 to remove up to 700 trees (363 trees actual, as described in
the staff report to the Planning Commission), replaced at a 20 to 1 ratio in Development
Areas 4, 5, and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan based on the findings that (a) Specimen
Tree Removal Permit No. 2006-00003 is in conformance with the Mountain Park Specific
Plan No. 90-4, (b) that a reasonable and practical development of the property on which the
trees are located requires destruction of the trees, (c) that the trees to be removed are
located within the boundaries of the graded areas identified in Appendix C, Conceptual
® - - -- - - -
Grading Plan, of the Mountain Park Specific Plan, and (d) that trees shall be replaced in
accordance with Code Section 18.112.070.040, and subject to the following condition:
1. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and
specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are
on file with the Planning Department marked SPT Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2 (Impacted
Specimen Tree Plan and Conceptual Tree Replacement).
2. That prior to removal of any specimen trees within Development Area 5 or prior to
approval of a Development Area Plan or tentative tract map for Development Area 5,
whichever occurs first, the property ownerldeveloper shall submit a conceptual tree
replacement program for the review and approval of the Planning Department, for the
59 specimen trees to be removed in Development Area 5.
Sincerely,
Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary
Anaheim Planning Commission
cc: John Sherwood, Irvine Community Development Company, 550 Newport Center Drive, Newport
Beach, CA 92660
SPT 2006-OD003_Excerpt_
- - - - - - ® -
- - - - - - -
Item No. 4
w v"'p i ~
ysv TOO 3o~°o6 o wO PPRKIT R~----- - VPR~TM4E\M` -------
uG OM NP~E / Gsi
a ~8 55R
32B6 _
SPRARU~.~U E m - - CE TER S'CREES PRA-~~ - HP p RG~ Zpi
N N T.GUP
_ ~ ---- c-G lOMOploo6 S GUP 2 P
,-ERSTRDET ~--- ul ~ F6B~P`ott o"u ~i Np F~EFp
.OMENP-- ~ c Z~o~-opp3Z ~1 RGt.~4s~ m
.--- M,UI `~`'WOFFIGES pG IOM \N.B`oG, m~
FSF ~p y0 BBB o GG INEUM OFFIGE
GVP 9~ fi9 UM °
6 GMUI FB ~~ IoMV~ MUSE ° ®° ® GU~t
RFS 200°~~p00 ~~ 69-00"69 ° ®m ® G~ pc c.
R GUP 3200006 ®V µ ,
I U Psp 20B04"~A91 ®°®Illn®tnArea) ;;o w
R~ B9 Zg 9 lRG PR16011 A ° ®nGomA^~heim ent Area G.6~5 ~~' m`4", c
e
GU 03-OODOB N 1
FSP 20 ~B9 BRO P® ®®®° ® (S~RedeVelaPm ®, MGR.IUARY
PP K\NG g°®®°
°B® OI-9 96'OAB19 4GV
ment PtprealA®° ®° ® R Zpoz- °~ -G 3 0
T-GUP 84354 ~' '19-BO- 6 50
RBdeveDOWntom®° GGCH GIPNCE pGN 9~TpS10N Z ® Rv Pn3149t p0
®° ° ® GHOn1 G~ ~ ENTER 5ER6 fGP W PSH 9m sNOP ly\\~.~ ~ ~u av On 1 6 D
®° ~ G~.op q nUP \ ~ ..n~31 ~ B ~ n eBC ~~0~ B gC
°®
3~
~RG~2~0' OBCO
o51n5en5 to S!/
Conditional'Use Permit No. 2006-05092
TRACKING NO. CUP2006-05176
Requested By: ROBERT H. HORN TRUST
111 and 125 West Elm Street
N
VPGPNT / p ~\
//1 tlV\
Subject Property
Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 84
tozos
e]
t
Date oFAerial Photo:
July 2005
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05092
TRACKIPtG NO. CUP2006-05176
Requested By: ROBERT H. HORN TRUST
Subject Property
Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 84
111 and 125 West Elm Street
Bozos
j
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 4
4a. CEQA ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 330.
(PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED1 - (Motion)
4b.' CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 2006-05092 (Resolution)
(TRACKING NO CUP2006-05176),.
4c: FINAL ELEVATION PLAN REVIEW (Motion)
(TRACKING NO. CUP2006-05178)..:.
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION•
(1) This 0.76-acre parcel has a frontage of 210 feet on the north side of Elm Street, a maximum
depth of 180 feet, and (s located 167 feef westof the benterline of Ahafteim Boulevard (111 -
125 West Elm Street). '
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests the following:
(a) To modify the "affordability/' component, add a third incentive, and amend/delete
conditions of approval pertaining to an'affo~dability agreement and sewer improvements
for apreviously-approved 52-unit affordable apartment complex with a'density bonus and
incentives for (a) minimum lot size, (b) minimum width of pedestrian access ways*, and
(c) required dedication and improvement under Authority of Code Sections 18:32.030.120
and 18.60.190.030..
(b) Review of final elevation plans fora previously-approved, 52-unit,'affordable apartment
complex with density bonus and incentives.'.
Added incentive.
BACKGROUND:
(3) The site consists`of two properties. The 111 West Elm Street property is developed with
industrial buildings and the 125 West Elm Streetpropertyis developed with ahistorically-
significant single family home and detached garage. The historic home is proposed to tie
relocated to an existing vacant property at Lemon Street and Water Street (owned by the
Redevelopment Agency).'Both properties are zoned I (MU) (Industrial; Mixetl Use Overlay)
zone and are located withjn the Merged Redevelopment Project Area; The Anaheim
General Plan designates the site for Mixed Use land uses'. The properties to the north, east,
and south (across Elm Street) are designated for Mixed Uses, ahd the properties to the west
are designated for Medium Density Residential land uses:` This property is located within the
Anaheim Colony Historic District which was adopted'by City Council on October 21, 1997,:
along with guidelines to ensure that infill development would be compatible with the District.
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS• '
(4) Conditional Use Permit No: 2006-05092 (to construct a 52-unit affordable apartment
complex with a density bonus 60 dwelling units per acre permitted; 68 dwelling units per.
acre proposed) and incentives for minimum lot size and dedication and improvementof right-
of-way was approved by the Planning Commission on June 12; 2006`:' Resolution Nm
PC2006-52, approved in conjunction with this'pe~mif, ihdudes }he following conditions of
aPProval:
srcup2006-05176 10807jpr
G:\GHM6C27C10B07JPR Revisetl.DOC
_ _
a
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 4
"31. That the applicant shall agree td construct, operate and maintain the Affordable Units in
accordance with a written "Affordability Agreement" between the applicant and the City, in
a form acceptable to the City Attorney grid Community Development Department; duty
executed and acknowledged by the applicant and the City, and recorded against tFie'
subject property in the official records of Orange County, CalifomiaLThe Affordable Units
shall be subject to the requirements of the Affordability Agreement for a period of fifty-five
(55) years, beginnirig on the date a certificate of occupancy is granted fdr the Affordable
Units.
33. That finalbuilding elevation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for
review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations
item.,,.
37. That the developer shall submit public sewer improvemenfplans to the Public Works
Department, Development Services Divisdri and a bond shall be posted to guarantee that
the existing six (6) inch VCP sewer in Elm Street west to Lemon Street and then south to
Santa Ana Street. is replaced with an eigFit (6) inch VCP sewer line (approximately 920
feet). The improvement shall be wnstructed prioi to final building and zoning
inspections:'
DISCUSSION:
(5) The applicant is requesting to mddify the "affdrdability' component of the project, add a third
incentive, and amend/delete conditions of approval tndicated above pertaining to an
affordability agreement and sewer improvements. In'addition to these requested
modifications; the applicant is also requesting review of final elevation plahs as required by
the above-referenced condition bf approvalnb. 33. No ohanges to exhibits aye proposed.
(6) The applicant is requesting the entitlemenf be modified to require that at least either (~;
fifteen oerdent (15%) of the total number of units will be allocated for Verv Low Income
hdusefiolds or (bl thirty percent (30%1 of the total number of units willbe allocated for Lower
Income hduseholds as deposed to the current proposaP of 100 % of the units for Low Income `
Households.. The request for this modification is stridtly for financing purposes and lender
obligations. The applicant intends to develop the project with 100 °!o of the units for Low
Income Households. Additionally, the Affordability Agreement with the Housing Authority
would still require 100 %df the units for Low Income Households. Since the modification
requested with regard to the "affdrdability' component of the project is in compliance with the
density bonus provisions of State Law (Government Code Sectidn 65915), staff recommends
approval of this modification as requested.
(7) The applicant is requesting modification of Condition No. 31, indicated above, to update the
wording to be consistent with the documehts required as part of this request: Since the
mddificatidn td the condition (as indicated below in Bold) would not change the intent or
purpose of the condition, staff recommends approval of the amended condition, to read as
follows:
"3T That the applicant shall agree to construct, operate and maintain the Affordable Units in
accordance with a written "Density Bonus Housing Agreement" between the
applicantand the Cifq, in a form acdeptable to the City Attorney and Community '
Development Deparfineht, duly executed and ackhowledged by the applicant and the
City, and7ecorded against the subject property in the olficial records of Orange County,
California The Affordable Units shall be subject to the requirements of the Density
G9GHM6C27C10807JPR RevisedWC
_ ® _ _
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission.
January 8, 2007
Item No. 4
Bonus Housing Agreement for a period dififfy-five (55) years; beginning oh the date a
Certificate of Occupancy is granted for the Affordable Units."
(8) The applicant is also requesting deletion of Condition Na. 37, indicated above, pertaining to
public sewer improvements associated with theproject. The improvements7eferenced in the
previous approval have been incorporated into and are subject to an existirg Cdpperation
Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency and the Public Works Department . These
improvements will be completed byDecember, 2008, and coordinated with the' completion of
this project. Since the improvements are required under a separate agreemert and the Public
Works Department supports the mddification, staff recommends deletion of the cohdition.
(9) The applicant has submitted the attached letter requesting a third incentive pursuant to State
Law.YSection 65915 (b) df the Government Code, in relevantpart; requires that the City.
musYapprove a density bonus and incentives when an applicant agrees to provide specified
levels of affordable housing. The applicant is entitled toYeceive three incentives or
concessions for'projects that includeat least thirty percent (30%) of the total'units for Lower
Income Househblds or fifteen percent (15%) of the total units for Very Low Income
Households (Government Cade Sectidn 65915), The City must grant the incentive or
concession. requested unless it makes the. findings set forth in Section 65915(d)(1): Section
65915(1) defines a concession or incentive to mean any df the following:
"(1) A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code
requirements or architectural desigh requirements that exceed the minimum building
standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission as prdvided in Part
2.5 (commencing with Sectidn 18901) df Division 13 oithe Health and Safety Code,
including, but not limited to; a reduction fn setback ahd square fddtage requirements and in
the ratio of vehicular parking spaces that wduld otherwise 6e required thaf results in
identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions.
(2) Approval of mixed use zoning in conjunction with the housing project if commercial,.
office, industrial, or other land uses will reduce fhe cosYof the housing development ahd if
the commercial, office, industrial, or other land uses are'compatible with the housing project
and the existing or planned development in the area where the proposed housing project
will he located.
(3) :Other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed. by the developer orthe city,
county, or city and county that result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cosf
reductions. This subdivision does not limit or require the provision of direct financial
incentives for the housing development, including the provision of publicly owned land, by
the city, county; or city and county, or the waiver of fees or dedication requirements."'A
copybf Section 65915 is attached to this stafireport.
(10) The additional incentive (ihadwertently not identified when the project was approved by
Commission this past June) pertains to minimum width of pedestrian access ways. Code
requires a minimum pedestrian access way Width of 8 to 12 feet and access way widths from
5 to' 10 feet are proposed;' The applicant has submittetl the attached updated'density bonus
application requesting this third incentive pursuant to State Law (Govt. Code Sectioh 65915).
State law requires thaEthree incentives be grahted foiprojects that provide a minimum bf at
least thirty percent (30%)'of the totalUnits for Lower Income Households or fifteenpercent
(15%) of the total units for Very Low: Income Households.` Since the requested incentive has
been reviewed and approved by the Fire Department for life/safety issues, and the project
G:\GHM6C27C1PBO7JPR ReWseC.OGC
a
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission.
January 8, 2007
Item No. 4
Private open space may :include courtyards, balconies, patios, terraces and enclosed.
play areas.
Where amultiple-story apartment building abuts single-stdry development, provide for a-
gradual transition in height by}educing the heightpf the building adjacent to the smaller
scale usel
m Provide convenienfpedestrian access from multiple-family tlevelopmeht to nearby
commercial centers', schools;'and transit stops.
Where possible, underground or screen utilities and utility equipment or locate and size
them tobe as inconspicuousas possible:
The design goal is to encourage multiple family housing that retains a neighborhood feel
and contributes to the character of the streef environment and provides a quality residential
environment. that is safe and attractive;'
(14) Many design features intended to address the policies indicated above have been
incorporatetl' into the project, including articulated entry features, a variety of roofiihes; wall
'articulation;balconieswindow treatments; and reducing the visual impact of parking areas
by utilizing interior courtyard garages, parking structures, and subterranean structures. As
proposed, the project meets the intent of the Community Design Element and further
implements the City's'vsion for multiple-family residential development. Since the
proposed elevations are consistent with the Community Design Element and further
' implement the City's bision for multiple-family residential development, and are cohsistent
with Historic Preservation guidelines, staff recommends aoproval of the final elevation
plans; as proposed.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(15) Staff has reviewed the7equest to modify the "affordability' component, add a third incentive;
and amend/delete conditiohs of approval and for a review of final elevation plans and the
. previously-approved Addendum to EIR No. 330 and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 122, and
finds there are no changes to the originally-:approved permit and that will result in any
significant adverse environmentalmpacts::.Therefore; staff recommends that the
previously-approved Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring Plan serve as the required
environmental documentation for this request.
FINDINGS:.
(16) Before the Commission grants any major modification to a conditional use permit, it must
make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions.
exisk
(a) That the modification of use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is
authorized by the Zohing Code; dais an unlisted use as defihed in Subsection .030.
(Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Sectibn 18.66.04p (Approval Authority),
(b) That the modification will' not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth
and development of the area in which it is ptdposed to be located;
G:\GHM6C27C70607JPR ReNSetl.000
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 4
(c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or
to the health and safety;
(d) That the traffic generated by the modified use will not impose an undue burdeh upon
the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and
(e) That the granting of the modifications under the conditions imposed will not be
detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
(17) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that
the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist:
(a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the
Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses
Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority);
(b) That theLse will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and
development of the area in which it is proposed to be located;
(c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or
to the health and safety;
(d) That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and
(e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any;
will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
RECOMMENDATION:
(18) Staff recommends that; uhless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including
the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the
public hearing, the Planning Commission take the following actions as indicated in the
attached resolution, including the findings and conditions contained therein:.
a. By motion; determine that the previously-approved addendum to EIR No. 330 and
Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 122 are adequate to serve as the appropriate
environmental documentation for this request
b. By resolution, aoorove the amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05092..
c. By motion, ao rove the final elevation plans for the previously-approved affordable
apartment complex (Tracking No. CUP2006-05178)..
G:\GHMfiC27C70B07JPR ReNSetl.000
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007-*"
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
AMENDING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-52 ADOPTED IN CONJUNCTION W ITH
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05092. -
(111-125 WEST ELM STREET)
WHEREAS, on June 12, 20p6, the Anaheim Planning Commission did, by Resolution No. PC
2006-52, grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05092 to construct a 52-unit affordable apartment complex
with a density bonus l60 dwelling units per acre permitted; 68 dwelling units per acre proposed) and
incentives for minimum lot size and dedication and improvement of right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. PC 2006-52, adopted in connection with subject conditional use
permit, includes the following conditions of approval:. -
"31. That the applicant shall agree to construct, operate and maintain the Affordable Units in accordance
with a writteh "Affordability Agreement" between the applicant and the City, in a form acceptable to
the City Attorney and Community Development Department, duly executed and acknowledged by
the applicant and the City, and recorded against the subject property in the official records of
Orange County, California. The Affordable Units shall be subject to the requirements of the
Affordability Agreement for a period of fifty-five (55) years, beginning on the date a certificate of
occupancy is granted for the Affordable Units.
33. That final building. elevation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review
ahd approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item:'
37: That the developer shall submit public sewer improvement plans to fhe Public Works Department,
Development Services Divisioh ahd a bond shall be posted to guarantee that the existing six (6)
inch VCP sewer in Elm Street west to Lemon Street and then south to Santa Ana Street is replaced
with an eight (t3) inch VCP sewer line {approximately 920 feet). The improvement shall be
constructed prior to final building and zoning inspections."
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested td modify the "affordability' cdmponeM of the project,
add a khird ihcehtive, and amend/delete conditions of approval pertaining to an affordabilityagreement and
sewer improvements; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested review of final elevation plans fora 52-unit affordable
apartment complex; and
'"WHEREAS, this property is currently developed with ahistorically-significant single family
home and detached garage, the underlying zoning is I (MU) (Industrial; Mixed Use Overlay); the Anaheim
General Plan designates this property for Mixed Use land uses; and this property is located within the
Merged Redevelopment Project Area; and is situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of
California, described as:
THE SOUTHERLY 150 FEET OF THE ORIGINAL TOWN LOT 54, RECORDED IN
BOOK 4, PAGES 629-630 OF DEEDS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
OF SAID COUNTY
THE EASTERLY RECTANGULAR ONE-HALF OF TOWN LOT 55 OF ANAHEIM, IN
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 4 PAGES 629 AND 630
OF DEEDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY
G1GHMfiC2fiAElm 51. Redsetl Reso.GOC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City pf Anaheim on January 8, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60, to
hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and
make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and.
WHEREAS, said Commission; after due ihspection, 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 request to construct a 44-foot high, 52-unit affordable apartment complex'
with a density bonus (60 dwelling units per acre permitted; 68 dwelling units per acre proposed) and
incentives is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code
Section 18.32.030.120 with the following incentives:
(a) SECTION NO. 18.32.040 Minimum lot size: (3 acres required; 0.76 acre
proposed).
(b) SECTION NO. 18.32.080.030" '
(c) SECTION NO: 18.40.060
**Additional incentive.
Minimum width df pedestrian acpesswavs.
(8 to 12 feet required; 5 to 10 feet proposed)
Dedication and imprdvement of right-df-way. 60-foot
wide public right-of-way required; 55 feet proposed).
2. That at (east either (a) fifteen percent (15%) of the total number of units will be allocated for
Very Low Income Households or (b) thirty percent (30%) of the total Numperpf units will be allocated for
Lower Income Households (the "Affordable Units"); therefore, the project would be in compliance with the
density bonus provisions of State Law (Govemment Code Section fi5915).
3. That the density bonus and incentives pertaining to (a) minimum lot size, (b) dedication and
improvement of right-of-way and (c) minimum width of pedestrian accessways are tiereby approved because
the applicant has submitted a density bonus application requesting a density bonus and incentives pursuant
to State Law (Govt. Code Section 65915). State Law requires that three incentives be granted far projects
that provide a minimum of at least fifteen percent (15%) of the total number of units for Very Low Income
.Households or thirty percent (30%) of the total number of units for Lower Income Households. In addition, in
regards to incentive (b), the proposed street frontage adjacent to the project would be similar to the existing
street width.
4. The additional incentive pertaining to minimum width of pedestrian access ways is hereby
approved as State Law requires that three incentives be granted far projects that provide a minimum of at
least thirty percent (30%) of the total units for Lower Income Households or fifteen percent (15%) of the total
units for Very Low Income Households.. The requested incentive has been reviewed and approved by the.
Fire Department for life/safety issues, and the project would be in compliance with the density bonus
provision of State Law as indicated above.
5. That the request for modification to the affordability is hereby approved since the project
would be in compliance with the density bonus provisions of State Law (Government Code Section 65915).
6. That the request for modification of Condition No. 31 pertaining to the affordability
agreement is hereby approved since the modification would not change the intent or purpose of the
condition.
7. That the request to delete Condition No. 37 pertaining to public sewer improvement plans
associated with the project is hereby approved since the improvements referenced in the previous approval have
been incorporated into and are subject to an existing Cooperation Agreement between the Redevelopment
GiGHMfiC2fiAElm 51. Revisetl Res°.000
Agency and the Public Works Department. Additionally, these improvements would be complete by December,
2008, and coordinated with the completion of this project
8. That the proposed project is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and
maintains good overall project design.
9. That the project would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and
development of the area in which it is proposed because the site plan is well designed with adequate
setbacks to the street and within the development.
10. Thak the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area.
11. That the granting of this conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, would not be
detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City. of Anaheim.
12. That modification to setback and heighfstandards would be compatible with existing and
surrounding land uses and that the modifications from the Code allowed under the Mixed Use Ordinance
(Chapter 18.32), would achieve a good project designed to preserve and enhance the neighborhood. The
applicant has demonstrated that the setback and height modifications are necessary to make the housing
units economically feasible:
13'. That the modifications would allbw fora development that provides a unified street frontage
similar to other residential development in the Downtown, exceeds the amount of recreational space required
by code, and promotes compatibility with surrounding development that is currently under construction in a
manner that would not adversely affecfthe adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area
in which it is proposed.
14. That commercial floor area would not be needed in conjunction with this residential project
since the project is located on a local residential street with nb commercial activity dr attractions, and since
the project would be located in close proximity to office; retail, business services; personal services, putilic
spaces and uses, and other communityamenitieswithin Downtown Anaheim.
15. 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 as demonstrated by the
analysis included in the Final Ehvironmental Impact Report No. 330 EIR (Final EIR) and Addendum, the
proposed project actions will notresult in new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of
previously identified significant impacts; and; therefore, no supplemental or subsequent environmental
review is required. Therefore, the Planning Commission hereby determines that the previously-certified Final
EIR with the Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 122, are adequate to serve as the required
environmental documentation for the proposed project actions in donnectionwith Conditional Use Permit No.
2006-05092.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
hereby amend the conditions of approval bf Resolution No. PC2006-52, relating to Conditional Use Permit
No. 2006-05092, as follows:
1. That the City of Anaheim Sewer Impact Mitigation fee for the Old Town Basin 8 Area shall be paid.
2. That all existing driveway approaches on Elm Street shall be removed and replaced with curb, gutter,
parkway landscaping and sidewalk. A Right-of-Way Construction Pennit shall be obtained from the Public
Works Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
GiGRM6C26AElm 51. Revised Reso.GOC
3. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department
Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that:
• Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas,
maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero
discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas.
• Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area
Management Plan.
• Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in 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.
4. That prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shalt:
• 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 WQMR
• 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.
5. That all driveways shall be constructed with ten (1i)) foot radius curb returns as required by the City
Engineer in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115. Said inforrnation shall be specifically shown
on plans submitted for building permits.
6. That gates shall not be installed across the driveway in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular
traffic in the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan
Nd. 475 and shall be subject to the reviewand approval of the Planning Services Division priorto issuance
of a building permit.
7. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval in
conformance with the Engineering Standard No. 115 pertaining to sight distance visibility for the sign and
wall/fence locations.
8. That plans shalt be submitted to the Planning Services Division for reviewand approval showing
conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 4028, 436 and 470 pertaining to
parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained
in conformance with said plans..
9. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for storage uses.
10. That no compact parking spaces shall be permitted.
11. That an on-site trash truck turn around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476 or
an approved alternative, which shall be shown on plans as required by the Department of Public Works,
Sanitation Division. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits...
12. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works
Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said
Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily
identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from
graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum. l-gallon size clinging vines planted on
maximum 3-foot centers or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans
submitted for building permits.
G9GHMfiC2BAElm SI. Revised Reso.DOG
13. 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.
14. That the locations for future above-ground utility devices including, but not limited to, electrical
transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications and cable devices, etc., shall be shown on
plans submitted for building permits. Plans shall also identify the specific screening treatments of.each
device (i.e. landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.) and shall be
subject to the review and approval of the appropriate City departments.
15. 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
16. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current W ater Services Standards
Specifications. Any water service and/or fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if
continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The
ownerldeveloper shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade onto abandon any water service or fire line.
17. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the front setback area in a manner
fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault
shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the
satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division butside of the front 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 the Cross Connection Control Inspector.
18. That since this project has landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall
be installed and comply with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
19. That prior to submitting water improvement plans, the developer shall submit a water system master plan,
including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, for Public Utilities Water Engineering review and
approval. The plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on-site water system to meet the
project's water demand and fire protection requirements.
20. That water improvement plans in areas not covered under the Cooperation Agreement between the City of
Anaheim and the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency shall be submitted to the Water Engineering Division
for approval and a performance bond in the amount approved by the City Engineer and in a form
approved by the City Attorney shall be posted with the City of Anaheim.
21. That prior to rendering water service, the developer shall submit a set of improvement plans for Public
Utilities Water Engineering review and approval in determining the conditions necessary for providing
water service to the project:
22. That prior to application for water meters, fire line or submitting the water improvement plans for approval,
the developer/owner shall submit to the Public Utilities Water Engineering Division an estimate of the.
maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information
will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide the estimated water
demands. Any off-site water system improvements required to serve the project shall occur in accordance
with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules and Regulations.
23. That the property ownerldeveloper shall install street lights on the public streets as required by the
Electrical Engineering Division. A bond for the installation of the street lights shall be posted with the City
of Anaheim. The street lights shall be installed prior to occupancy.
24. That the property ownerldeveloper shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement to be
determined as electrical design is completed.
'G:\GHM6G29AEIm 51. Revisetl Reso. W G
25. 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.
26. That the entire 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.
27. 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.
28. That if required by the Urban Forestry Division of the Community Services Department, street trees shall
be installed, by the property owner, within the public rights-of-way adjacent to Elm Street. The size, type
and number of trees shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Urban Forestry Division of the Community
Services Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
29. That all air conditioning apparatus and other roof and ground-mounted equipment shall!be properly
shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent residential properties and the public right-of-way.
Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
30. That all dwelling units shall be assigned street addresses, and all public and private streets shall be
assigned street names, by the Planning Department
31. That the applicant shall agree to construct, operate and maintain the Affordable Units in accordance
with a written "Density Bonus Housing Agreement" between the applicant and the City, in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney and Housing Authority, duly executed and acknowledged by the
applicant and the City, and recorded against the subject property in the official records of Orange
Gounty, California. The Affordable Units shall be subject to the requirements of the Density Bonus
Housing Agreement for a period of fifty-five (55) years, beginning on the date a Certificate of
Occupancy is granted for the Affordable Units.
32. That a maintenance covenant shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Development Services
Division and approved by the City Attorney's office. The covenant shall include provisions for.
maintenance of private facilities, including compliance with an approved Water Quality Management Plan
and maintenance exhibit. The covenant shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit.
33. That final building elevation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and
approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item.
34. That final landscape and fencing plans for the subject property shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval. Said plans shall show minimum 24-inch box size trees, shrubs,
groundcover, and clinging vines to be planted in layers and shall also show decorative hardscape
treatment within the central courtyard area. The landscape material selected shall be appropriate to the
width of either the parkway or the planter area. Any decision made by the Planning and Community
Development Departments regarding said plan maybe appealed to the Planning Commission. All trees
shall be properly and professionally maintained by the property owner to ensure mature, healthy growth.
Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
35. That the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05092 is hereby granted subject to the approval
of, and finalization of, Reclassification No. 2006-00178, now pending..
36. That the property owner shall submit a letter to the Planning Department requesting termination of
Conditional Use Permit No. 1473 (to permit a motorcycle repair facility with outdoor storage with
waivers of required screening of outdoor uses and minimum number of parking spaces).
37. Intentionally Deleted at the January 8, 2007, Commission meeting as requested.
G:\GHM6C26AEIm 51. Rehsed Reso.000
38. 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 9, and as conditioned herein.
39. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolutioh,"
whichever occurs first, Condition No. 3, above mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further
time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170..
40. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, B, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29,
30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, and 37, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to
complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.04:60.190 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code.
41. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 4, 16, 23, 37, and 38, above-mentioned,
shall be complied with.
42 That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal
regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request
regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and
aII of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared
invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution,
and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
BE 1T FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related
to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or
prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges
shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2007. 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 maybe replaced by a City Council
Resolution in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
G1GHM6C26AEIm SI. Revisetl ResoA00
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris; Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission
held on January 8, 2007, 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
2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
G:\GHM6C26AEIm SI. Revised Reso.00C
City of Anaheim
I~I.AIVNING I3EPAR'1,1VlENT
January 8, 2007
Robert H. Horn Trust
935 Lotus Circle
San Dimas, CA 91773
Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2007.
4a.
4b.
4c.
Owner: Robert H. Horn Trust, 935 Lotus Circle, San Dimas, CA 91773
Agent: Scott Richards, SADI LLC, 5939 Monterey Road, Los
Angeles, CA 90042
Location: 111-125 West Elm Street: Property is approximately 0.76-acre, having
a frontage of 210 feet on the north side of Elm Street and is located 167
feet west of the centerline of Anaheim Boulevard.
Request to modify the "affordability" component, add a third incentive, and
amend/delete conditions of approval pertaining to an affordability agreement and sewer
improvements between the applicant and the City, for apreviously-approved 52-unit
affordable apartment complex with a density bonus and incentives for (a) minimum lot
size, (b) minimum width of pedestrian accessways, and (c) required dedication and
improvement.
Request to review final elevation plans for apreviously-approved, 52-unit,
affordable apartment complex with density bonus and incentives.
wv,W.onaheim nil
ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and
MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal for
review of final elevation plans and the previously-approved Addendum to EIR No. 330 and
Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 122, and finds there are no changes to the originally-approved
permit and that the request will npt result in any significant adverse environmental impacts.
Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve the final elevation
plans for the previously-approved affordable apartment complex because the plans reflect an
enhanced project that complies with Historic Preservation guidelines and maintains the
quality of construction demonstrated in other projects in the nearby downtown.
Sincerely.,
Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary
Anaheim Planning Commission
CU P2006-05178_Excerpt
200 Soulh Anaheim Boulevard
P.0. Box 3222
Anaheim, Calilornia 92803
TEL (714)765-5139
FINAL ELEVATION PLAN REVIEW
(TRACKING NO. CUP2006-05178)
Attachment -Item No. 4
RESOLUTION NO. PC2006-52
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05092 BE GRANTED
(111-125 WEST ELM STREET)
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional
Use Permit to construct a 52-unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus and incentives far.
certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as:
THE SOUTHERLY 150 FEET OF THE ORIGINAL TOWN LOT 54, RECORDED IN
BOOK 4, PAGES 629-630 OF DEEDS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
OF SAID COUNTY
THE EASTERLY RECTANGULAR ONE-HALF OF TOWN LOT 55 OF ANAHEIM, IN
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 4 PAGES 629 AND 630
OF DEEDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on June 12, 2006 at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60, to
hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and
make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and _
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself
and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find
and determine the following facts:.
1. That the proposed request to construct a 44-foot high, 52-unit affordable apartment complex
with a density bonus 60 dwelling units per acre permitted; 68 dwelling. units per acre proposed) and
incentives is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code
Section 18.32.030.120 with the following incentives:
(a) SECTION NO. 18.32.040 Minimum Iofsize. (3 acres required; 0.76 acre
proposed).
(b) SECTION NO. 18.40.060 Dedication and improvement of right-of-wav. (60-foot
wide public right-of-way required; 55 feet proposed).
2. That atleast thirty (30) percent of the total units will be allocated for low income households;
therefore, the project would be in compliance with the density bonus provisions of State Law (Government
Code Section 65915).
3. That the density bonus and incentives pertaining to (a) minimum lot size and (b) dedication
and improvement of right-of-way are hereby approved because the applicant has submitted a density bonus
application requesting a density bonus and incentives pursuant to State Law (Govt. Code Section 65915).
State Law requires that three incentives be granted for projects that provide a minimum of at (east 30 percent
of the total units for low income households. This project provides affordable units for low income
households for 100 percent of its units. In addition, in regards to incentive (b), the proposed streets would
connect to and be similar in width to the existing street grid.
4. That the proposed project is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and
maintains good overall project design.
Cr\PC2006-52
-1-
PC2006-52
5. That the project would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and
development of the area in which it is proposed because the site plan is well designed with adequate
setbacks to the street and within the development.
6. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area
7. That the granting of this conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, would riot be
detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
8. That modification to setback and height standards would be compatible with existing and
surrounding land uses and that the modifications from the Code allowed under the Mixed Use Ordinance
(Chapter 18.32), would achieve a good project designed to preserve and enhance the neighborhood. The
applicant has demonstrated that the setback and height modifications are necessary to make the housing
units economically feasible.
9. That the modifications would allow for a development that provides a unified street frontage
similar to other residential development in the Downtown, exceeds the amount of recreational space required
by code, .and promotes compatibility with surrounding development that is currently under construction in a
manner that would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area
in which it is proposed.
10. That commercial floor area would not be needed in conjunction with this residential project
since the project is located on a local residential street with no commercial activity or attractions, and since
the project would be located in close proximity to office, retail, business services, personal services, public
spaces and uses, and other community amenities within Downtown Anaheim.
11. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and thafno
correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That as demonstrated by the
analysis included in the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330 EIR (Final EIR) and Addendum, the
proposed project actions will not result in new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of
previously identified significant impacts; and, therefore, no supplemental or subsequent environmental
review is required. Therefore, the Planning Commission hereby determines that the previously-certified Final
EIR with the Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 122, are adequate to serve as the required
environmental documentation for the proposed project actions in connection with Conditional Use Permit No.
2006-05092..
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does
hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby
found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the
safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That the City of Anaheim Sewer Impact Mitigation fee for the Old Town Basin 8 Area shall be paid.
2. That all existing driveway approaches on Elm Street shall tie removed and replaced with curb; gutter,
parkway landscaping, and sidewalk. A Right-of-Way Construction Permit shall be obtaihed from the
Public Works Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building
permits.
3. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department
Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that:
Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas,
maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero
discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas.
-2- PC2006-52
• 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 Tong-term operation and maintenance of the
Treatment Control BMPs, and
• Describes the mechanism for funding the long-tens operation and maintenance of the Treatment.
Control BMPs.
4. 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 andspecifications.
• 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 WOMP are available
onsite.
• Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation ahd Maintenance Plan for all structural
BMPs.
5. That all driveways shall bebohs6vcted with ten (10) foot radius curb returns a5required by the City
Engineer in conformance with Engineering Standard No: 115. Said information shall be specifically shown
on plans submitted for building permits.
6. That gates shall not be installed across the driveway ih a manner which may adversely affect vehicular
haffic in the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan
No. 475 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Services Division prior td issuance
of a building permit.
7. That plans shall be submitted to the City Trafficand Transportation Manager for his review-and approval in
conformance with the Engineering Standard No. 115 pertaining to sight distance visibility for the signor
wall/fence locatlons.
8. That plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval showing
conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos: 4028, 43fi and 470 pertaining to
parking standards and driveway Iodations: Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained
in conformance with said plans.
9. That no 7equired parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for storage uses.
10. That no compact parking spaces shall be permitted.
11. That an oh-site trash truck turn around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476 or
ah approved alternative, which shall be shown on plans as required by the Department of Public Works,
Sanitation'Divisibn: Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted far building permits.
12. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works
Department, Streets and Sanitation Divisidn and in accordance with approvedplans on file with said
Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily
identifiable from adjacent streets dr highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from
graffiti opportunitles by the use of plant materials such as minimum 1-gallon size clinging vines planted on
maximum 3-foot centers or tall shrubbery. Said inforration shall be specifically shown on the plans
submitted for building permits.
13. 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 forreview and approval.
_3_ PC2006-52
14. That the locations far future above-ground utility devices including, but not limited to; electrical
transformers, water backflow devices; gas, communications and cable devices, etc., shall be shown on
plans submitted for building permits. Plans shall also identify the specific screening treatments of each
device (i.e. landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.) and shall be
subject to the review and approval of the appropriate Ciry departments, z
15. That all requests focnew water services or fire liries, as well as any modifications, relocations, or
abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through the Water Engineering
Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department.
16. That all existing water services and fire Tines 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 no longer needed. The
owner/developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line.
17. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the front setback area in a manner
fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Any backflow assemblies currently installetl ih 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 outside of the front setback area in a manner fully screened
from all public street and alleys.. Said ihforrnatidn shall be specifically shown on plans and approved by
Water Engineering and Cross Cdnnectlon Control Inspector.
18. That since this project has landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall
be installed and comply with City Ordinance No: 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of Anaheim Municipal Code.
Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
19. That prior to submitting water improvement plans, the developer shall submit a water system master plan,
including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, for Public Utilities Water Engineering review and
.approval. The master plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on-site water system to meet
the project's water demand and fire protecfioh requirements.
20. That water improvement plans in areas not covered under the Cooperation Agreement between the City of
Anaheim and the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency shall be submitted to the Water Engineering Division
for approval and a pertbrmance bond in the amount approved by the City Engineer and in a form
approved by the CityAttomey shall tie posted with the City of Anaheim.
21. That prior to rendering water service, the developer shall submit a set of improvement plans for Public
Utllities Water Engineering review and approval in determining the conditions necessary for providing
water service to the project.
22. That prior to application for water meters, fire line or submitting the water improvement plans for approval,
the developedowner shall submit to the Public Utilities Water Engineering Division an estimate of the
maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information
will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system td provide the estimated water
demands. Any off-site water system improvements required to serve the project shall occur in accordance
with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules and Regulations.
23. That the property owner/developer shall install street lights bn the public streets as required by the
Electrical Engineering Division. A bond for the installation of the street lights shall be posted with the City
of Anaheim. The street lights shall be installed prior to occupancy.
24. That the property owner/developer shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement to be
determined as electdcal design is completed.
-4- PC2006-52
25. Thaf 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.
26. That the entire 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.
27: 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:
28. That if required by the Urban Forestry Division of the Community Services Department, street trees shall
be installed, by the property owner, within the public rights-of-way adjacent to Elm Street. The size, type
and number of trees shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Urban Forestry Division of the Community
Services Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
29. That all air conditioning apparatus and other roof and ground-mounted equipment shall be propedy
shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent residential properties and the public right-of--way.
Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
30. That all dwelling units shall be assigned street addresses, and all public and private streets shall tie
assigned street names, by the Planning Department.
31. That the applicant shall agree td cdnstruct; operate and maintain the Affordable Units in accordance with a
written "Affordability Agreement" between the applicant and the City, in a farm acceptable to the City
Attorney and Community Development Department, duly executed and acknowledged by the applicant
and the City, and recorded against the subject property in the official records of Orange County, California.
The Affordable Units shall tie subject to the requirements of the Affordability Agreement for a period of
fifty-five (55) years, beginning on the date a certificate of occupancy is granted for the Affordable Units.
32. That a maintenance covenant shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Development Services
Division and approved by the City Attorney's office. The covenant shall include provisions for
maintenance of private facilities, ihcluding compliance with approved ah Water Quality Management Plan
and maintehance exhibit. The covenant shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit.
33. That final building elevation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and
approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item.
34. That final landscape and fencing plans for the subject property shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval. Said plans shall show minimum 24-inch box size trees, shrubs,
groundcover, and clinging vines to be planted in layers and shall also show decorative hardscape
treatment within the central courtyard area. The landscape material selected shall be appropriate to the
width of either the parkway or the planter area. Any decision made by the Planning and Community
Development Departments regarding said plan may be appealed to the Planning Commission. All trees
shall be propedy and professionally maintained by the properly owner to ensure mature, healthy growth.
Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
35. That the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05092 is hereby granted subject to the approval
of, and finalization of, Reclassification No. 2006-00178, now pending.
36. That the property owner shall submit a letter to the Planning Department requesting termination of
Conditional Use Permit No. 1473 (to permit a motorcycle repair facility with outdoor storage with
waivers of required screening of outdoor uses and minimum number of parking spaces).
37. That the developer shall submit public sewer improvement plans to the Public Works Department,
Development Services Division and a bond shall be posted to guarantee that the existing six (6) inch
-5- PC2006-52
VCP sewer in EIm Street west to Lemon Street and then south to Santa Ana Street is replaced with an
eight (8) inch VCP sewer line (approximately 920 feet). The improvement shall be constructed prior to
final building and zohing inspections.
38. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications
submitted to the City ofAnaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning„_
Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 9, and as conditioned herein.
39. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, or within a pedod of one (1) year from the date of this resolution,
whichever occurs first, Condition No. 3, above mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further
time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170.
40. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29,
30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, and 37, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to
complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code.
41. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 4, 16, 23, 37, and 38, above-mentioned,
shall be complied with.
42. That approval of this applicaticn constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal
regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request
regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and
all of the conditions hereinabbve set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared
invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competentjurisdiction, then this Resolution;
and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void...
$E IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related
to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or
prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges
shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
June 12, 2006. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60; "Zoning
Provisions -General" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced
by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal
-(ORIGINAL SIGNED BY GAIL EASTMAN)
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
(ORIGINAL SIGNED BY ELEANOR MORRIS)
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-6- PC2006-52
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission
held on June 12, 2006, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BUFFA, EASTMAN, FAESSEL, FLORES, KARAKI, ROMERO, VELASOUEZ
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
.2006.
(ORIGINAL SIGNED BY ELEANOR MORRIS)
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-7- PC2006-52
SAD1, L.L.C. Attachment-ItemNo.4
5939 Monterey Road
Los Angeles, CA 90042
Phone: (323)254-3338 Fax: (323) 254-3449
December 29, 2006
City of Anaheim
Planning Department
2D0 S. Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, CA 92805
Attn: John Ramirez
Subject: Request for modification of conditions of approval for Resolution No. PC2006-52
Dear Mr. Ramirez,
On June l2, 2006 the Planning Commission approved our request fora 52-unit affordable apartment
complex. Since that time we have been working with Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority staff to
develop an Affordable Agreement for the construction of the project. I am happy to inform you that the
Housing Authority Governing Boazd approved the Affordable Agreement on December 19, 2006.
We would like to request to modify several of the conditions of approval of Resolution No. PC2006-52
due to changes that have emerged since the Planning Commission approved our request in June of 2006.
First, we request that at least either fifteen percent (15%) of the total number of units be allocated for
Very Low Income Households or thirty percent (30%) of the total number of units be allocated for Lower
Income Households as opposed to 100% of the units for Low Income Households. We are requesting this
modification strictly for financing purposes and obligations imposed by our lenders. We intend to
develop a 100% affordable project for Low Income Households as stipulated in our recently approved
agreement with the Anaheim Housing Authority.
In addition, we also request the deletion of Condition No. 37, requiring sewer improvements as pazt of the
project. During our negotiations with the Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority, we were informed
that sewer improvements benefiting our project aze scheduled to be completed by the Public Works
Department prior to December, 2008.. These improvements are part of a Cooperation Agreement
between the Redevelopment Agency and the City of Anaheim's Public Works Department.
Also, we would like to request an additional incentive pertaining to minimum width of pedestrian access
ways. Code requires a minimum pedestrian access way width of 8-12 feet, however we are proposing 5-
10 foot wide pedestrian access ways due to site limitations. The City's Fire Department has reviewed our
proposal and has determined that it is in conformity with City Fire requirements.
In advance, we would like to thank you for your consideration of the mod cations listed above. Please
feel free [o contact me if you have any questions. I may be reached a[ (323) 254-3338.
Sincerely,
~` -~-~
Aj ithaiwala
SADI Limited Liability Company
Item No.
6
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE SCENIC CORRIDOR (SC) OVERLAY ZONE.
Subject Property
Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2006-00030 Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1"' = 200'
Requested By: TARGET CORPORATION Q.S. No. 213
6148 East Santa Ana Canyon Road
10198
Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2006-00030
Requested By: TARGET CORPORATION
8148 East Santa Ana Canyon Road
Subject Property
Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 213
10198
ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE SCENIC CORRIDOR (SC) OVERLAY ZONE. Date ofAerial Photo:
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 5
5a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS i (Motion)
5b. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE ' (Resolution)
OR NECESSITY NO. 2006-00030
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) 'The property is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting pf approximately 9.48 acres
located at the northwest corner of Roosevelt Road and Monte Vista Road; having
approximate frontages of 25 feet on the north side of Monte Vista Road and 570 feet on the
west side of Roosevelt Road and further described as 8148 East Santa Ana Canyon Road
(The Anaheim Hills Festival Center, Target).
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity to .permit sales
of beer and wine for off-premises consumption within an existing retail store (Target)..
BACKGROUND::'`
(3) This property is developed witfi e 122,225 square foot retail building attached to a
commercial retail center. The property is .located in the Anaheim Hills. Festival Center and
is zoned SP90-1, DAt (SC) (Anaheim Hills Festival Center Specific PlanNo. 90-1
Development Area 1 Scenic Corridor Overlay). The Anaheim General Plan designates this
property and properties to the north and west for Regional Commercialland uses.
Properties located to the east are designated for Low'Intensity Office, and' properties to the
south are designated for Parks end Lowbensity Residential land uses.
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:
(4) The following zoning actions pertain to this property:
(a) Variance No. 2001.-04477 (to waive maximum letter height of a primary waA sign with
more than one row of letters for a previously approved hotel in the Festival Shopping
Center) was approved by the PlanningCommission on January 28;.2002'.:(125 South
Festival Drive).
(b) Variance No. 2001-04451 (to permit a second wall sign Toren existing restaurant within
a commercial shopping center with waiver of maximum number ofwall signs) was
approved by the Planning Commission on September 10; 200T (8182 East Santa Ana
Canyon, Road).
(c) Variance No. 4377 (to waive the minimum number of parking spaces and maximum
building'height tobonstruct a 4-story;:128 unit hotel) was approved by the Planning
Commission on tJovember t3, 1999'(105-125 South Festival Drive).
(d) Conditional Use Permit No. 3920 (to permit a temporary health club facility in an
existing tenant space duringconstruction of a previously approved 35,000'square foot
healtff cluti facility) was approved by the Planning Commission on September 28; 1998
to expire on September 28, 1998: (Anaheim'Hills Festival Center). This permit is no
longer needed and a condition of approval has been added requiring termination of this
permit.
Page l
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 5
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(11) The Planning Director's authprized representative has determined that the proposed project
falls within the definition'of Categorical Exemptions; Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing.
Facilities); as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines; and is; therefore, exempt from the
requirements to prepate additional environmental documentation.
EVALUATION:
(12) The Festival Specific Plan No 90-1 allows the sale ofalcoholic beverages including beer
and wine for off-premises cdnsumptiohas'apermitted accessory use to the existing Target.
retail store.. Due to an above average crime rate and an overconcentration of off-sale
alcoholic licenses within the Reporting District of this property; a determination of public
convenience or necessity is required from the City of Anaheim by the Department of
Alcoholic Beverage ControL(ABC)
(13) , State law requires a determination of public convenience cr necessity when a property is
located in a police7epdrting district with`a crime rate above the City avefage or there is an
overconcentration in thenumber of licenses withih a Census Tract:' Section 23958 of the.
Business and Professions Code provides thattfte'Department of Alcoholic Beverage.
Control (ABC) shall deny an application for a license if issuance of that license would tend
to create a law enforcement problem or'if issuance'would result in, or add to; an undue
concentration of licenses, except when an applicant has demonstratedithatpubiic
convenience or necessity would be served by the issuance of a license.
(14) On July 11, 1995, the Anaheim City Council adopted Resolution No. 95R-134 establishing
procedures and delegating certain respdnsibilities relating td issuance of licensesby ABC
with regard to applications for licenses which would otherwise be denied but for the issue of
whether public convenience or necessity would be'served by jssuance of the'license and
i where the City is responsible under State law to make sucRdetermination, the resolution
`delegates'such determinations to the Planning Commission`with the right of appeal (or ',
review] by the City Council.
(15) :`Resolution No. 95R-134 also authorizes'the Police`Department to make'recommendations
related to public convenienceor necessity determinations. When the sales of beer and
wine for off-premises consumption is permitted by Code, the Police Department's
recommehdations hall take the form of7ecommended conditions ofapproval to be
imposed bn the determination in order to ensure that the saleof beer and wine does not:
'adversely affect any; adjoiningland use or the growth and development ofthe surrounding
<'area.
(16), The Anaheim Police Department has submitted the attached memorandum stating that this
property is located within Reporting District 1244, which has a crime rate of 81' percent
above the City-wide average: This reporting district extends from Sunset Ridge td the
south, Santa Ana Canyon Road to the north, Serrano Avenue to the east, and Sunset
Ridge to the west with a portion of reporting district within the Festival Specific Plah. Said
memorandum further indicates that the population within the census tract allows for 3 off- -
sale lidehses (thee is presently 3active). It also allows for 5 on-sale licehses (there are.
presently 9 active);` Said memorandum also indludes Yecommended conditions of approval.
Page 4
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 5
(17) Community PreservationYecords indicate one open code violation pertaining td outside
storage of containers and refuse on this property: The applicant isaware of the violation
and is working with Community Preservation staff to resolve the violation:
(18) The statement of justification for determination of public convenience or necessity
submitted by'the applicant indicates the sale of beer and wine is ancillary (3-5%) to the
overall product mix provided by the store; and tftat tftere are nd otfiergrocery and retail
businesses in the same census tract that offer alcoholic beverages for off-premises
consumption: Target has indicated that they have an Alcohol Training Program where all
cashieremployee5are trained on the laws applying to hours of sale and permitted age of
purchasers. In addition, employees are also trained on the policy of requesting proper
identification from .any purchaser who appears to be under the age of 40. All trained team
;members are required to pass an exam with a minimum of an 80% in order tote a cashier.
Theree~e single-family residences across thestreetfrom the rear of the subject site but are
I not negatively affected. The retail store does not face he homes or solicit the sale of beer
or wine. '
(19) The Planning Commission has established. a policy to determine whethera determination
of putilic convenience or necessity is appropriate. Tfte following is the list of factors to
consider when evaluating a request
(a) How signiffcant is the "undue concentration"71n census tracts witha few
excess licenses, it may be easier to justify the need for additional licenses when
considering other factors. However, irT areas with a significant number df excess7icenses,
the City should' carefully examine, based on submitted evidence and the whole record,
whether it would be appropriate td make the requested finding.
There is not an undue concentration of licenses in this census tract.
(b) How close is the proposed site to a residential neighborhood and/or.
school? if the site is irr close proximity to a residential neighborhood oCSchool, then the
decision on whether to make the finding of PCN should give weight to these sensitive land
uses.
The site is not in close proximity to schools but is located 111 feet away from the rear
property line of single-family residential uses (across Festival Drive). This location does not
anticipate a negative impactin theiocation to residential uses as the retail store's main
business is to sell retail .items and will not solicit tFte sale of off safe. beerand wine. The
tieer andwine sales ismeant to be a cdnvenience to the consumer who already shops at
this location. The conditions of approval require monitoring of the site td prevent
consumption on thepremises.
(c) How close are other alcohol outlets? Are outlets in close proximity or are they
spread throughout the census tract? If the outlefis located near the boro'er of the census
tract, is there a cluster of outlets in the vicinity of the outlet located in the adjoihing census
tracts7ln some areas there are a large number of businesses providing alcoftol in close
proximity. As a result, the impact is greater than if the same number of businesses were
spread throughout the census tract. /n these instances, it may be difficult to make the
finding.
Page 5
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission.
January 8, 2007
Item No. 5
< Thete are no stores immediately adjacent to the retail store which sells off sale beer and
Winer The active off-sale licenses within the same census tract are Von's Pavilions at 8010
Easf Santa Ana Canyon. Road, CVS Pharmacy at 731 South Weir Canyon Road; and
Ralph's Groceryat 711 South Weir Canyon Road. There are a couple locations within the
vicinity located outside of the subject census tract that also provide off-sale beer and wine:
or alcoholic beverages which are;. East Hills Liquor at 8285 East Santa Ana Canyon Road,
and Grape Press Liquorat464 Anaheim Hilis Road.
(d) Are there similar businesses already in the area? Is this the first business of
this type or are there several similarbusinesses nearby? If the product is already available,.
then it would be harder to justify the public need.
-The closest retail store that has off-sale beer and wine is the Von's Pavilions, over 500 feet
away and Ralph's Grocery/CVS Pharmacy thatis located over 2,000 feetaway from the
subject Target retail store.
(e) Is the sale of alcohol an integral part of the primary purpose of the
business2 A "dinner house" would normally sell alcohol; however,' a gas station or
breakfast cafe would not.
The sale of beer and wine is anticipated to generate 3 to 5 percent of the gross sales for
the retail store and would be a minor accessdrycdmpbnentbf the`stdre. The sales of beer
and wine is not the primary purpose df the business. Rather, the sales'of general
household goods is the primary purpose of the busihess and the alcohol sales will not be
advertised to the public on the premises:
(f) Is there a history of alcohol-related problems in the area? Determination of
PCN in reporting districts that have'a much higherfhan average crime rate will be more
difficult to justify: Likewise; even if the proposed location is in a census tract that does not
have a higher than: averagecrime'rafe; it may be adjacent td one or more reporting districts
' that have a higher than average crime rate.
The Police Department would normally recommend denial of this request because of the
high crime rate in the area and an overconcentration of off-sate alcoholic licenses, however
they do not feet this Lse would be detrimental td the' area and that the availabilityof alcohol
is intended to be a convenience to the customeq therefore; they do notobject to this
request Although this location has received: 70 calls for service during the past year,
however; due to the stze of the center; it is difficult to attribute the calls to a specific
business:'.The calls for service are primarily related to theft and burglary.
(g) Are there unusual factors which are applicable to a particular location?
The establishment maycater to a specific customer such as specialty markets or
warehouse stores: In these Ihstahces, the Planning Commission may determine that the
unusual factdrs are sufficient to determine public'convenience o~necessfty.
The availability of beer and wine within this Target retail store is unique because it will note
be advertised to the general public from the store as conditioned:' Since it is intended for
retail sales; it is anticipated that the general publicwalking'dr driving past the store would
not know that beer and wine is available.
Page 6
Staff Report to the.
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007.
Item No. 6
(h) Is the proposed site in an area which has both an overconcentration,of
licenses and a higher than average crime rate? In such instances, it maybe more
difficult to make the finding
Yes. The site is in an area of above average crime (81 percent above average), and there
is an overcbncentration in the number of licenses within the census tract with this request
totaling 4 licenses with only 3alfowed for this census tract: Given the manner in which the
beer and wine will be sold, the Police Department feels that this use would not be
detrimental to the area do to the large size of the shopping center.
(i) Would a particular establishment have mitigating operational
characteristics such as increased security, limited hours of operation or bulk sales
anti/or temperatures not conducive to on-site consumption?
The proposed conditions of approval would both limit the advertisement of the beer and
wine to the general public, and require monitoring by the operator to ensure the beer and
wine is not consumed on the premises;
(20) Code permits the sale of beer end wine for off-premises consumption for a retail store; .The
intent of the cdde is to provide such sales as a convenience for patrons shopping for retail.
gopds and since this facility provides a wide range of products as a convenience to the
customer; the availability of beer and wine for sale within the retail store would also provide
a public convenience. Based uponYeview of the proposed request, the submitted
information and abbve'analysis of the Commission policy, staff recommends approval of
this application.
RECOMMENDATION:
(21) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Plahning Commissioh, ihcluding
the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence. presented at the
public hearing; the Planning Commission take the following actions as indicated in the
attached resolutions including the findings and conditions contained therein:
(a) By motion; approve a CEQA Categorical Exemption -Class 1 (Existing Facilities)
for the project.
(b) By resolution, a rove Public Convenience or Necessity Nn. 2006-00030.:
Page 7
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"*
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
DETERMINATION PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2006-00030
FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE
(8148 EAST SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD, TARGET)
WHEREAS, on July 11, 1995, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 95R-134 establishing
procedures and delegating certain responsibilities to the Planning Commission relating to the determination of
"public convenience or necessity" on those certain applications requiring that such determination be made by the
local governing body pursuant to applicable provisions of the California Business and Professions Code, and
prior to the issuance of aiicense by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC); and
WHEREAS, Section 23958 of the Business and Professions Code provides that the ABC shall
deny an application for a license if issuance of that license would tend to create a law enforcement problem, or if
issuance would result in or add to an undue concentration of licenses; except when an applicant has
demonstrated that public convenience or necessity would be served by the issuance of a license; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive an application for a
Determination of :Public Convenience or Necessity to permit sales of beer and wine for off-premises
consumption within an existing hotel gift shop on certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of
Orange, State of California, described as:
PARCEL 20 OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT NO. 264, RECORDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1991
AS INSTRUMENT NO. 91-532358 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City Of Anaheim did hold a public hearing afthe
Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on January 8, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been
duly given as required under Resolution No. 95R-134 and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim:
Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60 "Procedures", to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed
determination of public convenience or necessity for an alcoholic beverage control license 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 Anaheim Hills Festival Center Specific Plan No. 90-1 permits the retail sale of alcoholic
beverages, including beer and wine, for off-premises consumption as a permitted accessory use in a retail store,
and the intent of the Code is to provide such sales as a convenience for existing patrons.
2. That California state law requires a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity when
property is located in a police reporting district with a crime rate above the city average; and that Section 23958
of the Business and Professions Code provides that the ABC shall deny an application for a license if issuance
of that license would tend to create a law enforcement problem or if issuance would result in, or add to, an undue
concentration of licenses, except when an applicant has demonstrated that public convenience or necessity
would be served by issuance of a license.
3. That Resolution No. 95R-134 authorizes the City of Anaheim Police Department to make
recommendations related to the public convenience or necessity determinations; and when the sale of beer and
wine for off-premises consumption is permitted by the Municipal Code, said recommendations shall take the
form of conditions of approval to be imposed on the determination in order to ensure that the sale of beer and
wine does not adversely affect any adjoining land use or the growth and development of the surrounding area.
Cr\PC2007-0 -1- PC2007-
4. That the applicant demonstrated that the sales of beer and wine would be a very minor portion of
the proposed business (3%) retail floor area and no more than five percent of the annual retail sales.
5. That the accessory sales of beer and wine; as proposed and as approved, will not have a negative
impact on the surrounding area due to the operational characteristics including employee training to prevent
illegal sales to minors.
6. That subject property is located in Reporting District No. 1244, which has a crime rate of 81
above the City average and is also located in Census Tract 219.22 which permits 3 off-sale licenses currently
there are 3 licenses existing. :
7. That there are no schools adjacent to the subject site and is located 111 feet away from the
closest single-family residential uses (across Festival Drive at the rear of the site).
8.. That there is an over-concentration of ABC licenses in the reporting district, that the availability of
beer and wine offers a convenience to the customers shopping at this store, the nearest license is located at the
other end of the regional shopping center within a supermarket and that the conditions of approval will ensure:
that approval of the proposal will not adversely affect any adjoining land use or the growth and development of
the surrounding area..
9. That the Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity can be made based on the finding that
the license requested is consistent with the Planning Commission policy for such determinations.
10. That "' indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence
was received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: The Planning Director's authorized
representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions,
Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines, and is, therefore, exempt
from the requirements to prepare additional environmental documentation.
NOW, THEREFORE., BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby
determine that the public convenience or necessity will be served by the issuance of a license for the sale of
beer and wine for off-premises consumption at this location based on the following:
1. That there shall be no exterior advertising or sign of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the
exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of beer and wine. Interior displays of beer and
wine which are clearly visible to the exterior shall constitute a violation of this condition.
2. That the hours of operation for beer and wine sales shall be limited to 8:00 am to 10:00 pm daily.
3. That there shall be no display of beer and wine located outside of a building or within five (5) feet of any
public entrance to the building.
4. That the area of alcoholic beverage displays shall not exceed 25% of the total display area in the building.
5. That`the sale of beer and'wine shall be made to customers only when the customer is in the building.
6. That beer and malt beverages shall not be sold in packages containing less than a six (8) pack, and that
wine coolers shall not be sold in packages containing less than a four {4) pack.
7. That the possession of beer and wine in open containers and the consumption of beer and wine are
prohibited on or around these premises.
6. That there shall be no amusement machines, video game devices, or pool tables located outside the
building and within the control of the applicant.
-2- PC2007-
9. That no person under eighteen (18) years of age shall sell or be permitted to sell any beer and wine without
approval of a store supervisor twenty-one (21) years of age or older..
10. That the gross sales of beer and wine shall not exceed 35 percent 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 beer and wine and other items. These records shall be made available for inspection by any City of
Anaheim official whemrequested:
11. That there shall be no public telephones on the property that are located outside the building and within the
control of the applicant.
12. That any graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any adjacent area under the control of the
licensee shall be removed or painted over within 24 hours of discovery.
13. That the applicant shall be responsible for maintaining free of litter the area adjacent to the premises over
which they have control.
14. That the property owner shall submit a letter to the Planning Services Division requesting termination of
Conditional Use Permit No. 3920 (to permit a temporary health club facility in an existing tenant space
during construction of a previously approved 35,000 square foot health club facility.
15. That the beer and wine display shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications
submitted to the Cily of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department'
marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2, and as conditioned herein.
16. That prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution, or within a period of one (1) year
from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 3, 4, 8, 11, 14 and 16;
above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be
granted in accordance with Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
17. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that
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, regulatiohor requirement.
18. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a
showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and
purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modificaticn complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code and (iii) the
applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all
of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or
unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any
approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the
processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice 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.
-3- PC2007-
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2007. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of
the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution
in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNdA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on
January 8, 2007, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:.
IN W ITNESS W HEREOF, I have hereunto sef my hand this day of ,
zao7.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-4- PC2007-
as ~
e a ~' ;. s
' @~s@88@@@ ~ k'
@@
~2~a ~
g
~ 8~~~~~i~~ea~~~~ai e3e3e
j~~~'~. eei ' 5
~ ~S~s.~a~g~ U m c
O ~,3~i~ sg~c
'~ii`~3~3.
.
' ~~Sa ~ ¢ `v~
v v a
~
j a ww w,.w Wd x
W
~u~, ., ~
., .,
s: cec "s g'4~~: aea ':as
---- w w
w
~
?E.5ae"a y
w c ~m
e N H
v ~ ~ ~J....
~~
Q
E ~ ~ N mm F
J
~ ~~ m
~i
~
~
2
; ~ W
O OI^
M til 9 n~ m ~
0
~;
C 0 U 33.~ ~ ~ ~^ 4 s y ~ d F- 0 O O a (~ Z U _I a
E N N Q ~a~ey @5@ zS~
c
~ 3w: 3
~/E
§ E .o
L °
'~ „E g."gigg
~~ c
J r
~
C to 3~~~~~
~9~d ~
~
~
d ~~~
~
~
~~
~ N
Q (~ c
i
~
$ c
~
O '
z
00
O N ~
N n a
0
~. V b
0 ¢
< U ~ d ei
~m
r Nf/I
~ c ai m ¢
O N OO
® ~ a m
m ~
rn
N
Y0
O d
Q 0
o
a
O ~ r N~
~< tv ~
® w
O i ~f m
rw m
rn
COQ
~~~a N
o`
°
o
O I- `9
~ ~ ~ ~~a
O ~,
~o. `rz s
`
N ~ urn
'~ o0
Z ~
N ~`nm
W
U \
~ O1 ti ti
~A
U ~ N '~ ~'
C `
LL ~~ O O
i
2
.
O
Q
i /
~
-1 1.,
eo
c n ; 1,6
J6
7
Ely ~
ion ~'6 ~ 0 ~.
\
~`e `
Q
•` ~'
~
~
' lIH WI3HVNtl ~"
`
~ ~
I ._~
I
I R %
I l
ltlRi3dWl I
f ~
r ~.1
O
Z
d
C ~
E
/~~ ~
4
~ ~
Q U ~
~
a
m
~
'~°
<
v o w
a °' P
d f- m
O my
~~
v
¢'U
y
ti
y
~ m o
~ off-
~' Af'o~ E
.~ m o
c ~+
~ "e E
6 6 Z
+
~ e
~ ~
~ ~
Z
a I
Z
Q U
® ~ ~ p
M U %
~,
O ~
j
~~
~ ~'o pJE
O H
0 (~ M
r- MNO
gR
' S
C~ C7 ~ Ro
O ~ ~pN
N °C
O
a
W
R~ ~
e
~
y
ti
~ o
A a
', P
~
\
' ~
a ~~ ~~, \
:
\
;
\
~
\
c'
,\ ~e
N ~ ~
o
\ ~ z
, 0
\ z
,\ U
:\ Q
Q
i
O Q
Z
JQ
v
NO
1b w w
~ ~~
p?
I p
"tiy Q
~ m gy
r
I
71 b1~bS ,
QP
Attachment -Item No. 5
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR
PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY
The City Council has established procedures for the determination of Public Convenience or Necessity and has
delegated the responsibility for making such determinations to the Anaheim Planning Commission. In order to
assist the Planning Commission in its deliberations as to whether the public convenience or necessity would be
served by permitting an additional alcohol establishment within an area containing an aver concentration of
licenses andlor high crime rate, please answer the (bllowing questions.
1. What is the primary purpose of your business? Is the sale of alcohol an essential part of the primary
purpose of the business? Please explain.
Retail sales are the primary purpose of the business. Target stores sell a broad
_array of general merchandise and Rroce~ items. Alcoho_1 beverage sales are incidental
to the general retail business.
2. Are there similar businesses or a concentration of alcohol outlets in the immediate area that already provide
alcohol service? If so, how would the public convenience or necessity be served by permitting an additional
license within the census tract?
There are only a liquor store and a gas station/convenience store in the immediate
_area, although in a different census tract. The Target store is located in census
_tract '119.22. There are 3 off-sale licenses allowed for the census tract and only 1 **_
3. Is there a residential neighborhood or school adjacent to the property for which you are requesting a public
convenience or necessity determination? If so, please explain how permitting an additional license would
not disproportionately impact an adjacent residential neighborhood or school.
No. There are no residents or schools within,SQQ.` of the Target store.
4. What percentage of your business do you anticipate will be alcohol sales?
Approximately 3-59.
5. Does your business cater to a specific need or specialty which is not currently available in the area? Please
explain.
Target offers a complete one-st~_sho~pinR experience_ where customers can nurchase_
_high-quality products at affordable prices. ___
6. Are you proposing any specific operational measures to eliminate or limit any potential negative
consequences from the sale of alcoholic beverages? Please explain.
Alcohol sales training for em~oyees. __ ____ _ __ ______
7. What type of license are you requesting from ABC? Is il. an existing license?
Original Type 20 Off-.Sale $eer and Wine license.
** existing. There is not an over concentration of licenses in the census tract.
.r,1~~1r1 rl~ , (.:, dpi i nit ~fiSm u. rR.~^.t{OC '.(ARV Flit _~il tJ li ~I
0' \ .4;
V ~ ~>~
.~
~~~VNf)F.U \4~~~.
Cityggaa ogg®® WW/~^^~Ang~a~®heg~i/~m® g@~( ryalp~g® Nfapl
®LEV~ IIJ~B 19Y\Y 1~1~1 \ Y
Special Operations Division
Attachment -Item No. 5
To: Jessica Nixon
Planning Department
From: Sergeant Mike Lozeau
Vice Detail
Date: December 14, 2006
RE: PCN 2006-00030
Target
8148 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road
Anaheim, CA 92809
The Police Department has received an LD.C. Route Sheet for PCN
2006-00030. The applicant is requesting to permit ofF-sale beer and
wine in conjunction with a commercial retail store.
The location is within Reporting District 1244, which has a Crime Rate
of 81 percent above average. It is also within Census Tract Number
219.22 which has a population of 4,581. This population allows for 3 off
sale Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses and there is presently 1
license in the tract. It also allows for 5 on sale licenses and there are
presently 9 licenses in the tract
The census tract boundaries are
North Santa Ana Canyon
South Sunset Ridge
East Serrano
West Sunset Ridge
Anaheim Police Dept.
425 S. Harhor Blvd.
Anaheim, CA 92805
TEL: 714.765.1401
FAX: 714.765.1665
Off Sale licenses in the applicant census tract:
711 S. Weir Canyon Road
On Sale licenses in the applicant census tract:
8188 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road
8182 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road 199
8182 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road 195
8086 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road 155.
105 Festival Drive
8200 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road (two licenses)
8086 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road 153 & 154
Memorandum
Jessica Nixon
Target
8285 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road 120
8018 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road 108
The census tracts surrounding this location are as follows
North - 219.05
On Sale allowed 6/active 6
population 5,216
Off Sale allowed 3/active 5
South - 219.21
On Sale allowed 5/active 5
East - 219:24
On Sale allowed 5/active 6
West- 219.21
On Sale allowed 5/active 5
Additional Census Tract information:
North East -Corona
North West-219.05
On Sale allowed 6/active 6
South West - 219.21
On Sale allowed 5/active 5
South East-219.23
On Sale allowed 7/active 2
population 4,520
Off Sale allowed 3/active 1
population 4,390
Off Sale allowed 3/active 1
population 4,520
Off Sale allowed 3/active 1
population 5216
Off Sale allowed 3/active 5
population 4,52p
Off Sale allowed 3/active 1
population 5.,864
Off Sale allowed 4/active 1
There have been 70 calls for service to this address and 31 reports
taken. The location makes it difficult to decipher who the calls can be
attributed to.
The Police Department would normally oppose this request due to the
high crime rate; however, we do not feel this use would be detrimental
to the area. The Police Department would request the following
conditions be :placed on their CUP:
1) There shall be no exterior advertising or sign of any kind or type,
including advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting
or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. Interior
displays of alcoholic beverages or signs which are clearly visible
to the exterior shall constitute a violation of this condition.
Page 2
Memorandum
Jessica Nixon
Target
2) No display of alcoholic beverages shall be located outside of
a building or within five (5) feet of any public entrance to the
building.
3) The area of alcoholic beverage displays shall not exceed 25% of
the total display area in a building.
4) Sale of alcoholic beverages shall be made to customers only
when the customer is in the building.
5) That beer and malt beverages shall not be sold in packages
containing less than a six (6) pack, and that wine coolers
shall not be sold in packages containing less than a four (4)
pack.
6) The possession of alcoholic beverages in open containers and the
consumption of alcoholic beverages is prohibited on or around
these premises.
7) The parking lot of 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.
Additionally, the position of such lighting shall not disturb the
normal privacy and use of any neighboring residences..
8) There shall be no amusement machines, pay to play video game
devices, or pool tables maintained upon the .premises at any time.
9) Any Graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any
adjacent area under the control of the licensee shall be removed
or painted over within 24 hours of being applied.
10) The petitioner shall be responsible for maintaining free of litter the
area adjacent to the premises over which they have control, as
depicted.
Please contact me at extension 1451 if you require further information in
regards to this matter.
f:\home\mmirwin12006-00030 PCN 8148 E. Santa Ana Canyon Rd Target.doc
Page 3
Item No.
i 5}5p.2~
53 5 2Z. cJPCpNS
N
SOU i+
6153 000
p~pg200~ "
`M,NA gT.
Wt~H~,
AI i
~~
y
~ o i
0
;z o
EPGN A ~
pVENgE
G~ENWggq _..~_
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05164
Requested By: 508 NORTH EAST STREET, LLC
506 North East Street - La Reina Market
1
1q
qU
1~
10203
F~q~R~
' Subject Property
Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 92
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05164
Requested By: 508 NORTH EAST STREET, LLC
506 North East Street - La Reina Market
Subject Property
Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 92
10203
ua[e ornenai Nnoto:
Staff Report tq the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 6
6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion)
6b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion)
6c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 2006-05164 (Resolution)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
(1) This rectangularly-shaped, 1.15-acre property is located at the northeast corner of
,Sycamore Street and East Street, having frontages of 210 feet on the' east side of East
Street and 229 feet on the north side of Sycamore Street (508 North East Street -ta Reina
Market).
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit to permit the expansion of an
existing legal non-conforming market with sales of beer and wine for off-premises
consumption and to establish land use conformity for an existing legally non-conforming
commercial retail center under authority of Code Section No. 18.08.030.040.0402.
(Alcoholic Beverage Sales-Off-Sale), (Markets-Small) and (Commercial Retail Centers)
with waiver of the following:
(a) SECTION N0. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of Dorking spaces
(101 required; 71 proposed)
BACKGROUND:
(3) This property is developed with a nine (9punit commercial retail shopping center and is
zoned C-G (General Commercial). The Anaheim General Plan designates this property for
General Commercial land uses. The Anaheim General Plan further designates properties
in all directions for Medium Density Residential land uses. This property is located within
the Merged Redevelopment Area
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:
(4) The following zoning .actions pertain to this property:
(a) Conditional Use Permit No. 3547 (to permit the addition of a 780 square foot
storage area to an existing comme~pial tenter with waiver of minimum number of
parking spaces and maximum permitted'structural height within 150 feet of a
single-family residential zone boundary) was approved by the Plahning
Commission oh October 5, 1992. -
(b) Conditional Use Permit No. 2315 (to permit on-sale beer and wine in an existing
restaurant) was approved by the Planning Commission bn April 6', 1992: The
restaurant is no longer in operation et this location and staff has included a
condition of approval requiring ti;rminatiph of this permit;
(c) Conditional Use Permit No. 1409 (to establish' a church with waiver of minimum
number of required parking spaces) was apprpvedby the Planning Commission on
July 23, 1973. The church is no longer in operation at this location end staff has
included a condition of approval requiring termination of this permit.
srcuP2aos-os~sakiw Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 6
(d) Conditional Use Permit No. 1263 (to permit on-sale. liquor in an existing restaurant
- with waiver of minimum distance between freestanding sign) was approved by the
Planning Commission on September 20; 1971: This entitlement is currently ih use
by EI Nopal Restaurant..
(e) Conditional Use Permit No. 813 (tc permit a restaurant with on-sale beer and wine
with waiver of minimum required number of parking spades) was approved by the
Planning;Commission on February 16; 1966: This restaurant is no tohger in
operation and staff has included a condition of approval requiring termination of this.
permit:.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL:
' (5) The applicant requests a conditional use permit to permit the expansion of an existing legal
non-conforming market with sales of beer and wine for off-premisesconsumption and to
establish land use conformity for an existing 9-unit commercial retail center <
(6) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates an existing nine (9) unit' commercial retail building,
The applicant proposes to expand the existing La Reina Market into the adjacent southerly
unit for a total of 7,878 square feet of retail space. In addition, the applicant propdses to
construct a 1,460: square foot second-story addition at the froht of the unit for accessory ,
office and storage space.
(7) Vehicular access to the site is provided via two (2) driveways, from Sycamore Street and
East Street:: Plans indicate a total of 71 existing on-site parking spaces available for this
center ,:The proposed market expansidn would7equire 51 `spacesand the combined uses.
in tfie retail center require 101 parking spaces based on the following:
USE „ ~ ~Sf2UARE , ;, - '
FOOTAGE ; . REQUIRED PdRKIN(3
er1,OQ0 s.f. '. TOTAL ', •-
EI Nopal Restaurant. 2,109 s.f.' 8 16.9
Coin Laund 1,512 s.f. 5,5 8.3
Sycamore East
Barbe~sho 634 s.f. 5.5 3.5
Hair Fashion 732 s.f. 5.5 4.0
Rosita's Bridal Sho 525 s.f. _ 5.5 2.9
La Reina Market`: 9,338 s.f. 5.5 51.3
New A e Water 950 s.f. 5.5 5.2
Tic Tac Market 1,520 s.f. 5,5 8.4
TOTAL.: 17,320 s.f. , 101
'Includes 1,460 square foot second-story addition
(8) The floor plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates the expanded market oonsists of a produce and
meat area, hot foods display area, bakery, walk-in cooler, restrooms and accessory offices
on the first floor of the market. The second-story addition consists of a new restroom, office
space and accessory storage area
Page 2
Staff .Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 6
N'_'•ur°~ ~a~~s,[ ~' z~ tom"`'` "~rT~="-~~e ~~-F ' ~: ys?~,~~~ r r ~
'-~~e„ r -s ,~
s'3r ~,
,~.,r ,~...... .. ,. ,....-~ruyr;, d"s, .m ~"-~;~~ s ,~.. r,,,,.mr~,„.....e 'du.~H'..>rr..l.cn S~,. -x, _n _. rr.,, .., ._...,, ~,.,.
~toposed Elevations
(9) The elevation plan as shown above, color rendering and materials board (Exhibit Nos. 3, 4,
and 5) indicate a 24-foot high, two-story building incorporating aSpanisht style design. In
addition to constructing asecond-story, the applicant also proposes to refurbish the existing
fagade by incorporating blue file along thebottom of the pillars of the building; applying an
orange-yellow colored stucco to the building ahd dark maroon trim.
(10) Sign plans were not submitted with this application. The elevations indicate four (4)„
existing non-conforming wall signs for the market, 'Tortilleria;'''Panderia," "Carniceria'", and
"La Reina " Code permits a maximum of three (3) wall signs for the unit for the frohtage of
the use and the total aggregate area of wall sign(s) affixed to the face of the buildings to
which such: sign(s) are attached to a maximum of ten percent (10%) or two hundred (200)
square feet; whichever is less and a maximum letter height of 24-inches for this building.
Any new wall signs would have to comply with current code requirements:.The elevation
plans indicate the removal of the "La Reina" sign at the existing entryway of the market,
and a new!'La Reina" wall sign over the expansion area, resulting in four (4) wall signs, and
would not comply with the current Code requirements; therefore; the existing signs would
need to be modified incrder to'accommodate the new. sign. The applicant is aware of the
requirement of maximum number of wall signs and i5wiliing to modify plans to comply with
Code. The existing wall signs for the center are a combination of cabinet signs and
individual channel letter signs that were permitted under the prior code which did not have '
a letter height limit; however, most of the signs would comply with current Bode
~equiremehts.
(11) Photographs and staff inspections have confirmed orie (1)non-conforming multi-tenant
pole sign identifying businesses in the center: Changes are not proposed for the free-
standing'sigh. All freestanding signs are in compliance with the approved sign plans oh file
ih the Building Divisior4.
(12) Photographs and staff inspections of the site indicate minimalbut maintained landscaping.
Small treesand shrutis are in thelandscape planters along Easfand Sycamore Street and
ih the lantlscape planters within the parking lot. No additional lahdscaping is proposed.
(13) The applicant has submitted a letter of operation indicating the market would continue to
operate as a small retail market selling fresh produce, delicatessen meats and specialized
prepared foods. There would be no seats for food consumption on thepremises; The
current hours for the market are 7:30 a.m: = 8:30 p.m. daily, with a total of twenty (20)
amployees.
(14) There are no open Community Preservation violations associated with the property.
Page 3
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 6
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: ,
(15) .`Staff has reviewed the proposal to permit the expansion of commercial unit with sales of
beer and wine for off-premises'consumption and to establisfi'land use conformityfor an
existing nine (9) unitoommercal retail center, and the Initial Study (a copy of which is
available for review in the Planning Department) and finds nd significant environmental
impact and, therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be epprpved upon a
finding by the Planning Commission that the Negative Declaration reflects the independent
judgmentof the lead agency; and that it hasconsidered the proposed Negative Declaration
together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding
'on the tiasis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial
evidence that the projecfwill have a significant effect on the environment.
EVALUATION:
(16) The expahsion of an existing market with a floor area of less than 15,000 square feetand
the sale of beer end wine for off-premises consumption are'permitted in theC-G Zone
subject to approval of a conditional use permit.
(17) The requested waiver pertains to minimum number'of required parking spaces: Code
requires'a minimum of 101 parking spaces for the combined uses proposed on-site and the
expansion of the market. Plans indicate7l parking paces provided, resulting in a
'deficiendy of 3~arking spaces. A parking study was conducted by the City's independent.
traffic parking consultant at the existing center and determined the maximum number of
occupied parking spaces observed was 59 parking spaces.' Increasing the maximum
' demand. by 20% (59 x .20 = 12) to account for the increased square footage of the retail
:'portion of the market, results in a parking demandbf 71 parking stalls. The site plan
indicates 71 parking stalls would be provided. Therefore, the City's independenttraffic and.:.
parking `odnsultant has determined thet the numberof parking'spaces provided would be
adequate to support the numtier of employees and customers for the combined uses and:
market ezpahsiort. Staff recommends approval'of the waiver based upon the Traffic
consultant's ehalysis and findings contained in the attached draft resolution,
(18) La Reina Market currently holds aType-20 (off-sale beer and wine) ABC license.. Records
indidate the license was established prior to the Code requirement for a conditional use
permit and therefore, the landuse is legal non-conforming:` However,`since an expansion
of the marketis proposed, Code`requires a conditional use permit for the sales of beer and
wine for off-premises consumption. Tfte Police Department indicates that three (3) phone
calls were received within the last year, none pertaining to beer or winesales: A
Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity is not required and ABC has indicated
the business is in cdmplie~ce with the license: Therefore; staff recommends approval td
permit the sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption.
(19) The existing center was constructed prior to the Code provision requiring a conditional use
permit for a commercial retail center, therefore; tfie applicehPjs also requesting to establish.
land use conformity for the retail center: The existing commercial center is non-conforming
in terms of signage and landscaping,. both within the parking Iof and street setback.
"Although staff would encourage additional landscaping, the requested action on its own
would not require the property owner to make these improvements. The applicant does not
propose any additional landscaping..
Page 4
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 6
(20) Staff has included standard conditions of approval pertaining to smalimarkets related to
site maintenance,. seating limitations and window signage limitations. In addition, the
recommended standard conditions of approval would ensure proper maintenance,
landscaping; sanitation and screening of roof-mounted equipment.
FINDINGS:
(21) Section 18.42.110 of the parking code sets forth the following findings which are required to
be made before the parking waivers are approved by the Planning Commission:
(a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed if any, will not cause fewer off-street
parking spaces to be provided for the use than the number of such spaces
necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the Normal
and reasonably foreseeable conditions ofoperation 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 proposedLse; and
(c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed if any; will not increase the demand
and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the
immediate vicinity of the proposed use; and
(d) The variance under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic
congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use;
(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.
(22) Before the Planning Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding
of fact that the evidencepresented shows that all of the following conditions exisk
(a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the
Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses
Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority);.
(b) That the use will not adversely affect khe adjoining land uses or the growth and
development of the area in which it is proposed to be located;
(c) That the size and shapenf the site for the use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area
or to the health and safety;
(d) That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and
(e) That the granting of the conditional use .permit under the conditions imposed., if
any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of
Anaheim.
Page 5
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No, 6
RECOMMENDATION: ,
(23) Staff recommends that, unless additional br contrary information is received duffing the.
meeting, and based' upori the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including
the evidence presented in this staff report,'ahd oral and written evidence presented at the
public hearing, the Planning Commission take the followirig actions as indicated in the'.
', attached resolutions including the findings and conditions contained therein:
(a) By motiom ap rove the Negative Declaration for the project.
(b) Bymotion, ap rdve the waiverof minimum number of parking spaces..
(c) Byresolutidn, a rove, Conditional Use Permit No: 2006-05164:
Page 8
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--***
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THATPETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05164 BE GRANTED
(508 NORTH EAST STREET)
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional
Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
described as:
THE SOUTHERLY 249.75 FEET, MEASURED FROM THE CENTERLINE OF SYCAMORE
STREET, LYING WESTERLY OF A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND SOUTH 74° 31' 10"WEST
515.00 FEET FROM THE EASTERLY LINE OF tOT 1 OF ANAHEIM EXTENSION, IN THE City of
Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, AS PER MAP OF SURVEY MADE BY WILLIAM
HAMEL IN 1968, AND FILED FOR RECORD IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, A COPY OF W HICH IS
FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY; ON PAGES 163
AT SEQ. OF BOOK 3 ENTITLED LOS ANGELES COUNTY MAP.
EXCEPT THE SOUTHERLY 5.25 FEET, THE SOUTEHRLY LINE OF WHICH IS THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SYCAMORE STREET.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on January 8, 2007; at 2:30 p:m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60, to
hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and
make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself
and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing; does find
and determine the fallowing facts:
1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by ,
Anaheim Municipal Code Section No, 18:08.030.040.0402 (Alcoholic Beverage Sales-0ff-Sale), (Markets-
Small) and (Commercial Retail Centers) to permit the expansion of an existing legal non-conforming market
with sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption and to establish land use conformity for an existing
legally non-conforming commercial retail center:.
(a) SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of oarkino spaces.
(7.01 required; 71 proposed)
2. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not cause fewer off-street.
parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate atl
vehicles attributable to the proposal under. the normal and reasonably foreseeable operation of such use
since the maximum number of occupied parking spaces observed was 59 parking spaces and factoring the
maximum by 20% to account for the increased square footage of the retail portion of the market, resulted in a
parking demand of 71 parking stalls which currently exists at the center....
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 proposal.
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 proposal since the
anticipated parking demand can be accommodated by the parking provided on the property.
Cr\PC2007-0 -1- PC2007-
5. That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion within the
off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposal since the existing parking lot has access and
parking and It is anticipated that all of the traffic for the uses in this center would be contained on-site.
6. That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress
from adjacent properties upon the putilic streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposal since ttie'existing
parking lot provides ingress and egress along East Street and Sycamore Street.
7c That the request for conformance with Code for the sales of beer and wine for off-premises
consumption within the existing legally non-conforming market would not be detrimental to adjoining land
uses as conditioned because the business currently holds aType-20 ABC license and ABC has indicated the
business is compliance with the existing license. In addition, the Police Department indicates that this
property received three (3) calls for service within the last year none pertaining to beer or wine sales.
t3.` That the expansion of the existing market will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses
and the growth and development of the area in which the market is located because the use is an existing
legal non-conforming market which has not had a negative impact on the surrounding area and because the
addition will comply with code requirements and the parking deviation requested can be justified.
9. That the size and shape of the site for the combined uses within the commercial retail center
is adequate to allow full development in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health and
safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim and would comply with all provisions of the Zoning Code.
10. That "' indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposal; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding
that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the
Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further
finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that
the project will have a significant effect on the environment
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does
hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit., upon the following conditions which are hereby
found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the
safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That the number of tenant spaces shall be limited to nine (g) as indicated on the site plan exhibit
submitted by the applicant. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building
permits.
2. That a minimum of 71' parking spaces shall be maintained on site. Said information shall be
specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits.
3. That no outdoor vending machines shall be permitted on the property that are visible to the public right-
of-way.
4. That there shall be no public telephones on the premises and located outside the building.
5. That activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise
disturbance to surrounding properties.
-2- PC2007-
6. That all fixtures, displays, merchandise and other materials in excess of three (3) feet in height shall be
setback a minimum of three (3) feet from all window areas. Said information shall be specifically
shown on plans submitted for building permits.
7. That no roof-mounted balloons or other inflatable devices shall be permitted on the property.
8. That there shall be no outdoor storage permitted on the premises.
9. That all trash generated from the market and commercial retail center shall be properly contained in
trash bins located within approved trash enclosures. The number of bins shall be adequate and the
trash pick-up shall be as frequent as necessary to ensure the sanitary handling and timely removal of
refuse from the property. The Community Preservation Division of the Planning Department shall
determine the need for additional bins or addition pick-up. All costs for increasing the number of bins
or frequency of pick-up shall be paid by the business owner.
10. That the trash enclosure shall be refurbished. Said .information shall be specifically shown on plans
submitted for Streets and Sanitation Division approval
11. That all trash generated from the commercial retail center shall be properly contained in trash bins
located within approved trash enclosures.
12. That any new roof-mounted equipment shall be screened from view in accordance with the
requirements of the Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.38.170 pertaining to the C-G (General
Commercial) Zone. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building
permits.
13. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by the provision of regular
landscaping maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty-four (24)
hours from time of discovery.
14. That the parking lot shall be maintained in good condition free of trash and debris.
15. That four (4) foot high street address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of the main building in a
contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall be visible to adjacent streets or properties.
Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted to the Police Department, Community
Services Division, for review and approval
16. That the sales'of beer and wine shall be permitted only between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 8:30 p.m.
17. That the sales of beer and wine shall not exceed thirty-five percent (35%) of the gross sales of all retail
sales during any three (3) month period. The applicant shall maintain records on a quarterly basis
showing the separate amounts of sates of beer and wine and other items. These records shall be
subject to audit, and made available, when requested by any City of Anaheim official during
reasonable business hours.
18. That no advertising of beer or wine be located, placed or attached to any location outside the building,
and that any such advertising shall not be audible (interior or exterior).
19. That no beer and wine shall be consumed on the premises.
20. That no video, electronic or other amusement devices or games shall be permitted anywhere on the
subject property unless required permits are obtained from the'Business License Division.
21. That no display of beer or wine shall be located outside the building or within five (5) feet of any public
entrance to the building.
-3- PC2007-
22. That the areas of beer or wine displays shall not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the total display
area in the building.
23. That beer shall not be sold to packages containing less than a six (6) pack, and that wine coolers shall
not be sold in packages containing less than a four (4) pack.
24. That the property owner shall submit a letter requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No.
2315 (to permit on-sale beer and wine in an existing restaurant), Conditional Use PermitNo. 1409 (to
establish a church with waiver of minimum number of required parking spaces) and Conditional Use
Permit No. 813 (to permit a restaurant with on-sale beer and wine with waiver of minimum required
number of parking spaces) to the Planning Services Division.
25. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications
submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning
Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 6, and as conditioned herein.
26. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 6, 10, 12, 15, and 24, above-mentioned, shall be
complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with
Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal
27. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 3, 4, and 25, above-mentioned, shall be
complied with.
28. 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 tfie
request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
29. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon
a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent
and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code and
(iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved
development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and
all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared
invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution.,
and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying atl charges related
to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or
prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to .pay all charges
shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application.
-4- PC2007-
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2007. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Zoning
Provisions -General" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced
by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission
held on January 8, 2007, 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
2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-6- PC2007-
Attachment - Item Rio, 6
~.~~a~~a~~g~ ~a~°u~~ ~~~~~
508 (V. East ~freet
Anaheim, California
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
` -~ ~~~~ ~
~. ~ss~~6at~sp ~~ac.
November 2006
Table of Contents
Section
i. Introduction
2. Project Location
3. Site Description
A. Existing Site
B. Proposed Site
4. Parking Requirements per Municipal Code
5. Site Parking Counts
6. Methodology of Study
7. Site Observations
8. Site Layout
9. Conclusions
10. Findings
I1. Recommendations
Appendix A Site Plan
Appendix B Parking Counts
Appendix C Site Photos
Page
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
4
5
6
7
I. Introduction
The purpose of this parking study is to determine if the existing parking will be sufficient
to accommodate an expansion of the existing market into a vacant suite formerly
occupied by the Mexico Lindo Discoteca.
2. Project Location
The retail center is located at 508 N. East Street.
3. Site Description
A. Existing Site
The site is located on the northeast comer of East Street and Sycamore. It is
bounded by Glenwood Avenue to the north, East Street on the west and Sycamore
on the south. It consists of one parking lot accessed via two driveways, one on
East Street and one on Sycamore. There is also a gated delivery access on
Sycamore. There are 17,320 SF of retail and restaurant uses, with some office
and storage on the second floor. The tenants of the retail center are:
• El Nopal Restaurant
• Coin Laundry
• Sycamore and East Barber Shop
• Elegant Hair Fashions
• Rosita's Bridal Shop
'' • Rubalcaba's market: La Reina Carniceria, Panaderia, Tortilleria
• Vacant Suite Formerly Mexico Lindo Discoteca
• La Mejor Agua Water store
• Tic Tac Liquor store
B. Proposed Site
The applicant wishes to expand the .grocery store into the vacant 1,569 SF suite
formerly occupied by the Mexico Lindo Discoteca.
A site plan is provided in Appendix A.
Rubalcaba's Parking Study 1 Rafiq & Associates, Inc.
4. Parking Requirements per Municipal Code
The City of Anaheim parking code requires 97 spaces for the proposed uses after the
grocery expansion. The site contains 68 parking spaces. This tabulation is provided
below.
Tenant SF . Code
arkin rate Pazking
Re uirement
El No al Restaurant 2,109 8 17
Coin Laun 1512 SS 8
S camore and East Barber Sho 634 5.5 4
Ele ant Hair Fashions 732 5.5 4
Rosita's Bridal Sho 525 5.5 3
Market with ex ansion . 7,878 5.5 43
2" floor office 901 4 4
2" floor stora e 559 1.55 I
La Me'or A a Water Store 950 5.5 5
Tic Tac Li uor Store 1520 5.5 8
Total 17,320 97
5. Site Parking Counts
Counts were taken by Southland Car Counters on Saturday November 11, 2006 between
8:00 AM and 10:00 PM in 15 minute intervals. Based upon the counts taken, the
maximum number of occupied parking spaces was 59 spaces at 9:15 AM. The count
sheets are provided in Appendix B.
6. Methodology of Study
The market contains 6,309 SF and it wishes to expand to 7,878 SF. This is an increase
of 20%. The observed maximum parking demand on a typical Saturday will be factored
up by 20% to see if it can be accommodated within the existing parking lot.
7. Analysis -
The maximum number of occupied pazking spaces observed on a typical Satwday was 59
spaces at 9:15 AM. Factoring this up by 20% to account for the increased square
footage results in a parking demand of 71 spaces. The site contains 68 existing parking
spaces. The site would need to provide three more parking spaces to meet the observed
demand. These could be accommodated within the site.
Rubalcaba's Parking Study
2
Rafiq & Associates, Inc.
8. Site Layout
Several of the existing parking stalls are an existing non-conforming situation that will
remain.
It is suggested, that the Sycamore Street driveway be shifted easterly to align with the
drive aisle to remove the offset.
9. Conclusions
The expansion of the market into the vacant suite (formerly the discoteca) will require
that the site contain 71 parking spaces, based upon the observed parking demand for the
current site. The current site contains 68 spaces. The site would be short three parking
stalls if the market were to be expanded. Three additional parking stalls could be
provided onsite.
10. k'indings
Finding Number .0101 That the variance, undez- the conditions unposed, if any, will
not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed zrse than the
number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use
undez• the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such zrse.
Rubalcaba's Retail Center will be able to provide adequate parking onsite for its
uses.
Finding Number .0102 That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will
not increase the demand az:d competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in
the immediate vicinity of the proposed use.
Rubalcaba's Retail Center will provide adequate parking onsite for its uses.
Curbside parking will not be needed.
Finding Number .0103 That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will
not increase the demand and competition for parkiztg spaces upon adjacent private
property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use (which property is not expressly
provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with subsection
18.42.050.030 (Non-Residez:tial Uses-Exception).
Rubalcaba's Retail Center will provide adequate parking onsite. Overflow parking
will not occur upon adjacent private property.
Rubalcaba's Parking Study
3
ltafiq & Associates, Inc:
Finding Number .0104 That the variance, under the conditions unposed, if any, will
not increase h•a~c cazgestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for• the
proposed use.
Rubalcaba's Retail Center will provide sufficient parking onsite for its uses.
Finding Number .0105 That the variance, zznder• the conditions imposed, if azzy, will
not impede vehicular ingress to or• egress fro»r adjacent properties upon the public
streets in the inunediate vicinity of the proposed use.
Rubalcaba's Retail Center will provide sufficient parking onsite for its uses.
1L -Recommendations
The parking lot should be restriped to provide 71 parking stalls.
Rubalcaba's Parking Study 4 Rafiq & Associates, Inc.
Appendix A
Site Plan
WIDTH OF STR88T = 89'-9"
Appendix ~
~a~9~~9c~~~°s Pa~ku~a 5~~~~
Location: 508 East St. Day: Saturday
City: Anaheim
38
40
42
47
53
59
57
51
46
42
39
37
46
49
52
52
50
54
55
51
48
49
52
52
51
46
47
44
40
Car Counters estimated 68 total parking stalls. Some parking may have been along areas now striped-out on plan.
Current site plan shows 66 stalls.
Spircizdi~ {:
~'+lt L' i'il ~IQtiS
Item No. 7
i
c
C
j RCL 55-56-12
1 ff n~~==-=r-<= _\
I _\P~ I
RCL 56-5]-23
I
!m
w
m ¢
j CUP 3312
~Q CUP 3312
I
o ~< i.
U
1
I ~
Nom RCL ]SJ6-91
CUP 2131 m~u
^
' Q r RCL 56-5]-23
J CUP 1292
, ~ > ~
I RCL 55-56-12 ~m ~ CUP 1929
~ VACANT
EQUIPMENT ~
° mN vAR Zeis u °~
RENTALS /
,~
~a D
~~o
CPL
PAC
G m.
'~
rvn cG
GG
Im U~
~ ~~
pD .
.
IABEL CO. ~d~
~z ^O
r RCL 6667-07 RCL 5x56-3]
~J
U
s<
o~
~m VAR 1645
VAR 2648
~ 00 O VACANT
LINCOLN AVENUE - _ . ~
sos ~ _
D, -
N
C~
RCL 6263-TS -^ ~ - ~~- -
T-CUP 2W3-w7a p G.G t'
~ GG C-G
CuP
8 ~ ~ t ,RCL 56 57-39 RCL 59-67dT RCL 56-57-27
CUP 1506 ~ w w " CUP 4017 j:-
- U2~1 ,VAR 22795 ~ VAR 2993 6 VAR 1076 3
VAR 19155 RCI
C
REST. CUP 373 ,
~(rG ~ € v ~ ADJ 2006 00298
s VACANT
VAR 2191 5
VAR 259 ~, f pCN 200fi-00031
RCL 56-57 39 !
VAp 919
REST .
,
CUP 3'111
~
-i
,
ADJ 2006-0029 RCL 66.57 39 ~ ~-
C PCN 2006-0003'( CUP 3966 ;.
'
' C-G
- VACANT ~ CUP 7071 /~
;
W z
W,- x VAR 20665 (%- RCL 5&57-27
R ~' _ ADJ 2006-00298 CUP 2261
~ .
ti: ` j' PCN 2006-00031 VAR 2581 S
5z1:
APTS ETTLE MOTO W OF; o L1J
HOTEL 2 -~'' ~ / ~ ;
, =._,~i
2 j ~ ~ ~
R,
, -
w / c-G ~ ' U
' AOJ 2006.00299 ~ GG
RM-0 ,,.
~~° h RCL 5&57 39 ~,~
' ~ RCL 56-57-27
RCL 62-63-75 '~ '
CUP 1447 U CUP 1357
CUP 373 / 3
PCN 2006-00031 < ~ VAR 2578 S
VAR 619 ,
~ t
~ ! (CUP 320) e" ~ u! CAR WASH
APARTMENTS / `' ~, ~ CAR DEALERSHIP ~ t s
t `~' £
"
~ '
"
~
'
~ ~ ~
` ' PAMPAS LANE r
r
F ;
~
`~ ~ z' RCL S&60-113
t OU EACH G VAR 2156 6
~ t ~, ~
C-G ~ R
BR ENTWOOD PL RCL 59-60.113
C~ VAR 2155 S
RCL Se-57-39 ADJ 0025 d
ADJ 0101 ~
R6-2 T-CUP 2004.04931 W
.R 1320
1 DU EACH
CUP 2004-04666 .
RCL 9~fiD-113 a
PCN 2005.00020 CUP 3956 p
PCN B6-01 SMALL SMOPS tj
T SCW 2004-00025
(CUP 1060) ~
Cri W
3 O
RCL 5
CUP 3273 (CUP 629) 9-60-11
CUP 350 (VAR 2656) CUP 1451 0
GIRL (
VAR 1663
SCOUTS 3
AR 1603
N
T
T-CUP 2004-04894 SHOPPING
GENTER
c-G 6
CUP 542 RQ 99-8509 C~
/D!`I SU_Ph_At -_.
Subject Properly
Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2006-00031 Date: January 8, 2007
Requested 8y: LINCOLN & EUCLID LLC Scale: T" = 200'
215 S. EUCLID ST., LCC Q.S. No. 47
101-215 South Euclid Street and 1732 West Lincoln Avenue
10202
Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2006-00031
Requested By: LINCOLN & EUCLID LLC
215 S. EUCLID ST., LCC
101-215 South Euclid Street and 1732 West Lincoln Avenue
Subject Property
Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
O.S. No. 47
~ozoz
Date ofAeriai Photo:
Ju1v 2005
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 7
7a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion)
7b. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE - (Resolution)
OR NECESSITY N0.2006-00031
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This rectangularly-shaped 10.4-acre property is located at the southwest comer of Euclid
Street and Lincoln Avenue with a frontage of 740 feet on the west side of Euclid Street and
609 feet on the south side of Lincoln Avenue (101 -215 South Euclid Street and 1732
West Lincoln Avenue -Target).
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity to permit the
sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption within a proposed grocery and retail
store (Target).
BACKGROUND:
(3) This property is currently developed with an automotive dealership and fast-food restaurant
and is zoned C-G (General Commercial)., The Anaheim General' Plan designates this
property and properties to the south and east fog General CommeYcial lahd uses
Properties to the north are designated for Industrial land .uses and' properties to the west
- are designated for Low. Density Residential and Low-Medium Density Residential land
uses.. Thrs property is located in the Merged Redevelopment Area
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:
(4) The following zoning actions pertain to this property:
(a) Administrative Adjustment No: 2006-00299 (to construct a new retail store (Target)
with waiver of the minimum numbeFof required parking'spaces'and maximum
permitted height) was approved by the Zoning Administrator on December 7, 2006,
(b) :Conditional Use Permit No. 4017 (to permit a 22,300 square foof expansion of an
existing automobile sales lot withi waiver of minimum landscaped setback and
minimum numtierbf street trees) was approved byYhe Planning Commissioh on
April 13, 1998. This entitlemehf is no longer needed and a condition of approval
requiring the termination of this permit has been added.
(c) Conditional Use Permit No. 3988 (to permits 41,600 square foot expansion of an
existing automobile sales lot display area with waiver of minimum required
landscape setback adjacent town arterial highway) was approved by the Planning
- Commissioh do December 8 1997. Thisentitlement is no longer needed and a
condition of approval requiring the termination of this permit has been added.
(d) Conditional Use Permit No. 3111 (1732 West Lincoln) (to permit a commercial-
retail center with waiver of minimum numberof parking'spades and landscaping of
required yard) was approved by the City Council on April 18,'.1989: This
entitlement is no longer needed and a condition of approval requiring the.
termination of this permit has been added.
Srpcn2006-00031k1w Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007.
Item No. 7
(e) Conditional Use Permit No. 1447 (215 South Euclid) (to establish an automobile
sales agency and service facilities with waiver of (a)'minimum number ofparking
spaces (b) maximum number of free-standing signs, (c) minimum distance
between free-standing signs (d) permitted location offree-standing stgnsjwas
approved by the Planning Commission on January 7; 19741 This ehttlemenfis no
longer needed and a condition of apprdval requiring the termination of this permit
has been added.
(f) Variance No. 2279 (101 South Euclid) (waiver of (a) maximum number of free-
standing signs (b) minimum height of afree-standing sign) was denied by the
Planning Commission on July 26, 1971. This request was subsequently approved
by the City Council on September 17, 1971. This entitlement is no longer needed
and a cdndition of approval requiring the termination of this variance has been
added.
(g) Variance No. 2086 (waivers of (1) number of free-standing signs permitted (2)
location of afree-standing sign, and (3) minimum height of afree-standing sign; to
permit an existing statue as afree-standing sign in conjunction with an existing
restaurant) was denied bythe Planning Commission on May 19, 1969.:This
request was subsequently approved:by he City Council on July 1, 1969; This
entitlement is no longerheeded and a condition ofapprovaf requiring the
termination df this variance has been added.
(h) Conditional Use Permit No. 1071 (111 South Euclid) (to establish an outdoor eating.
area (patio) in conjunction with'an established restaurant) was'approved by the
Planning Commissidn on October 21; 1968: This entitlement is no longer needed
and a condition of approval requiring the termination of this permit has been added.,
PROPOSAL:
(5) The applicant requests a determination of public convenience or necessity to permit the
retail sales of alcohdlic beverages for off-premises consumption within a proposed retail
and grocery store (Target):;. The existing automotive dealership and fast-food restaurant:.
would be demolished to facilitate the construction of a Target store which is a primary
permitted use within the C-G Zone.: This determination is required by State law because
the property is located within a reporting district that hasa crimerateabove the city-wide.
average and an duet-concentration of off-sale alcohol permits.> This request does not
pertain to tha cdnstructidncf the store itself.
(6) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates a proposed 127,225 square foot Target store that
would be constructed at the southwest corner of the site with the main entrance facing
Euclid Street.
(7) Vehicular access to the site is providedvia two (2) driveways along Lincoln Avenue and
two (2) driveways along Euclid Streets Since thereerend prdposetl changes to the square.
footage of the building, no additional parking is required with this request.
(8) The floor plan (Exhibit No: 2) indicates a 127,225 square foot building consisting of an
office and lounge area for employees, storage area and retail area including a pharmacy,.
Page 2
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 7
food service; and aphoto-processing counter. The beer and wine sales area would°be
located in one aisle, a couple of end-caps, and sometimes at the check-out lanes.
(9) The elevation plan {Exhibit Ne. 8) indicates a 24 to 50-foot high'single story building, with a
flat roof, textured plaster exterior finish; and stone wainscoting along the bottom' of
elevation5along Lincoln Avenue and Euclid Street: In addition; the building would have a
- tower element at the entryway of the building.
(10) The letter of operation indicates that the requested liquor license would allow the store to
provide an additional product to customers:. Currently, Target stores in California sell
packaged food`and beverages; grab-and-go items and are expanding their food areas to
cater to their customer's needs. The store's hours of operation are proposed to be 8 AM to
10 PM Monday through Saturday and 8 AM to 9 PM on Sunday. The proposed sale of
beer and wine is estimated to be less than three (3) percent of the store's gross sales.
ENVIRONMENTAL4MPACTANALYSlS:
(11) .Staff has reviewed the proposa(to permit the sales of beer and wine for off-premises
consumption within a proposed grocery end retail store, and the Initial Study (a copy of
which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant
environmental impactand, tnerefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be
approved upon a finding by the Planning Commission that the Negative Declaration reflects
the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed
Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review
process ahd further finding bn the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that
there is ho substantial evidence that the project will have'a significant effect on the
environment:
EVALUATION:
(12) The sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption in a grocery store greater than
15,000 square feet sa permitted use within the C-G'Zone: The applicant has applied for a
determination of public convenience or necessity in order to obtain a Type 20 (Off-Sale
Beer and Wine) license. Due to an over-concentration bfoff-salelicenses within the
Census Tract and an above average grime rate within the Reporting District of this
property, a determination ofpublic convenience or necessityis required from the City of
Anaheim by the Department of Alcoholic Beveragg Control (ABC).
(13) State law requires a determination ofpublic convenience or necessity when a property is
located in a police reporting district withe crime rate above the Cityaverage or there is an
over-concentration in the number of licenseswithin a Census Tract: Section 23958 of the
Business and Professions Code provides that the Department ofAlcoholic Beverage
Control (ABC) shalt deny an'applicant fora license if issuahce of that license would'tend to
create a7awenforcement problem or if issuance would result in or add to; an undue
concentration of licenses, except when an applicant has demonstrated. that public
' conveniencebr necessity would be served by the issuance oPa license:
(14) O~ July 11,1995, the Anaheim City Council adopted ResolutionNo. 95R-134 establishing
procedures and delegating certain responsibilities relating to issuance of licenses by ABC
witR regard to applications for licenses which would otherwise be denied but for the issue of
Page 3
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 7
whether public cohveniehce or necessity would be served by issuance of the license and
', where the. City is respohstile under State taw to make such determination;. the resolutiori
delegates such determinations to the Planning Commission with the right of appeal (or
review) by the City Council
(15) Resolution No. 95R-134 also authorizes the Police Department to make recommendations
related td public convenience or necessitydeterminatiohs: When theaales of beer and
wine for off-premises consumption is permitted by Code, the Police Department's
recdmmendations shall take the form of recommended conditions of approval to be
imposed on the determination in order td ensure that the sale of beer and wine does not
adversely affect anyadjoining land use or the growth and development of the surrounding
area
(16) The Anaheim Police Department has submitted the attached memorandum dated:
December 13, 2006, stating this property is located within Police Reporting District Nd.
1721, which has a crime rate of 27% above the City average,:, This property is also located
within Census Tract 871.03, where there are currently 6 licenses for retail sales of alcoholic
beverages for off-premises consumption and only 5 off-sale licenses are allowed. This
census racfpopulation also allows for 9 licenses far retail salesbf aldofiolic beverages for
on-premises consumption where currently 5 exist:.. The oensus tract boundaries are Lincoln
Avenue. to the north; Ball Road and Willow Avenue to the south, Euclid Street to the east;
and Nutwood Street and Brookhurst Streefto the west.
(17) The statement ofjustifidation for determination of public convenience or necessity,
submitted. by the applicantsindicates the sale of alceholic beverages is ancillary (less than
1 %) to the overall product mizprdvided by the store, and that there are no other grocery
and retail businesses in the vicinity that offer alcoholic beverages fdrbff-premises:
consumption: The applicant furthef notes that there are multiple-family and single-family
residential neighborhoods adjacent to the property; however; Target hasihdicated that they
have ate Alcohol Training Program where all cashier employeesare trained on the laws
applying to hours of sale'and permitted' age of purchasers: In addition; employees are also
trained on the policy of requesting proper idehtiflcatioh from any purchaser who appears to
be under the age of 40. All trained team membersare required to pass an exam with a
minimum of an 80°/d in order to be a cashier.
(18) The Planning Commission has. established a policy to determine whether a determination
of public convenience orhecessity inappropriate:' The following. is the list of factors to
consider when evaluating a request:
(a) How significant is the "undue concentration"1 In census tracts with a few
'excess licenses; it may be easier to justify the need for additional licenses when
t considering other factors. However, in areas with a significant number of excess
licenses, fhe City should carefully examine, teased on submitted evidence and
the whole record,: whether it would be appropriate to make the7equested finding.
The census tract is currently overconcentrated by 1` off-sale license.. The
proposed grocery and retail store is unique to other businesses with off-sale
licenses in thatthe sales of beer and wine: is to provide an additional amenity to
customers and would not be a primary sales product.
Page 4
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 7
(b) How close is the proposed site to a residential neighborhood and/or, ;
school? If the site is in close proximity to a7esidential neighborhood or school,
then the decision on whether to make the finding of PCN should give weight to
these sensitive land uses..
The groceryand retail store is adjacent to both single-family and multiple-family
residences to the south: There are no schools in the vicinity:. This location does
not anticipate a negative impact in the'location to residential uses as the retail
store's main business is to sell retail items and will' not solicit the sale of off-sale
beer and wine. The beer and wine sales is meant to be a convenience to the
consumer who already shops at this location: The conditions of approval require
monitoring of the site to prevent alcohol consumption on he premises:.
• (c) How close are other alcohol outlets? Are outlets in close proximity or are they
spread throughout the census tracts? If the outlet is located near the border of
the census tract, is there a cluster of outlets in the vicinity of the outlet located in
the adjoining oensus tracts? In some areas there are a large number of
businesses providing alcohol in close proximity:: As a result, the impact is greater
than if the same number of 6usihesses were spread throughout the census tract.
/n these instances,. it may be difficult fo make the finding.
The closest off-sale license is approximately 1,050 feet from the subject property
(275 South Euclid Sheet - Sav-On Drugs):
(d) Are there similar businesses already in the area? Is this the first business of
this type or are there several similar businesses nearby? If the product is already.
available, then it would be harder to justify the public need
The proposed grocery and retail store is the first business in the vicinity to sell
beer and wine: The sales of tieer and wine would allow the business to offer a
convenience to the customers.
(e) Is the sale of alcohol an integral part of the primary purpose of the
businessl A `dinner house" would normally sell. alcohol; however, a gas station
orbreakfasfcaf~ would not.
The sale of beer and wine is anticipated to generate less than three (3) percent
of the gross sales forthe retail store. The sales of beer and wine is not the
primary purpose of the business. Rather, the sales of general household goods
is the primary purpose of the business and the alcohpl sales will not be
advertised to the public on the premises.
(tJ /s there ahistory ofalcohol-related problems in the areal Determination of
PCN In reporting disMcts that have a much. higher than average crime rate will be
more difficult to justify. Likewise,. even if the proposed location is in a census
tract that does not have a higher than average crime rate, it maybe adjacent fo
one or more reporting districts that have a higher than average came rate.
This property has a crime rate of of 27% above the City average. The Anaheim
.Police Department would normally recommend denial of this request because of
Page 5
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission.
January 8, 2007
Item No. 7
'_the highbrime rate in the area, however, they do not feelthis use would.be
detrimental to the area and that the availability of alcohol is intended to be an
additidnal amenity for the customer; therefore; they do not object to this request:
(g) Are there unusual factors which are applicable to a particular location?
The establishment may cater to a specific customer such as specialty markets or
warehouse stores: In these instances; the Planning Commission may determine
that the unusual factors are sufficient to determine public convenience or
necessity.
c The availability of beer and wine within this Target retail store is unique because
it will not be advertised to the generalpublic from the store as conditioned. Since
it is intended for retail sales, it is anticipated that the general public walking or
driving past tfie store would not know that beer and wine is available:.
(h) Is the proposed site in an area which has both cover=concentration or
licenses and a higher than average crime rate? In such instances, it may be
'more difficult to make the finding.
There is an over concentrationof off-sales licenses and an above average crime
rate. However, the method in which the beer and wine is offered is unique and is
geated towardsbustomers already in the store.
(i) Would a particular establishment have mitigating operational
'characteristics such as increased security, limited hours of operation or
bulk sa/esanti/or temperatures not conducive to on-site consumption?
The proposed conditions of approval would both limit the advertisemeht of the
beer and wine to the gerteralpublic, and requite mohitoring by ttte operator to
ensure the beerahd wine is not consumed on thepremises. In addition, there
would be cameras in the aisles where the beer and wine would tie located:
(19) The proposed conditions ofapproval'would bothlimit the advertising of beer and wine to
the general public; and require monitoring by the operator to ensure the beer and wine is
not consumed on the premises.
(20) Code permits the sale of beer and wine for off-premises consumption for grocery stores.
> greater than 15,000'square feet: The intent of the Code is to provide such sales as a'
convenience for customets:' Althougft the proposed Target would tie located within an area
of high crime rate and over-concentration; the hew groceryahdretail store would provide a
variety of retail services. There are no similarYetail stores immediately adjacent to the
proposed Target which sell beer and wine; and the availability of beer and wine for sale
withih theretaN store would provide a public convenience'. Based upon review of the
propdsed request; tfie submitted information ehd above analysis of the Commission policy,
'staff recommends approvaf of this application.
Page 6
Staff Report to the
• Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 7
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 in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the:
public hearing, the Planning Commission take the following actions as indicated in the
attached resolutions including the findings and conditions contained therein:
(ap By motioh; a rove a CEQA Negative Declaration for this project.
(b) By resolution, approve Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2006-00031:
Page 7
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--***
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2006-00031
FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE
(101-215 SOUTH EUCLID STREET AND 1732 WEST LINCOLN AVENUE)
WHEREAS; on July 11, 1995, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 95R-134 establishing
procedures and delegating certain responsibilities to the Planning Commission relating to the determination
of "public convenience or necessity' on those certain applications requiring that such determination be made
by the local governing body pursuant to applicable provisions of the Business and Professions Code, and
prior to issuance of a license by the Department of Alcoholic:Beverage Control (ABC); and
WHEREAS, Section 23958 of the Business and Professions Code provides that the ABC
shall deny an application for a license if issuance of that license would tend to create a law enforcement
problem, or if issuance would result in or add to an undue concentration of licenses, except when an
applicant has demonstrated that public convenience or necessity would be served by the issuance of a
license; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of did receive an application for a
Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity to permit the sales of beer and wine for off-premises
consumption within a proposed retail store on certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of
Orange, State of California, described as:
PARCEL A: PARCEL 1, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 11, PAGE 45 OF PARCEL
MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
PARCEL B: PARCEL 1, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 18, PAGES 17 OF PARCEL
MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALfFORNIA.
PARCEL C: PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 85-472, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN
BOOK 215, PAGES 43 AND 44 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA:
PARCEL D:- PARCEL 2 AS SHOWN ON A PLAT ATTACHED TO THAT CERTAIN LOT LINE
ADJUSTMENT NO. 313 RECORDED MAY 16, 1994 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 94-0335342 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on January 8, 2007, at 2:30 p.m:, notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by Resolution No. 95R-134 and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code,
Chapter 18.60 "Procedures", to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed determination of
public convenience or necessity for an alcoholic beverage control license 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 of said hearing, does find
and determine the following facts:
1. That the C-G (General Commercial) Zone permits the retail sales of alcoholic beverages,
including beer and wine, for off-premises consumption as a permitted accessory use in a grocery and retail
store of greater than 15,000 square feet, and the intent of the Code is to provide such sales as convenience
for customers.
Cr\PC2006-0 -1-
PC2007-
d
2. That California state law requires a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity when
property is located in a police reporting district with a crime rate above the city average; and that Section
23958 of the Business and Professions Code provides that the ABC shall deny an application for a license if
issuance of that license would tend to create a law enforcement problem or if issuance would result in, or
add to, an undue concentration of licenses, except when an applicant has demonstrated that public
convenience or necessity would be served by issuance of a license.
3. That Resolution No. 95R-134 authorizes the City of Anaheim Police Department to make
recommendations related to the public convenience or necessity determinations; and when the sale of beer
and wine for off-premises consumption is permitted by the Municipal Code, said recommendations shall take
the form of conditions of approval to be imposed on the determination in order to ensure that the sale of beer
and wine does not adversely affect any adjoining land use or the growth and development of the surrounding
area
4. That the applicant demonstrated that the sales of beer and wine would be a very minor
portion of the proposed business (less than 1 %) retail Floor area and no more than three percent of the
annual retail sales.
5. That the accessory sales of beer and wine, as proposed and as approved, will not have a ,
negative impact on the surrounding area due to the operational characteristics including employee training to
prevent illegal sales to minors_
6. That the public convenience or necessity will be served because the applicant would be the
only retailer (grocery and general merchandise) in the general area that would offer beer and wine for off-
premises consumption.
7. That subject property is located in Reporting District No. 1721, which has a crime rate of
27% above the City average and is also located in Census Tract 871.03 which permits 5 off-sale licenses
currently there are 6 licenses existing.
8. That there are no schools adjacent to the subject site.
9. That the Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity can be made based on the
finding that the license requested is consistent with the Planning Commission policy for such determinations.
10. That *** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit the sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption
within a proposed retail store; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the
declaration reflects the independenfjudgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative
Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the
basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will.
have a significant effect on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission dces
hereby determine that the Public Convenience or Necessity will be served by the issuance of a license for
the sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption at this location based on the following:
1. That there shall be no exterior advertising or sign of any kind or type, including advertising directed to
the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of beer and wine. Interior displays of
beer and wine or signs which are clearly visible to the exterior shall constitute a violation of this.
condition.
_2_
PC2007-
- - - - -
2. That the hours of operation for beer and wine sales shall be limited to 8 AM to 10 PM daily.
3. That there shall be no display of beer and wine located outside of a building or within five (5) feet of
any public entrance to the building.
4. That the area of alcoholic beverage displays shall not exceed 25% of the total display area ima
building.
5. That sale of beer and wine shall be made to customers only when the customer is in the building.
6. That beer and malt beverages shall not be sold in packages containing less than a six (6) pack, and
that wine coolers shall not be sold in packages containing less than a four (4) pack.
7. That the possession of beer and wine in open containers and the consumption of beer and wine are
prohibited on or around these premises.
8. That there shall be no amusement machines, pay to play video game devices, or pool tables
maintained upon the premises at any time.
9. That no person under eighteen (18) years of age shall sell or be permitted to sell any beer and wine
without approval of a store supervisortwenty-one (21) years of age or older.
10. That the gross sales of beer and wine shall not exceed 35% 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 beer and wine and other items. These records shall be made available for
inspection by any City of Anaheim official when requested:
11. That there shall be no public telephones on the property that are located outside the building and
within the control of the applicant.
12. That any graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any adjacent area under the control of the
licensee shall be removed or painted over within twenty-four (24) hours of discovery..
13. That the applicant shall be responsible for maintaining free of litter the area .adjacent to the premises
over which they have control.
14. That the property owner shall submit a letter to the Planning Services Division requesting termination
of Conditional Use Permit No. 1447 (to establish an automobile sales agency and service facilities with
waiver of (a) minimum number of parking spaces (b) maximum number of free-standing signs, (c)
minimum distance between free-standing signs, (d) permitted location of free-standing signs),
Conditional Use Permit No. 3111 (to permit a commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number
of parking spaces and landscaping of required yard), Conditional Use Permit No. 1071 (to establish an
outdoor eating area (patio) in conjunction with an established restaurant), Conditional Use Permit No.
3988 (to permit a 41,600 square foot expansion of an existing automobile sales lot display area with
waiver of minimum required landscape setback adjacent to an arterial highway), Conditional Use
Permit No. 4017 (to permit a 22,300 square foot expansion of an existing automobile sales lot with
waiver of minimum landscaped setback and minimum number of street trees), Variance No. 2279
(waiver of (a) maximum number offree-standing signs (b) minimum height of afree-standing sign), and
Variance No. 2086 (waivers of (1) number of free-standing signs permitted (2) location of a free-
standing sign, and (3) minimum height of afree-standing sign, to permit an existing statue as a free-
standing sign in conjunction with an existing restaurant).
15. That the beer and wine display shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and
specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim'by the applicant and which plans are on file with the
Planning Department marked Exhibit No. 2, and as conditioned herein.
-3-
PC2007-
.. _ a _ _
16. That prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution, or within a period of one (1)
year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 3, 4, 8, 11, 14 and 15,
above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time tp complete said conditions maybe
granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal
17. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal
regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the
request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
18. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon
a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent
and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code and
(iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved
development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and
all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared
invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution,
and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related
to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice 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
January 8, 2007. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Zoning
Provisions -General" of the Anaheim. Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced
by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-4-
PC2007-
_ _ _. _ s _ ... _ _.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission
held on January 8, 2007, 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
2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-5- PC2007-
NN
WWW
aQ
Q¢
~
6
zzzi3w m
»>-
m° G <°
o
OOUOQZO
jm°°°O
Y
~Y
r p
p
p
zzzim~UOOD
w
UUUU3 m
~
• y
j
o»pmo
JC¢K 0777°
.. N
v
O ;3;;3;wmmm$wwwwz w m `
m
~ ~~nrrvnrva v~nmmmmNd ~ ~ m ~ ~ N~ 2
N G
N Q
~ ~ ¢ J J J 9 q H
m W
.y r '/~
V, x Y G m p, p~ N H N ~ 6C
~?
~ n 0
9
C O
~ tau ~z o z~ °m0 0` ~ a viz°c°
i a
O
N Soozsa?a°x `a ~~ dti
m wr'"ww° u°u-o~uEi
V N
~ N Q OOZrx~ 0°xZQw~,u~ U
j
°
~ O
` N
N ~
N ' xo i$~Tu az
z ~'
3
°z
m
~ w O
~ O ~
Q O f6 ~ w3
u~ oa?o~wx
m~ao °a
u v N to
O _
x~°ufua~o~~ ¢uaz
U ~ ~
.
x
n~,.~m~m __~~...._
a ~ w m
HARBOR r~ ~ pISN LAND z
0
m
QNVlA3NS10
1f1NlV
r
O°
~ ~
~
O ~ ao ti ui
in 'n "~ n m m
O lei m ~~N
~
~ WNN 00 J
Q g tlk1VOl G ~ J
d' O O m
O L O
r r
N~ i a ~ ~ ® ®
v7 ~ ~ ^
~~~~~, ® an~na
w U
~ O O
U a oM
~
U 3 ~~
0 0 ....
d o 00 add
ti~~
Z m m C m N N
J M T H C
O O
` O ~ d G1 O O
w~
n
' U rmm
v
n J may
c
. c~
dv 00
nmm
O NV1 O_o
C ~ O ~
OO `O^
O .. .
~=
mN(A
C !t
00
a ~ a U° - Os :7 s
lsanr+NOOae ~n ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ is
t}uooaa+ '-
.~.._. ~.~ J
~ m~ .l ;
i~
r
.-.n ~ .._.. '
' i
O ' _
,
d d
.. ____
~ l.. .._.. N
A R A O
W N N ~
C tC ~
~ O O f._.._.. ~
I ~'1..~
~ ~ ~ ~
U
1M351I°J
N
O1
a
r
O
Z
E
d
..
c
m
E
r
U
w
Q
t
M
O ~c
O G
O
~ U
~a
O 1~
r
O
N ~
Z w
U~
d
i
w
w ¢¢
°°
y
QNN ° °_
OZ ~F
F
ogg ¢g~
U U U jo
6 N Z U U of
U U
V}N N m300WW WW
QQ N
N
n~i
~~~ Og s
OQ
~i
.-m YImN ng
vIP
U
6 Z
Q O
U
° ° s
Z~~ a
WWy C
~~
¢
~~~ =_
Zg
W U W W N N O
C
W N 2 W J ~ N W
O
~
~
~ ~K
~Y Q
'
6
O U
m m m
w r
m m
N°
N N N N N N ~ V~1 r N N N N Q N
a
1 1~ N N N
666 Q N~ 1~ 1 1 N N N Z N
6QQ66 ~
y
1- N 1~/l b h N N N N
.¢¢¢ ¢
¢¢¢ Y¢ ¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
N ¢
OOOOyy ~1 ¢y00000.ij 3i ~2~~ S
U~¢YS1 `~2 r'i `~T2 Sy ~Y
oODU0O0
????000 ODUUUOOOOwNO
03??3?ODO~NO 0-0000000
O~ 00000000
¢¢¢
3333mNm mJJJJJ¢¢¢- R
33333.mmmugm Umm¢K¢¢¢¢6¢
333mmNmNmNm
_
r2
~~~ NOtNV jg1n~~NNNZ pN 1q
`
'
'
'
'
~ 0N~„V IOq 1A yNy !bQ N1A N Vl
N
~
~
rve1NN rv
~
o
m
~Hirvrv~
ae YNtVNeSiAm
P
I
Q
U
K
U y °
LL y=
t
1 ~ w ~ ~
J°a ~
w~ wm
/
w
~ _° ¢
a
4i>~~ ~ ¢ ¢wy
a° ~~° ¢ ~
(n
Q jU' 9~ N
~U2¢¢ ga$'wly2
~
U
° 6bg0~ °~¢OV)
'
J
~
O U VfN00¢Z
~ E gm_ Q
~ _iI~%
V p2¢Z
0 W O Q N 6 K
222 URO U
IFI-V
N
}
2 J Y° ~ O~ N Z Q
N CO i t
4 w~
W ~ i~
3 9
O y 3 p a p N i
N
a
¢ ~ 0
=
6 N¢
¢
US S
°6 r
~ o
NN Illw °Q
r
w ~ ~ ~
O<
V ^JWF
~ y
LLy
yQQ Oaa
UZK `a 1`t
m
aaa<''''GWG y K
O~NQ~QQ~jO
W
1
..JJ
2
U [] W V' f
Q Q
$$
Q
<
J F~ f Q 6 6~° 6 N N J
~
~yy J
° U~¢ N N Z N N 6
C
C •(A tV
~ ~ ~~ IV 1'V N [N`I O C
d rv N [NV N N [qV ~'1 vl m m rl ~ VV
m m n n~ P V v Y Y C v
U
w
a~
v
~a
Aa
~.
a
r fi ti
~ ~
Z ~
m °
6
E ~ `o a
w > rn o E
'
I~ yi ¢
a c a
~ ¢ t5
•. O
O vi `O
a a v ...
0
d N w
o w ~ 19
g'
.c ai °° vi
e ~ 8 m fi
a v
V (p ~ d F •• a a z
~ N
~
Q ~j c Q
a~
a 1S lONItlM
Q
~ w
z
M U '<
O
Of- N+ U
~~
~. cV~
c ~y
I ~ ~
P'"t ~°
~ ~ Ls vavo~
O
O ~
N p is anona
a
~ w
~
;
W + W
<
~+
r+
/^~
1 H z
U N o
(~ ~ j O~ ~ a
Q
w
!'~-
NN
~~ o
U Z
a
o +
N a
1~ o
P ~
1slsanHNOOae
~ ~ -----'
~ L f1
1
J
~
Q .
~1~. ~.~ '
¢ .J ,__~ ~____.__._
m
._~
Attachment -Item No. 7
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR
PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY
The City Council has established procedures for the determination of Public Convenience or Necessity and has
delegated the responsibility for making such determinations to the Anaheim Planning Commission. (n order to
assist the Planning Commission in its deliberations as to whether the public convenience or necessity would be
served by permitting an additional alcohol establishment within an area containing an over concentration of
licenses and/or high crime rate, please answer the following questions.
1. What is the primary purpose of your business? Is the sale of alcohol an essential part of the primary
.purpose of the business? Please explain. -QETL+iL ~!} LAS .f•+4= TFfE /°~1isw~~'r°<+•<ras< <tBus%NCa.
~~aarT /~ s5 iy_r~, s~/l PAcLCfh(-,ICJ Foc~~,~r-u~A-~ ~~ N e~rC FueN~'cfy;,,c
2:
3. Is there a residential neighborhood or school adjacent to the property for which you are requesting a public
convenience or necessity determination? if so, please explain how permitting an additional license would
not disproportionatelyimpact an adjacent residential neighborhood or school.
>?Es~v~r~. bra-L~a~iaT.',r~,Y/{G,Loe,~TC~o~/LVpa/wEs"TsiD~-~rt/>G~aDosr~I~C=-~7-
'r~-$PDED ew/~rr~/i~t~/eEoy/,~,4v,wc:~rN:~r.~1t°,,~p d,'~ crops-l~PwiLC N TDFr~,i1.i2=n~~e
A.G/_/.. T.r-a~ ..~.nn/ n~n...~..-T.iAI ~.. ~i rv~ L]... ~~n.-.~so
4. What percentage of your business do you anticipate will be alcohol sales?
L r/s s T/f,4u ~,~ cz~ s o r~,4-( ~..q-~c-.s .
5. hoes your business cater to a specific need or specialty which is not currently available in the area? Please
explain.
'rll ~ ~ 1'~_r-~j Tir -T sTa~Q c wiLL BC- SER I//NG-r/fE snnr~ r'L~~NTFLE A~s7'H€ ~XlC7~,~1~t,--
~1`iFRrr~orl LinlcoLN Alr~ L?CChu5C7r~r< ~z/sTi~c=r~,t~-ETw,'LLBE cLos~D /t-T
~N'c oPF.tl/a!r oFTI,LEeVEW Sroi?C-.
6. Are you proposing any specific operational measures to eliminate or limit any potential negative
consequences from the sale of alcoholic beverages? Please explain.
~_(~ ",~ ~-r' RT wt%L V-~ $35c-7s '(~ 'TE ~Ic,N PEOPLE TffR=Gt ~=EFouTTK~~ T~otQE-
i-a nn cosg WILL BE LOC •7Z"D AR ~ ND Lr /;-o/ SALES ~IiF " ALL ELv1 PLo YEEC RE~PoNS(g[
~°/t ALC2!/o X5,4 FS fF,2is /3~lA/CSR/nlCtJ,NTI><~ slrLC o~A-Lc F/oL E
7. What type of license are you requesting from ABC? Is it an existing license?
-~R~r~T w~/L R r R~ w..ES~N h NEW .C./r' ~ s >^ F'oR 8~E-R7 ~ i,.i lIJ t"
pCN N0. Zoos - 0 0 ~ 31
Applicaiion Ibr delertninalien of PCN.doe
revised 7- I <.IIS
alCOhol SENICe? IrSO, hOW WOUItl the pt1bIIC COnVBNenCe 0rneCes5lly be serVetl by permlmng an ar1tl1[I0nal
license within the census tract?T}1~6 N~vt FsT1.1a4oR 979?6 iN T/ft /a"rr~~i~Tc A-Ks~t s 3, iT~ F~~r--
AW~,y f~4 ~1'77+E PkP~aSC-d TA7QCs ETC U ~FRC-NTL y iN T~~ c; rY os;ai/,o-N~~:<t~N-~f~ iiz .vo
M QAlok%(.IMesA/Th`~/y5u{fNC~~=~-s~LC-13F.6t'~w/i/GLi~,~.vsr_s.T65=ruI°arR~Tif,L
,~j,.H E-I ~.~.
Et. /~.
/a~ / A\
~ 12~
ul
jY
.~ /.~
`.` ,\PY`
,.. Nn EO_,i .
Clty Oyg Bf/ry~llg@d~p~gyh~eggl+~ri®h~'(p Ip®'~~~gry pp~~ 1y~T~'gp~ Attachment -Item No. 7
®R/H4.+~ 8/ w ~~8 L 1YY H 1~YLl \ Y
Special Operations Division
To: Kim Wong
Planning Department
From: Sergeant Mike Lozeau
Vice Detail
Anaheim Police Dept.
425 S. Harbor Blvd.
Anaheim, CA 92805
TEL: 714:765.1401
FAX: 714.765.1665
Date: December 13, 2006
12E: CUP 2006-05169/PC1V 2006-00031
Target
101 S. Euclid Street
Anaheim, CA 92804
The Police Department has received an I.D.C. Route Sheet for CUP
2006-05169. The applicant is requesting to permit off-sale beer and
wine in conjunction with a commercial retail store..
The location is within Reporting District 1721, which has a Crime Rate
of 27 percent above average. It is also within Census Tract Number
871.03 which has a population of 7,631. This population allows for 5 off
sale Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses and there are presently 6
licenses in the tract. It also allows for 9 on sale licenses and there are
presently 5 licenses in the tract..
The census tract boundaries are:
North Lincoln
South Ball/Willow
East Euclid
West Nutwood/Brookhurst
Off Sale licenses in the applicant census tract:
937 S. Euclid
929 S. Euclid
2174 W. Broadway
2034 W. Lincoln
275 S. Euclid
807-809 S. Euclid
On Sale licenses in the applicant census tract:
2175 W. Orange,
819 S. Euclid
1750 W. Lincoln
Memorandum
Kim Wong
Target
895 S. Euclid
408 S. Brookhurst
The census tracts surrounding this location are as follows:
North - 871.02 population 5,862
On Sale allowed 7/active 4 Off Sale allowed 4/active 4
South - 876.01 population 5,157
On Sale allowed 6/active 0 Off Sale allowed 3/active 3
South - 877.01
On Sale allowed 6/active 8
East - 871.04
On Sale allowed -/active 1
West - 877.01
On Sale allowed 6/active 8
West - 871.01
On Sale allowed 5/active 13
population 4,882
Off Sale allowed 3/active 3
no info
Off Sale allowed -/active 0
population 4,882
Off Sale allowed 3/active 3
population 4,087
Off Sale allowed 3/active 3
Additional Census Tract ihformatiotr.
North East - 871.04 no info
On Sale allowed -/active 1 Off Sale allowed -/active 0
North West-871.01
On Sale allowed 5/active 13
South West - 877.01
On Sale allowed 6/active 8
South East - 876.01
On Sale allowed 6/active 0
population 4,087
Off Sale allowed 3/active 3
population 4,882
Off Sale allowed 3/active 3
population 5,157
Off Sale allowed 3/active 3
There have been no calls for service or reports taken at this location in
the last year.
The Police Department would normally oppose this request due to the
high crime rate and over-concentration; however, we do not feel this
use would be detrimental to the area. The Police Department would
request the following conditions be placed on their CUP:
Page 2
Memorandum
Kim Wong
Target
1) There shall be no exterior advertising or sign of any kind or type,
including advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting
or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. Interior
displays of alcoholic beverages or signs which are clearly visible
to the exterior shall constitute a violation of this condition.
2) Plo display of alcoholic beverages shall be located outside of
a building or within five (5) feet of any public entrance to the
building..
3) The area of alcoholic beverage displays shall not exceed 25% of
the total display area in a building.
4) Sale of alcoholic beverages shall be made to customers only
when the customer is in the building.
5) That beer and malt beverages shall not be sold in packages
containing less than a six (6) pack, and that wine coolers
shall not be sold in packages containing less than a four (4)
pack.
6) The possession of alcoholic beverages in open containers and the
consumption of alcoholic beverages is prohibited on or around
these premises.
7) The parking lot of 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.
Additionally, the position of such lighting shall not disturb the
normal privacy and use of any neighboring residences.
8) There shall be no amusement machines, pay to play video game
devices, or pool tables maintained upon the premises at any time.
9) There shall be no public telephones on the property that are
located outside the building and within the control of the applicant.
10) The gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed 35
percent 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.
Page 3
Memorandum
Kim Wong
Target
11) Any Graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any .
adjacent area under the control of the licensee shall be removed
or painted over within 24 hours of being applied.
12) The petitioner shall be responsible for maintaining free of litter the
area adjacent to the premises over which they have control, as
depicted.
Please contact me at extension 1451 if you require further information in
regards to this matter.
f:\home\mmirwin\2006-05169101 S. Euclid Targel.doc
Page 4
~uV auu
20 DU 4DU 4DU 6DU 6DU
4DU 4DU
4DU 4DU 6DU
RM-4 6DU
RCL 66-67-56 4DU 4DU
RCL 83-64-105
: 4 pU CUP 560 4DU RM-4 6DU RM-4 6DU
VAR 1864 4DU R
7 R 06
VAR 20 4DU
94 VAR 27 p
4DU 4DU 4DU 6DU
20 DU o ~ 4DU fi:DU
4DU
~ 4DU
4DU J
o 6DU
= 4DU 6DU
t
4DU 4DU
4DU ~
z
4DU
6DU
6 DU
I-70-13
~ 4DU 4DU 4DU 4DU
~I 7125 6DU
JU RM~1
RCL 71-72-06
4 DU 4 DU 4DU 4 OU 3 DU VAR 2366
3 DU EA
ORANGEWOOD AVE
-~ RS ~ ~- no • -~
T
:UP 2248 F,-
;UP 7527
7 DU RM-0 W
RM-0 T RCL RCL :", ~ ~
RCL 75-76-34 CUP 917 77-78.32 76-77 59 r W
APTS. CHURCH APT VAR 290.4 `-,~~ ~ y
22 DU 16 DU VAR 1666 ~,,;` , Q
1
.
26 DU ::-; Z
0 g
r-1 ~
T
iUBTPM 2605-226 ~
RCL 2006-00180
CUP 2606-05160 U
CUP 3669 N
(RCL 56-57-92) ~ j
iDU ^
1 DU EACH
Reclassification No. 2006-00160
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05160
Tentative Parcel No. 2005-226
Requested By: LEIN M HOANG
606 East Orangewood Avenue
U1
~_
W
J
~I
1o19s
RM-4
RCL 61-82-05
RCL BS-B6-09
VAR 3513
QCUP 963
HAMPTON POINT
APARTMENTS
204 DU
~ RS-3 /
RCL 67-68-91
1 DU EA.
d
NW
V) ~ f9
~~ O
x
U
Z
Q
Subject Property
Date: January B, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. Na 99
CLIFFWOOD AVE
Reclassification No. 2006-00180
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05160
Tentative Parcel No. 2005-226
Requested By: LEIN M HOANG
606 East Orangewood Avenue
Subject Property
Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 99
~o~ss
0:
~w~ zoos
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 8
8a: CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion)
8b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2006-00180 (Resolution)
8d: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion) . ,
Sd: CONDITIONAbUSE PERMIT N0. 2006-05160 (Resolution)
8e, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2005-226 (Motion):
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This 0.33 acre rectangularly-shaped parcel has a frontage of 85 feet on the south side of
Orangewddd Avenue, a maximum depth of 175 feet, and is located 170 feet west of the
centerline bf Spinnaker Streef (606 East Orangewood Avenue).
REQUEST'.
(2) The applicant requests approval of the following:
Reclassification No: 2006-00180`- to reclassify this property from the T (Transition) zone to
the RS-4 (Single-Family Residential) zone.'
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05160 - to construct three (3), small-lot, single-family
residencesunderautfiority of Code Section No:18.04.030.080 (Special Provisions for
Dwellings- Single-Family Detached) and 18.04.160:010 (Development in the RS-4 Zone) with
'waivers of:
(a) SECTION NO: 98.04.060.020 Minimum lot depth abutting an arterial
hiahwav 120 feet required; 69 feet
proposed)
(b) SECTION N0. 18.92.150 Required frontage on a public or private
street (Frontagebn a private or public
street required; Frontage on private access
easement proposed for two lots)
Tentative, Parcel Mao No. 2005-226 - to establish a 3-lot, 3-unit detached single-family
residential subdivision:
BACKGROUND:
(3) This property is vacant and zoned: T (Transition). The Anaheim General Plan designates this
property and properties to the south and west focLow-Medium Density Residential land uses.
Properties to the east are designated for Low Density Residential land uses, and properties to
the north (across Orangewood Avenue) are designated for Medium Density Residential land
uses.
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:
{4) The following zoning actions pertain to this property:
(a) Conditional Use Permit No. 3669 (to permit a church with waiver of minimum settiack for
institutional uses and structural height adjacent to residential zones) was approved by
City Councif on Octobee 3, 1994. This permit is no longer needed and a condition of
approval has been added requiring termination of this permit.
SR-RCI2006-0O1801KN
Page l
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 8
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL:
(5) The applicant proposes to reclassify the property from the T zone to the RS-4 zone.to
construct three (3) detached single family homes antl establish athree-unit single-family
residential subdivision:
(6) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) and tentative map indicate the following characteristics:.
`General Plan tlensity.
(7) The site plan reflects three (3) single-family homeswith the following setbacks:
21 feet / 9 feet 10 feeU10 feet 1 ~`
Lot A (4,728 sf) 10 feet / 10 feet (adjacent tp floor
"a
20 feeU20 feet Orangewood 15 feeU15feet 2
Ave):. floor
5 feet / 5 feet
10 feeU10 feet 1s
Lot 8(3,113 sf) floor
' 10 feet710 feet 20 feeU20 feet 5 feet / 5 feet 15 feeUl5feet 2"a
Lot C (3,713 sf) floor
Develo meet Standards Pro osed Pro'ect RS-4 Zone Standards
Site Area .33 acres 14,480 s . ft. N/A
Density 9 d.u: per acre (grossp
11 d.u. er acre net 11 (d.uC per acre)
Average Net Land Area per
Unit (euclusive of access
easement 3,851 sq. ft. Determined by CUP
Avera a tot Covera a 40.6% 50%
Total Arkin 6 enclosed & 6 b en 8 enclosed & 6 o en
(8) The site plan further indicates pedestrian access to Orangewood Avenue for ail three lots. A
(siz) 6-foot high decorative block wall would be constructed along the Korth, south, and west
property lines. Six (6) foot high decorative block walls would also be constructed to separate
private yard areas for aach'of the properties and wrtlught irdn gates wduitl provide access to
these areas betwet:n theYesidences. Trash pick-up would odcurbn Orangewood Avenue.
(g) `Vehicular access would be provided by a private easement from Orangewood Avenue that is
enhanced with stamped concrete at the entrance. The site plan indicates twelve (12) parking.
spaces available within the subdivision, including two (2) garage spaces and two {2) driveway
spaces foreach home; as required by Code for single familyresidences. f
(10) The floor plans (Ezhitiit No. 2) for the residences indicate 2-story units consisting of a living
room, familyYoom, dining room, kitchen, 4 bedrooms, 4'/z bathrooms and awasher/dryer nook
ihside the garage.
(11) Elevatidn drawings (Exhibit Nos: 3 & 4) indicate 2-story structures with a maximum height of
24 feet 4 inches. Amixture of craftsman and mediterranean-styleatchitectural elements are
incorporated into all three plans as depicted in the following renderings. The homes include
SR-RCL2006-0DIBOJKN
Page 2
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 do tFle envrohment.
< EVALUATION:
(14) The Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Low-Medium Density Residential land.
uses, witha density range of O to 18 dwelling units per acre. The applicant proposes a
reclassification from the T zone to the RS'-4 zone to construcC3detached'single-family units at
e density of 11.0 dwelling units per acre. The proposed development would be compatible
with the existing single-family residential developments to the east The project also complies
with the maximum density permitted bythe General Planand the RS-4 zone.
(15) Detached, small-lot, single family residences are permitted in the RS-4 zone, subject to the
approval of a conditional use. permit under authority of Code Sections .18.04:030.080 and
.18.04.160 pertaining to small lot developments. This project complies with all aspects of the
code with the exception of the two waivers requested: The Code also establishes guidelines
for small lot single-family developments. These guidelines ,provide factors to consider for
designing the internal circulation, massing ahd articulation, entry features, fencing and
`:landscaping',
(16) .Waiver (a) pertains to the minimum lot depth abutting; an arterial highway:.. Code requires a
minimum depth of 120 feet for lots abutting an arterial street. Lot A of the: new subdivision
ebutting Orangewood Avenue would be ti9 feet in depth. The applicant bas submitted the
attached Justification of Waiver form indicating thatthe project is compatible with surrounding
land uses and that the project maintains good design hat will enhance the privacyand
livability for: residents within and'surrounding the project. Staff surveyed etljacentand
surrounding properties and identified several other p~opertiestfiat do not have the: required.'
depth of 120 feet (they range from 65 feetto 105 feet in depth);:. Since the strict application of
tfie Code would deprive this property of a privilege enjoyed by other properties in the Vicinity,
staff recommends approval of waiver (a). ',
(17) Waiver (b) pertains to the required lot frontage on a public or private street. The code defines
a lot as "a'percel of real property, lawfully'created, .i:abutting'at least one'public street, or
private street with direct legal vehicular access to a public right-of-way...'i Two of the
:'proposed lots would not meet this definition because the lots have access from aprivate
easemenfinstead of a public street. Theapplicant has submitted the attached Justification of
.Waiver form indicating that in order to obtain good project design and utilize tFle property
effectively;: a private access easement is proposed for access. Surrounding properties alohg
Orangewood Avenue developed'with multiple family residences all take access from a private
`drive. The'requested:private drive is identical to the access used on adjacent ahd surrounding
properties, except that only three (3) units would be served by the private access oh this
property. In addition, this property is narrower and smaller in size than most of the properties
in the vicinity, and is ttie only parcel with the RS-4 zone. Since the guidelines for small-lot
developments discourage multiple driveways and there are other properties in theVicinity that
also have private drives for primary access; staff recommends approval of waiver(b) as
.requested.,';
(18) Goal 3.1 of tfie Communitybesigh Elemehtdf the General Plsn encourages:
"Single-family neighborhoods that are attractive, safe and comfortable.
Several policies are indicated ih order to jmplement this goal. In summary, the design policies
include ttie followings
SR-RC11006-0OIBOIKN
Page 4
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 8
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission.
January 8, 2007
Item No. 8
• Continue to maintain and improve the visual image and quality of life of single-family
neighborhoods.
• Strengthen the important elements of residential streets that unify and enhance Elie
character of the neighborhood, including'parkways; mature street trees, compatible
setbacks;. and a unified range of architectural detailing.
• Require new and infill development to be of compatible scale, materials, and massing as
existing development.
• Improve the pedestrian and social atmosphere of the street by orienting new homes
towards the street with attractive fronf porches, highly visible street facades; and
compatible setbacks.
• Enhance and encourage neighborhood br street identity with theme landscaping or trees,
entry statements, and enhanced school or community facility identification.
Maintain; improved and/or develop parkways with canopy street trees; providing shade,
beauty and aLhitying idehtity toYesidehtial streets.
• Encourage well-designed, frdht yards tdprovide an effective visual transition from the
street to the homes.
• Where feasible; encourage the actual or visual narrowing of streets through measures.
such as widened parkways; canopy trees, and sidewalk bulbs at the intersectiohs.
Site garages back'from the street and minimize street frontage devoted to driveways and
vehicular access.
• If desired by the community, provide continuous sidewalks and links to hearbycdmmunity
facilities; retail centers and transit stops. for safety and convenience.
• ' Encourage a variety of architectural styles, massing, floor plans, fagade treatment and
elevations to create visuaf interest.
s Reduce the impact of monotonous walls, located at the periphery of residential
neighborhoods along arterial corridors; through landscaping varied surface treatment, and
use of vertical andlor horizontal design elements.
(19) Several of the design features indicated in the Desigh Element have been incorporated into
theproposed project. Examples include sidewalk connectivity, layered landscaping along the
street frontage and at tfte end of the private drive aisle for a softer approach, and'side loaded
'parking to help minimize street frontage devoted to driveways: ,However; staff recommends
the use of greater articulation and variety of;architectural styles: Staff also recommends
eliminating autility/storage room that is facing Orangewood Avenue and enhancing the
elevation td provide a street identity with attractive front porches br other elements: These
"design modifications are supported by the Guidelines for Small'-Lot Developments as well.
"Staff recommends that final elevation plansbe submitted to tfie Planning Services Division for
review and approva(to achieve these objectives. Staff is supportive of this. request to
construct three (3); small-lot, single-family residences because the project is consistent with
the General Plan Community Design Element (provided the staff recommendations regarding
the residence on Lot A are incorporated ihto the filial plans); density allowed for the property
and the Guidelines for Small-Lot Developments.
FINDINGS:
(20) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result fromstrict enforcement of the
Zoning Code, a modification may be grantetl for the purpose of assuring that no property,
because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly
enjoyed by other properties in the'same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose of any waiver is
to prevent discrimination and none shall be approved which would have the effect df granting a
`special privilege not shared bybther similar properties. Therefore, before anywaiver is
granted by the Commission, it shall be shown:
SR-RCL2006-001 BO1KN
Page 5
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 8
(a) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape,
topography, location orsurroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned.
properties in the vicinity; and
(b) That strict applicatipn of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed try
other propertiesLnderidentical zoning'classificatidn ih the vicinity.
(21) Before the Planning Commission grantsanyconditional use :permit in the RS-4 zone, it must
make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions.
exist:
(a) The uses within the project are compatible;
(b) New buildings or structures related to the project are compatible with the scale; mass;
bulk, and orientation of existing buildings in the surrounding area, provided the existing
buildings conform with the provisions of this title;..
(c) .Vehicular and pedestrian access are adequate;......
(d) The project is consistent with any adopted design guidelines applicable to the parcel or
parcels;
(e) 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 dehimehtal to the particular area;
(f) The traffic generated by the proposedLse will not impose an undue tiurden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area;
(g) The impact upon the surrounding area has beenmitigated to the maximum extent
practicable;
' (h) The project complies with the General'.Plan and Subdivision Map Act; and
(i) The granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any; will not be
detrimental to the health and safetyof the citizehs of the City of Anaheim.
(22) "The State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code, Section 66473.5) makes it mandatory to
include in all motions apprdving, or recommending approval of a tract map, a specific finding
that the proposed Subdivision together with its design and improvement is consistent with the
City's General Plan.
Further, the law requires that the Commission make any of the following. findings when
denying or recommending denial of a tract map;
1. Thafthe proposed map is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans.
2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is notconsistent with
applicable General and Specific Plans
3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.
4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
SR-RCL2006-00ISOIKN
Page 6
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 8
5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or
their habitat:
6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to house serious
public health problems.
7. That the design bf the subdivision or the type of improvements will bonflict with easements,
acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed.
subdivision
RECOMMENDATION:
(23} Staff recommends that, unless additional pr contrary information is received during the
meeting; and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the
evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public
hearing, the Planning Commission take the following actions as indicated in the attached
resolutions including the findings and conditions contained therein:
(a) By motion, approve a Negative Declaration for the project:
(b) By resolution, ap rove Reclassification No. 2006-00180.
(c) By resolution, approve waivers (a) and (b).
(d) By motion, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05160.
(ep By motion, approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005-226:
sR-acizooe-poi so~xr~
Page l
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"'
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION N0.2006-00180 BE GRANTED
(606 EAST ORANGEWOOD AVENUE)
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified petition for
Reclassification for real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
described as follows:.
PARCEL 1: THE EAST 85 FEET OF THE NORTH 200 FEET OF LOT(S) FOURTEEN OF
ORANGEWOOD TRACT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AS SHOWN ON A MAP .THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK 7 PAGE(S) 42 OF
MISCELLANEOUS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY,
THENCE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT FOURTEEN BEING THE SOUTH LINE OF ORANGEWOOD
AVENUE, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, 40 FEET WIDE.
PARCEL 2: AN UNDIVIDED 1/70TH INTEREST IN AND TO THAT PORTION OF LOT
FOURTEEN OF ORANGEWOOD TRACT, AS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 7 PAGE(S)
42 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT IN SAID LOT 145 FEET WESTERLY AND 237.5 FEET SOUTHERLY
FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT; THENCE SOUTHERLY PARALLEL TO THE
EAST LINE OF SAID LOT, 60 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY, PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF
SAID LOT, 25 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY, PARALLEL TO SAID EAST LINE OF SAID LOT; 60
FEET; THENCE EASTERLY, PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT, 25 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of
Anaheim on January 8, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by
law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60 "Procedures", to hear
and consider evidence fpr 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
determine the following facts:
1. That the applicant proposes reclassification of subject property from the. T (Transition) zone to
the RS-4 (Single-Family Residential) zone
2. That the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Low Medium Density Residential
land uses. The RS-4 zone is a typical implementation zone for this land designation: <
3. That the proposed reclassification of subject property is necessary andlor desirable for the
orderly and proper development of the community.
4. That the proposed reclassification of subject property does properly relate to the zones and their
permitted uses locally established in close proximity to subject property and to the zones and their permitted
uses generally established throughout the community..
5. That "' indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition.
CR\PC2007- -1- PC2007-
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposal; 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 an the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby
approve the subject Petition for Reclassification to authorize an amendment to the Zoning Map of the Anaheim
Municipal Cpde to exclude the above-described property from the T (Transition) Zone and to incorporate said
described property into the RS-4 (Single-Family Residential) Zone upon the following conditions which are
hereby fpund to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of subject property in order to preserve the
health and safety of the Citizens of the Gity of Anaheim:
1. That prior to introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, a preliminary title :report shall be
furnished to the Planning Services Division showing the legal vesting of title, a legal description and
containing a map of the property..
2. That prior to placement of an ordinance rezoning subject property on an agenda for City Council
consideration, Condition No. 1, above-mentioned, shall be completed. The City Council may approve or
disapprove a zoning ordinance at its discretion. If the ordinance is disapproved, the procedure set forth in
Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18:60.140 shall apply. The provisions or rights granted by this
resolution shall become null and void by action of the Planning Commission unless said conditions are
complied with within one (1) year from the date of this resolution, or such further time as the Planning
Commission may grant..
3. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval :may be amended by the Planning Director upon a
showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and
purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code and (iii) the
applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved structure:
4. 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 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.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim. Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all
of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or
unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any
approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to
the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to
the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in
delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application.
-2- PC2007-
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2p07. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of
the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution
in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on
January 8, 2007, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
2007.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
_3_ PC2007-
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007-`""
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05160 BE GRANTED
(606 EAST ORANGEWOOD AVENUE). -
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional
Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
described as:
PARCEL 1: THE EAST 85 FEET OF THE NORTH 200 FEET OF LOT(S) FOURTEEN OF
ORANGEWOOD TRACT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK 7 PAGE(S) 42 OF
MISCELLANEOUS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY,
THENCE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT FOURTEEN BEING THE SOUTH LINE OF
ORANGEWOOD AVENUE, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, 40 FEET WIDE.
PARCEL 2: AN UNDIVIDED 1170TH INTEREST iN AND TO THAT PORTION OF LOT
FOURTEEN OF ORANGEWOOD TRACT, AS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 7
PAGE(S) 42 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA,
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT IN SAID LOT 145 FEET WESTERLY AND 237.5 FEET SOUTHERLY
FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT; THENCE SOUTHERLY PARALLEL TO THE
EAST LINE OF SAID LOT, 60 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY, PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE
OF SAID LOT, 25 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY, PARALLEL TO SAID EAST LINE OF SAID
LOT, 60 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY, PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT, 25
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim an January 8, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60, to
hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and td 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 three (3), single-family homes in the RS-4 zone, fronting on a
private access easement, is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim
Municipal Code Section 18.04.030.080 (Special Provisions for Dwellings- Single-Family Detached) and
18.04.160.010 (Development in the RS-4 Zone) with waivers of the following:
(a) SECTION NO. 18:04.060.020 .:Minimum lot depth abutting an arterial highway (120
feet required; 69 feet proposed)
(b) SECTION'NO. 18.40.020.040 Required frontage on a public or private street
(Frontage on a private or public street required;
Frontage on private access easement proposed for
two lots)
Cr\PC2007-0 -1- PC2007-
2. That waiver (a) pertaining to the minimum lot depth abutting an arterial highway is hereby
approved because several other properties on Orangewood Avenue do not have the code required depth
and range from 65 feet to 105 feet in depth; therefore, compliance with the coda would deprive this property.
of a privilege enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity.
3. That waiver (b) pertaining to the required lot frontage on a public street is hereby approved
based on the finding that surrounding properties developed with multiple family residences also have private
drives for access and the development guidelines for small-lot developments discourage multiple driveways
Therefore, compliance with the code would deprive this property of a privilege enjoyed by other properties in
the vicinity. In addition, this property is narrower and smaller in size than most of the properties in the
vicinity, and is the only parcel with the RS-4 zone..
4. That the proposed single-family residences are compatible with each other within the
development and with the scale, mass and orientation of the other single-family residences in the area.
5. That vehicular and pedestrian access are adequate and 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 because the proposed private access easement is wide enough to accommodate
ingress and egress and the density proposed is consistent with the General Plan designation for the
property.
6. That the project complies with the General Plan and the Subdivision Map Act and the impact
of the project to fhe surrounding area has been mitigated to the maximum extent practicable.
7. That the proposed construction of three (3) single family residences would not adversely
affect the adjoining land uses and the health and safety of the area because the lot is surrounded by multiple
family residences to the west and single family residences to the east, and the proposed development will
serve as a buffer between those two uses.
8. That "' indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposal; 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 do the environment
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does
hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby
found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the
health and safety of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That the owner shall submit a letter to the Planning Services Division requesting :termination of
Conditional Use Permit No. 3669 (to permit a church with waiver of minimum setback for institutional
uses and structural height adjacent to residential zones).
2. 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 the time of discovery.
-2- PC2007-
3. That the proposed driveway approach shall be perpendicular to the street for improved visibility. Said
information shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. Improvements shall be complete prior
to final building and zoning inspections.
4. That it is the responsibility of the applicant to remove and relocate any traffic signal equipment or any
other related item to the traffic signal at the applicants expense if the project requires street widening
or newlmodification of the driveway.
5. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department,
Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that:.
• Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas,
maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero
discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas.
• Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Cohtrol BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area
Management Plan.
• Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP.
• Describes the long-term operation and maihtehande 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 Idng-term operation and maintenance of the Treatment
Control BMPs;
6. That prior to issuance of a certificate of ocdupancy, 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.
o Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared td implement all non-structural BMPs desdribed in the
Project W QMP.
• 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.
7. That the owner shall remove existing driveway approaches and construct new driveway approaches, curb,
gutter, and sidewalk. Parkway irrigation shall be connected to the on-site irrigation system and maintained
by the property owner. A bond for the improvements shall be posted in an amount approved by the City
Engineer and a form approved by the City Attorney prior tp issuance of a building permit. Obtain a Right of
Way Construction Permit from the Development Services Division for all work performed in the public
right-of-way. Improvements must be complete prior to final building and zoning inspections.
6. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Drainage Impact Mitigation Fee for the
South Central Area shall be paid. The fee is currently $ 16,312/ net acre. Credit will be applied for the
current development. The project architect or engineer musf document the existing impervious area and
the proposed impervious area. If the impervious area remains the same or decreases., no fee is due. If
the impervious area increases, the fee will be proportional to the increase.
9. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Sewer Impact Mitigation Fee for the South
Central Area shall be paid.. The fee is currently $ 1,047/ unit..
10. That the driveways, sanitary sewers and storm drains within the development shall be privately
maintained.
11. That any gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner, which may
adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public street. Installation of the gates shall conform to
the Engineering Standard Plan N. 475 and shall be subjectto the review and approval of the City
Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to issuance ofa building permit.
-3- PC2007-
12, That no required parking area shall be fenced orotherwise enclosed for storage uses:
13. That the two remaining trees adjacent to Orangewood Avenue must be .protect in place providing a 10
foot trunk, not piling soil or debris within this zone, protecting the tree canopy from damage or
breakage during construction. Said information shalt be specifically shown on plans submitted for-
building permits.
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 any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. That
landscape andlor hardscape screening of all pad-mounted equipment shall be required and shall be
shown on plans submitted for building permits.
16. 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..
17. That the locations for future above-ground utility devices ihcluding, but not limited to, electrical
transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications and cable devices, etc.., shall be shown on
plans submitted for building permits. Plans shall also idehtify the specific screening treatments of each
device (i.e. landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.) and shall be
subject to the review and approval of the appropriate City departments.
18. That alf requests for new water services or fire lihes; 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.
19. That any new backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street settiack area in
a manner fully screened from all public streets. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault
shall be brought up to curreht standards. Existing large'water system equipment shall be fully
screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be shown on plans and approved by
Water Engineering and Cross Connection Control Inspector before submittal for building permits.
20. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Services Standards
Specifications. Any water service andldr fire line that does not meet curent standards shall be upgraded if
continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is hd longer needed. Thee
owner/developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line.
21. That all air conditioning apparatus and other roof and ground-mounted equipment shall be properly
shielded from view and the sduhd buffered from adjacent residential properties and the public right-of-way.
Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
22. That all dwelling units shall be assigmed'street addresses by the Planning Department.
23. That final building elevation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division incorporating
the use of greater articulation and variety of architectural styles. Plahs shall indicate the removal of the
utility/storage room that is facing Orangewood Avenue and enhancing the elevation to provide a street
identity with attractive front porches or other elements.
24. That final landscape and fencing plans for the subject property shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval. Said plans shall show minimum 24-inch box size trees, shrubs,
groundcover, and clinging vines to be planted in layers dn'all walls visible from the public right-of-way.
The landscape material selected shall be appropriate td tfie width of either the parkway or the planter area.
Any decision made by the Planning Servicesbivisioh regarding said plan may be'appealed to the
Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. All trees shall be properly and
-4- PC2007-
professionally maintained by the property owner to ensure mature, healthy growth. Such information shall
be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
25. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications
submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning
Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 5, and as conditioned herein.
26. That prior to approval of a grading plan, Condition No. 5; above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
27. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution., whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 22, 23 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.
28. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 3, 6, 7, 20 and 25, above-mentioned,
shall be complied with.
29: That approval bf 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.
30. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon
a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent
and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code and
(iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved
development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and
all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared
invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution,
and any approvals herein contained, shail'be deemed null and void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related
to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or
prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges
shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adapted at the Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2007. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Zoning
Provisions -General" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced
by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-5- PC2007-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Comrrtission
held on :January 8, 2007, 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
2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-6- PC2007-
City of Anaheim
hLANI~dIIVG I~EI'ARTMENT
January 8, 2007
Lien M. Hoang
9938 Bolsa Avenue, #221
Westminster, CA 92683
Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2002
8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2006-00180
Sc. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
Bd. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITIJO. 2006-05160
Se. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2005-226
Owner: Lien M: Hoang, 9938 Bolsa Avenue, #221, Westminster, CA 92663
Agent: Duc Nguyen, MVI, Corporation, 11770 East Warner Avenue, #216,
Fountain Valley; CA 92708
Location: 606 East Orangewood Avenue: Property is approximately 0.33-acre,
having a frontage of 85 feet on the south side of Orangewood Avenue and
is located 170 feet west of the centerline of Spinnaker Street.
Reclassification No. 2006-00180 -Request reclassification of the subject property from
the T (Transition) zone to the RS-4 (Single-Family Residential) zone.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05160 - Request tb construct 3 single family homes
in the RS-4 zone, fronting on a private access easement with waivers of (a) minimum
lot depth abutting an arterial highway and (b) lot frontage on a public or private street.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005-226 - To establish a 3-lot, 3-unit detached single
family residential subdivision.
vnvw.an, heintnea
ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and
MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to
establish a 3-lot, 3-unit detached single family residential subdivision and does hereby
approve the Negative Declaration upon a 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 comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the
project will have a significant effect on the environment.
Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION
CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby determine that the proposed
tentative map, including its design and improvements, is consistent with the Anaheim General
Plan, and the site is physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed development,
and does therefore approve Tentative Tract Map No. 2005-226, to establish a 3-lot, 3-unit
detached single family residential subdivision subject to the following conditions:
1. Pricr to approval of the final map, the existing buildings on the property shall be
demolished. The legal property owner shall obtain a demolition permit from the
Building Division.
200 Soulh Anaheim Boulevard
P.0. Box 3222
Anaheim, Calilornia 92803
TEL (714) 765-5139
2. The legal property owner shall execute a Subdivision Agreement, in a form approved'°"
by the City Attorney, to complete the required public improvements at the legal property.
owner's expense. Said agreement shall be submitted to the Public Works Department,..
Subdivision Section approved by the City Attorney and City Engineer and then
recorded concurrently with the final parcel map.
3. That an unsubordinated restricted covenant providing reciprocal access and parking approved
by Planning Services'Division and in a form satisfactory to the City Atomey shall be recorded
with the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded covenant shall then
be submitted to the Development Services Division. In addition, provisions shall be made in
the covenant tp guarantee that the three residences shall be managed and maintained as one
(1) integral parcel for purposes of vehicular access and circulation and that the covenant shall
be referenced in all deeds transferring all or any part of the interest in the property.
4. That there shall be a recorded use agreement satisfactory to the City Attorney's office for
all parcels sharing fire protection equipment and associated appurtenances.
5. That prior to approval of the final map, a maintenance covenant, shall be submitted to the
Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attomey's office. The covenant shall include
provisions for maintenance of private facilities, including compliance with approved Water
Quality Management Plan, and a maintenance exhibit. The covenant shall be recorded
concurrently with the final map.
6. That prior to final map approval, the City of Anaheim sewer connection fee shall be paid.
The fee is currently $350/ acre ($250 mint
7. That the access drive, sanitary sewer and storm drain within the development shall be
privately maintained. Improvement plans for the sanitary sewer, and private drainage
system shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Development Services
Division concurrently with the final map.
8. Prior to final map approval, the City of Anaheim sewer connection fee for the Combined
West Anaheim Area shall be paid.
9. That prior to issuance of the first building permit, the final map shall be submitted to and
approved by the City of Anaheim and the Orange County Surveyor and then shall be
recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder (Subdivision Map Act, Section
66499.40).
10. That prior to final map approval., all units shalt be assigned street addresses off of
Orangewood Avenue by the Planning Department.
11. That approval of this tract map is granted subject to the approval of Reclassification No.
2006-00180 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05170, now pending.
12. That prior to final tract map approval, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11,
above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said
conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim
Municipal.
13. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the
extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable
City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to
compliance or approval of the requesLregarding any other applicable ordinance,
regulation or requirement.
14. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning
Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that
satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition{s), (ii) the modification complies
with the Anaheim Municipal Code and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant
progress toward establishment of the use or approved development.
Sincerely,
Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary
Anaheim Planning Commission
TPM2005-226_Excerpt
PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF Attachment -Item Plo.
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCF/CODE WAIVER
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OP CODE SECTION: ~~ (l4 U(p(1 U~~
I \ t, ,^~ 11``:, (A separate statement is required for each Code waiver)
PERTAINING TO: 1`T1l tllNl.U'IU~ l a~ /71~31G~.
Sections 18.03.040.030 and 18.12:060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code waiver may be
granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown:
1. TlJat there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and
2. .That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property under identical caning classification in the vicinity.
In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to
arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully
and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages.
I. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings? 'Yes _ No.
0}1
pJ l
[f your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances:
2. Are the special circumstances that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the
same zone as your property? ~ Yes _ No
If your answer is "yes," describe how the property is different:
Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring
properties located within the same zone? _Yes ~No
If your answer if "yes," describe Ute special
4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property
owners)? _Yes _ No
37625~DECEMBER 12, 20DD
._r_.i..,,._.,. .._.~ ._._____. ____ r
ed which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone
is not otherwise expressly autho~zed by zone~regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted.
~- {~. ~2-
Date
Justification Waiver. dot
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCENO.
Attachment -Item No. 8
PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF
JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WAIVER
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION:
'`~r ~,~~~ (A separate statement I5 requlretl Iot @@ach COtle w2wer)
PERTAINING TO: P4glli(C~A 'Gk 'Ni7Yl~rntan, i5i1 nr 13t:~i ~~ S1Yr c>~#
Sections 18.03.040.030 and 18.I2.06D of the Anzheim Municipal Code require that before anyvariance or Code waiver maybe
granted 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 not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and
Z. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to
arrive a[ a decision, please 2nswer each of the following questions regardine the property for which a variance is sought, fully
and as completely as possible: If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages.
1. .ore there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings??t Yes _No.
li your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: IN oen~2 -ro c1H.ePV t.v 2 S• d Latta
2. Are the special circumstznce; that apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the
same zone as your property? ?c Yes _ No
If your answer is "yes;' describe how the property is different:
G/~GCI !-~St1rN~~
3. Do the special circumstances applicable to the property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring
properties located within the same zone? _Yes _No
If your answer if "yes," describe the special circumstances:
'fl.l6.1?ti Jkp_~ OYkI@~. POUrhTi`- hCGLSC F-~~Me1N7'S csvUIGIIJ r4- ~THEtQ-
M\ L'Ii PhMIIN 201.18. IN T~•t(£ A.26 i..
4. Were.the special circumstances created by eaues beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property
owners)? ~ Yes _ No
'EXPLAIiI: _BY GJMPL\ft1.1(y- W/ $.S <F AJ.1D ~k.19.C,zt.ittC~f? [,dl' F2Ca/I"
R P¢.IIIlrrT._ oclL.r.~S ~~-~ EnIT /S 'I.IFL€Df~D "TV `~rr~'IIG~ T~FIP+ U1.J rPS•
The sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be
approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone
whislLis not otherwise expressly authorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not permitted.
Sigtt3ture ot(Yrgpert}(jpwner or
' ~ Du~G r~6-uY~J
37625~ECEMBER 12, 2080
ID•18•oG
Date
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO.
lus(ifimlion Waiver. dot
Item No. 9
RCL fi3-64-141 o p
T-CUP 2001-04331
T-CUP 2001-04305 /~
(V .~'E
v o
T-CUP 2001-04304 (L1 ~ U °
cuP zo9o-9a244
FAIRMONT ~ e N
PRIVATE SCHOOL I w m
~
3 ~ °
RCL 98-99-11
RCL 71-72-19
° S
q
U
T
~
RCL 66-67-14 q
J RCL 64-65-03 q~
,~ VAR 4116
~
Q' VAR 2973 6 ° A
R
\ ~~
JO Q SELF STORAGE FACILITY ~qY
Q
~
0 m
. ; rs:~
CG
RCL 98-99-11
RCL 96-97-6 r ~~
RCL 66-67-14 ,,
-~
~ ~
-- RCL 64-66-03 U'
-_ CUP 2006-05170 W
.. ~ T-CUP 2003-04749 ' ~
c CUP 4062 ~
~ c ~.
v
1
O CUP 4045 x
,-. CUP 2956 }n 'r a
"
v v
' W
.,, s
CUP 2602
~ ~ a
$'_, CUP 2604 x J
Q
,.?;+ VAR 4303 r ~ ! r ~ ~
HOME DEPOT `° ~ , ~ ;n
t SM,
5 f ~ s r ~~
1 X 4 S, .Y' K
2 Y 4
Y 5 ~'~: ( ~ .Y'
- Tao'
GRAMERCY AVENUE
RcL Se-ss-t4 RCL98
99-14
RCL9s-sett
RCL fib-67-14 -
RCL98-99-11
RcL °a.es-a3 RCL 89-90-34
C-G
cuP 2fifit-a4°e RCL 68-89-33
i~uP Zao-aize CUP 2001.04406-
cuaatzfi T-CUP 2000-04238 SMALL SHOPS
T-CUP 2000-04229
VAR 4115 .E E
C-G VAR 4013 °' °
m o I
VAR 389 I
=° RCL 71-72-19
JRST A
PM ¢
' e CUP 2000-0426:
SCHOOL
t
E CUP 3795
FIRE STATION
O D m
3 CUP 1443
F
NO
2 U VAR 4270
.
RM-0 SMALL INOUSTIRAL
RCL a&90-34 T
R~q RCL 98-99-11
WATER WELLS VAR 4115-
CRESCENT AVENUE ~ ~
Subject Property
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05170 Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Requested By: HOME DEPOT USA, INC. Q.S. No. 38
800 North Brookhurst Street
10201
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05170
Requested By: HOME DEPOT USA, INC.
800 North l3rookhurst Street
Subject Property
Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 38
io2a~
vaiewr~enainmoo:
JuIY 2005
Staff Report to the
:Planning Commission.
January 8, 2007
Item No. 9
9a: CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 3 (Motion)
9b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05170 (Resolution)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTIONr:
(1) This irregularly-shaped, 9,6-acrepropertyis located at the northeast corner of Gramercy
Avenue and Brookhurst Street, having frontages of 740 feeton the north side of Gramercy
Avenue, 540 feet on the east side of Brodkhurst Street,: and 540 feet on the west side of
Valley Street (B00 North Brookhurst Street - Home bepoUKelly's Deli).
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit to permit awalk-up restaurant in
donjunction with a home improvement store under authority of Code Section
18.08.030:0040.0402 (Restaurants-Walk-up).
BACKGROUND:
(3) The property is zoned C-G (General Commercial) ahd the Anaheim General Plan.
`designates this property for General Commercial land uses. Surrounding properties to the
north and south are also designated for General Commercial land uses, to'the west (across ,
Brookhurst,Street) for School land uses and to the east for Industrial land uses.
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:
(4) The following zoning actions pertain to this property:
(a) Conditional Use Permit No. 4045 (to permit a portable food'seroice use (hot dogcart) in
conjunction with a permitted retail store) was approved by he Planning Commission on
August 3, 1998 for a period of five years to expire on August 3, 2003: On September 8,
2003; the Commission approved the reinstatement with deletion of the time limitation
(Tracking No. CUP2003-04749), This'permit i5 no longer needed and a condition of
approval has been added requiring termination'of this permit.
(b) Conditional Use Permit No: 4082 (to construct a 70-foot high freestanding sign with
waiver of maximum number of signs, permitted)ocation of freestanding signs;.
maximum heightof freestanding signs and maximum sign .width) was'approved by the
City Council on June 8,'1999.
(c) Variance No. 4303 (to waive the minimum parking lot landscaping and minimum
number of parking spaces to construct a 105,984'. square foot home'improvement sales
building with 23(723 square foot garden center) was approved by the City Council on
June 3, 1997
(d) Conditional Use Permit Na 2958 (to retain a 672: square foot billboard with waiver of
permitted location) was approved by he Planning Commission on November 9, 1987
(806 North Brookhurst Street).
(e) Conditional Use Permit No: 2802 (to retain an auto towing, :impound and repair facility
with waivers df (a) structural setback,`permitted encroachments, and'yard
requirements, (b) minimum dimensions of parking spaces and (c) minimum number of
type'of parking spaces) was approved. by the City Council on Septemtier23, 1986 (806
North BrdokhursfStreet): This permit is no longer needed' and a cdndition of approval
has'been added requiring termination of this permit
SR-PC010807CUP2006-05176jkn
'Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 9
~,
a : `~~ "~ '' ~ "
~
~
~, ~
~ ,~
s ~~
~
..
`K,
~c Yt ,
,~- -.
~
~a
a.
~ ~
~
p,;.
~
~ §
'a $I ~
~'
y y f ~~~`
t
~
.
,_.
~. , , r.
o ..
i
-,
.~~
.. -e' k': .may ~ rv
? -
1 ,rte
~, k ~
~°~
u
u
~
a~
` .
,... ~ .7
.
~
r . .,~.
~ 5 .i9 v
r'
^ePl~S.~Y4Y." "i!
wniuuwa away wnn ova Nuunu was~eieuep~aues uai wuuw Ni evern venwuim awes
directly in front of the testaurent. The order line is proposed within 11 feet of the loading
zone area in front of the store: Code does not require this loading area to be clear provided
SR-PC010807CUP2006-05170jkn
Page 2
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission:.
January 8, 2007
Item No. 9
vehicular access is not impeded. The proposed plan continues to provide adequate
vehicular access in compliance with code at the walk-up restaurant.
(7) Vehicular access to the. site would be provided via four (4) driveways with one (1) driveway
from Brookhurst Street, two (2) from Gramercy Avenue and orie (1) from Valley Street. The
site plan indicates a total of 551 parking spaces available end approved through theprior
parking waiver for the site. The parking study concluded that the parking spaces provided
exceeds the demand by 12i parking spaces. Code requires 1 space for the proposed walk
up restaurant (16 parking spaces; per 1,000 square feet).. Although the demand for the site.
is well below the parking provided, the site plan propdsesbne new parking space located.
behind the home improvement store to offsetthe additional required space for the
restaurant: Staff has determined the proposed use is consistent with the previously
approvedparking study and will not cause a parking shortage as the walk-up restaurant is
meant as a convenience for customers already shopping at the home improvement store. ,
(8) The photograph below and the sign plan (Exhibit No: 3) depicts an existing. Kelly's Deli
restaurant in front of a Home Depot store which show the proposed menu boards located in
the center display window. The applicant is also. requesting a canopy sign:: Code allows
one wall sign for this restaurant on the wesEelevatioh provided the total aggregate area of
wall signs(s), including the area of awning signs or similar signs affixed to the building
elevation,;is a maximum of ten percent (10%) of the'area of the face of the building to which:
such sign(s) are attached or two hundred. (200) square feet, whichever isJess. The total
face of thebuilding is 264 square feet which allows 26 square feet of wall`signs. The
proposed canopy sign would have a green background with an orange stripe surrounding
the sign with white attars, Window signs aye permitted, provided all such'rpermanentand
temporary. signs obscure no more than ten: percent (1b%) of the total window area:: The
proposed wall sign complies with the heigtifand area requirements of the code, and the
menu board will be modified tb comply with code.
SR-PC010807CUP2006-05170jkn
Page 3
Staff Report to the.
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 9
(9) ;The letter of operation indicates that the proposed Kelly's Deli is in co-dperation with Home
Depot to upgrade the food selection to provide more quality foodsuch as sandwiches,
soups;. breakfast items and gourmet coffee. The walk-up restaurant would operate daily;
from 7 am to 7 pm witn tnree shills having one employee per shift with overlapping shifts.
betweert10 am and 4 pm.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(10) The Planning Director's authorized representative has determined that the proposed project
falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptiohs; Section 15303, Class 3 (New
Constructioh or Conversion of Small Structures); as defihed in the CEQA Guidelines and is,
therefore; exempt frdm requiremeht to prepare additional environmentaidocumentation:
EVALUATION:
(11) Walk-up restaurants are permitted in the C-G zone subject to the approval of a conditional
use permit: Given the distance of the restaurant from the street, it is intended for this
restaurant to primarily serveYhe customers of Home Depot
(12) `Since the restaurant is intended to provide fast and convenient food to the patrons of the
home improvement store; staffbeljeves the operation would not adverselyaffect adjoining
land uses or the grdwth or developmentdf the area: The site was previousiyapproved and
operated with aportable hot dogcart which had'nof resulted in Community Preservation
complaints. This structureprovides amore permanent facility to serve a similar purpose.
The size and shape of the site is adequate for the full development of the proposed use,
and staff7ecommends approval of the request to permit a walk-up restaurant in conjunction
witn a home improvement store as conditioned.
FINDINGS:
(13) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact
that the evidence presented shows that ah of the fpllowing conditions exist:
{a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the
Zoning Code, or is an unlisted useas defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses.
Permuted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); ,
(b) That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining IandLses or the growth and
development of the area'in whicn it is proposed to tie located;
(c) That the size and shapeof the site for the use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner notdetrimental to the particular area
or td the health and safety;
? (d) That the traffic generated by the use will notmpose ah undue burden upon the
sheets and hjj3hways designed antl improved to carry the traffic jn theareaj and
(e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any,
wilt not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. '
SR-PC010807CUP2006.05170jkn
Page 4
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007.
Item No. 9
RECOMMENDATION:
(14) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting; and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including
the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the
public hearing, the Planning Commission take the following actions as indicated in the
attached resolutions including the findings and conditions contained therein::
(a) By motion; approve a CEQA Categorical Exemption -Class 3 (New Construction or
Conversion of Small Structures).
(b) By resolution, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05170.
SR-PC010807CUP2006-05170jkn
Page 5
[DR,4FT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--*`*
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05170 BE GRANTED
(800 NORTH BROOKHURST STREET) `
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional
Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
described as:
PARCELS I AND 2 IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 4 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on January 8, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60, to
hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and
make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection., investigation and study made by itself
and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find
and determine the following facts:
1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by
Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.08.030.0040.0402 (Restaurants-Walk-up) to permit awalk-up
restaurant in conjunction with a home improvement store (Home Depot).
2. 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_
3. 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 health and safety
because the property is large enough to contain the use without adversely affecting adjoining land uses;
4. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the restaurant is
anticipated to serve patrons already visiting the site.
5. That granting of this conditional use permit, under the conditions imposed, will not be
detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
6. That *** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.:
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: The Planning Director's
authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical
Exemptions, Section 15303, Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), as defined in the
State CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental
documentation.
Cr\PC2007-0 -1- PC2007-
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does
hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby
found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the...:.
safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That the owner shall submit a letter requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 4045 (to
permit a portable food service use (hot dog cart) in conjunction with a permitted retail store) and
Conditional Use Permit No. 2802 (to retain an auto towing, impound and repair facility with waivers of
(a) structural setback, permitted encroachments, and yard requirements; (b) minimum dimensions of
parking spaces and (c) minimum number of type of parking spaces) to the Planning Services Division.
2. 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 the time of discovery..
3. That only one (1) walk-up restaurant shalt be permitted and that no accessory equipment for cooking
or food service or displays shall be permitted in conjunction with this approval
4. That signage for subject facility shall be limited to that shown on the exhibits submitted by the
petitioner. Any additional signage shall be subject to approval by the Planning Department.
5. That an Emergency Listing Card, Form ADP-281 shall be completed and submitted in a completed
form to the Anaheim Police Department.
6. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications
submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning
Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 4, and as conditioned herein.
7. 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 No. 1, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions
for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the
Anaheim Municipal.
8. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 5 and 6, above-mentioned, shall be
complied with.
9. 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 arid 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.
10. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon
a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent
and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code and
(iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved
development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each .and
.all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared
invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution,
and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
-2- PC2007-
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related
to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or
prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges
shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2007. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Zoning
Provisions -General" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and :may be replaced
by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission
held on January 8, 2007, 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
.2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
_3_ PC2007-
Item No. 10
CRESCENT AVENUE t .®.,®..m.,®..m..®..m.. o..m..m.. m..®..®,.®..e..®,.®..®.,
75"-~{
~- ANAHEIM C/TY L/MITS
~„_„®„®••m+•® „®„ 2
T W RS-2
r-cuP zool-0a33s
~ -` . .
?
cuazszl -
--- i- RM-4 1DU EACH
VAR ZO 5 W
~ ~ T
CUP 194 ~~ i w '.
F•
¢ RCL 2000-00028
RCL 63-6A-5e
T Q ~ CUP 2006 05167 CUP 645 RS-2
r-cuP zoo1a93es "' ~
CHURCH ~"-• ~ CUP 503
CUP 13Tfi W .
~ O VAR 1770 1 OU EACh
cuP Zaz1 i Q
~
T STOCKTON AVE
T-CUP 2001-09385
cuP 2521
cuP1m 7
BRAILLE CUP 194 RS-2
~ INSTITUTE
1 DU
~ "'•
1 DU EACH
O
^ RS-2
w ' 1 DU EACH
Y T
VAR 3032
~ BAYLOR AVE,
=~ T
~ 1 DU EACH
1 DU EACH
U y.
~ T /n
2
A W
T 1 DU E
CH
2-PORTION B = ~
¢ T NO O
(CUP 2930) ~ ~ CORNELL PL O
KENDOR CIR
^
RS-2
RCL 58-59-03
RS-2
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05167
Requested By: ANAHEIM CHRISTIAN REFORMEp CHURCH
530 North Dale Avenue -Anaheim Christian Reformed Church
m2ao
=
NQ
~ Q U
N~
N
m
~^
^ m w
~ ^
^ v1
¢O
^
~
N
Subject Property
pate: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
O.S. No. 19
HOLLY WAY
Date of Aerial Photo:
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05167
Requested By: ANAHEIM CHRISTIAN REFORMED CHURCH
530 North Dale Avenue -Anaheim Christian Reformed Church
Subject Property
Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 19
io2oo
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2002
Item No. 10
10a. CEQA'CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION'- CLASS 3 (Mbtion)
10b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIRMENT (Motion)
10c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05167 (Resolution);;,
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: ``
(1) This irregularly-shaped 1.94-acre property is located at the southeast cornerbf Crescent and
Dale Avenues; having a frontages'df 275 feet on the south side of Crescent Avenue and 265
feet on the east side df Dale Avenue (530 North Dale Avenue -Anaheim Christian Reformed
Church).
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant'requests approval of a conditional use permit under authorityof Code Section.
18.14.030.040.0402 (Community & ReligiousAssembly) to expand an existing church with
waiver of the following: ,
(a)' SECTION NO. 18.14.100.010: Minimum Structural Setback
25-foot setback required along Crescent'
`Avenue; 15-foot setback along Crescent Avenue
:proposed):,
(b) SECTION N0.18.40.060.080 Required Dedication and Improvement of Rioht-
of=Way
(DELETED)
BACKGROUND:
(3) This property is currently developed with a church and is zoned T (Transition). TheAnaheim
General designates this property and all surrounding properties foriow Density :Residential.
Land Uses:
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:
(4) The following zoning action pertain to this property:
<' Conditional Use Permit No: 194 (to bonstruct a bhurcH auditorium and Sunday School
classrodms) was approved by the Planning Commission omJanuary 22;.1962.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL-
(5) The applicant requests a conditional use permit in order to add a 3,067 square foot addition
td an existing church. The proposed classrooms would only be used for Sunday School
classes'nofa5a separate schdol facility.
(6) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the new addition to the church is proposed adjacent to
the existing sanctuary and 15 feet from the ultimate right-of-way along Crescent Avenue.
The existing church is currently setback 43 feet feet from the existing right-of-way and 33
feet from ultimate right-of-way on Crescent Avenue as depicted in the aerial on the following.
page.
Page 1
.~.
Aerialof Site
(7) :The floor plans (Exhitiit No.2) indicate thafthe proposed addition would consist of four (4)
additional dlassrooms; a storage}oom ahd hew restrooms.
(8) The site`plah (Exhibit No. 1) indicates thafthe existing church contains a 6,215 square foot
sanctuary, a 3,410 square foot fellowship hall, a 1,638 square foot classroom and a 1,080
square footdetacfied garage. ` No landscape plahs have been submitted, however the
applicanYhas indicated that they will try to save and/or replace the existing mature trees
within the atea ofazpansion.
(9) The elevation plans (Exhibit No. 3) indicate that the addition would match the existing church
and would consist of asphalt roof shingles, stucco finish, aluminum windows; woodsiding and
a matching covered walkway.
(10) The site is accessed via two (2) existing driveways,from Crescent and Dale Avenues: The
siteplan also indicates.134'existing on-site parking spaces. Current code would require 279
..parking spaces for the existing uses (29 spaces per 1,000 square feet of sanctuary and
fellowship. hall area), however, code does not require any additional: parking for accessory
uses such as Sunday school classrooms, restrooms and hallways. Therefore, the proposed
addition would not require any additional parking.
(11) The applicant has submitted a letter of opefatioh indicating that the property is cuRehtly used:
for religious assembly. for three different churches. The Anaheim Christian Reformed Church
has 230 members and one full time pastor. and cohtrols the schedule for the use of the
facility.
Anaheim Christian: Reformed Church
Mbnday through Friday 8 AM to 5 PM (for pastor and part time ministry staff).
Sundays from 9 AM to 12:30 PM and from 6 PM to 9 PM:
Page 2
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007:
Item No. 10
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 10
EVALUATION:
(14) Churchesere permitted in the T (Transition) zone subject td approval of a conditional use
permit.
(15) Waiver (a) pertains to minimum structural setback adjacent to Crescent Avenue. Code
requires a 25 foot setback from the ultimate right-of-way along Crescent Avenue. Plans
indicate a 15 foot setback proposed. The applicant has indicated in the attached justification
that due to the existing building ponfiguration in order to construct an architecturally balanced
classroom additiori, the building needs tobe setback t 5-feettrom the ultimate right-of-way.
The institutional use to the west; across Dale Avenue with the same zoning is developed with
a similar setback. Therefore; should this waivernot be granted, the property would be
deprived of a privileged enjoyed by another property in the area, The property is also unique
because it has a large expanse of frontage on twd streets. In addition, the layout of the
existing building limits the ability for the site to expand td meet the needs of the church;
therefore; staff recommends approval of this waiver.
(16) The waiver (b) pertaining to required dedications and improvements in the public right-of-way
has been deleted.
FINDINGS:
(17) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the
Zoning Code, a modification may be granted for the purpose of assuring thatho property,
because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly
enjoyed byother properties in the same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose of any variance.
is to prevent discrimination and Done shall be approved whicFwould have the effect df
grahting a special privilege not sfiared by other similar properties. Therefore; before any
variance is granted by the Commission, it shall be shown:
(a) That there are. special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned
properties in the vicinity;; and
(b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed
by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
(1 B) 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 condit(bns exist:
(a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the
Zoning Code`or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection :030 (Unlisted Uses
Permitted) of Section`18.66.040 (Approval Authority);
(b) Thaf the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and
development of the area in which if is proposed to be located;
(c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area
br to the health ahd safety;
(d) That the traffic generated by the use will not impose ah undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed end improved to carry the traffic in the area; and
Page 4
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007.
Item No. 10
(e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any,
will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim:
RECOMMENDATION:
(19) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the
meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the
evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public
hearing, the Planning Commission take the following actions as indicated in the attached
resolutions including the findings and conditions contained therein:
(a) By motion, approve a CEQA Categorical Exemption -Class 3 for the project.
(b) By motion, approve waiver (a) for minimum structural setback.
' (c) By motion, deny waiver (b) for required dedication and improvements:
(d) By resolution, approve Conditional Use Permit Nd. 2006-05167.
Page 5
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"`
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05167 BE GRANTED -
(530 NORTH DALE AVENUE -ANAHEIM CHRISTIAN REFORMED CHURCH)
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional
Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
described as:
THE WEST 310 FEET OF THE NORTH 425 FEET OF THE WEST HALF OF THE
NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 12, IN
TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, IN THE RANCHO LOS COYOTES, COUNTY OF
ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHON ON A MAP THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK
51, PAGE 7, ET SEQ., MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on January 8, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as
required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60, to
hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and
make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and that said public hearing was continued to
the January 8, 2007, 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 permitted under authority of Code Section 18.14.030.040.0402
(Community & Religious Assembly) to expand an existing church with waiver of the following:
(a) SECTION NO. 18.14.100.010 Minimum Structural Setback
25-foot setback required along Crescent Avenue;
15-foot setback along Crescent Avenue proposed).
(b) SECTION N0.18.40.060.080 Required Dedication and Improvement of Right-
of_Wav
(DELETED)
2. That requested waiver (a) is hereby aoprdved based on the existing building configuration
dictating the placement of the proposed addition to provide for an architecturally balanced classroom addition
setback 15-feet from the ultimate right-of-way; and that an existing institutional use across Dale Avenue is
developed with a similar setback.
3. ' That request waiver (b) is hereby denietl as the waiver has been deleted.
4. That the proposed church expansion 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 since
the use has been in existence since 1962 and the expansion area is consists of classrooms that are intended
to be accessory to the church.
5. That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development to
permit an expansion of an existing church and will not be detrimental to the particular area or to the fiealth
and safety as the expanded use does not require any additional parking.
6. That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and
highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area as the expanded church would not generate
additional trips from the accessory classrooms.
_1 _ PC2007
7. That granking 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 and will provide a land use that is
compatible with the surrounding area..
8. That "' indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: The it has been determined that the
proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15301, Class 3 (New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore,
exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE iT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does
hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby
found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the
health and safety of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City contract for sewer improvements in Dale Avenue
and Lincoln Avenue must be rewarded:
2. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense:
3. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Sewer Impact Mitigation fee for the
Combined West Anaheim Area shall be paid:
4. That plans shall be submitted to the Traffic and Transportation manager for his review and approval
showing conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115 (10-foot radius curb returns for the driveway
along Crescent Avenue).
5. That gates shall not be installed across any driveway in manner which may adversely affect vehicular
traffic on adjacent publicstreets. Installation of any gates shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan
No. 475 and shall be subject to review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager.
6. That aII plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be fully
screened by architectural devices andlor appropriate building materials. Said information shall be
specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
7. That the applicant shall file an Emergency Listing Card, APD-281, available at the Police Department.
8. That the applicant shaltpost a cash payment in lieu of constructing the required street improvements to
the Public Works Department prior to issuahce of a building permit.
9. That all new backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street setback area in a
manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys.
10. Thai all requests for new water services or fire lines, as welt as any modifications, relocations, or
abandonments of existing water services and fire liens, shall be coordinated through Water
Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department.
11. That since this project has a landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet; a separate irrigation meter
shall be installed in compliance with Chapter 10.19 of Anaheim Municipal Code regarding water
conservation. Said information shall be specifically shown oh the plans submitted for building permits;
12. That all classroom doors shall be equipped with locks that cari be locked from the inside, allowing
Iockdown of those rooms in the event of criminal activity in, or around, the building. Said information
shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.
-2- PC2007-
13. That all classroom windows shall be left clear and unobstructed, to allow an unimpaired line of sight by
a peace officer into the interior of the classroom during school hours.
14. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with the plans and
specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitipner and which plans are on fife with the
Planning Department Exhibit Nos. 1 through 4, and as conditioned herein.
15. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12 and 14, 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.
16. That prior to final .building and zoning inspections Condition No. 14, above-mentioned, shall be
complied with.
17. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal
regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the
request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
18. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon
a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent
and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code and
(iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved
structure.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commissipn does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and
all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared
invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution,
and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related
to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or
prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges
shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application,
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2007. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Zoning
Provisions -General" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced
by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
_3_ PC2007-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM ) "'
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission
held on January 8, 2007, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: GOMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of
2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
-4- PC2007-
~.
SECTION 4
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF _~ Attachment -Item No. 10
NSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE/CODE WArvER
(NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER)
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION:
(A sepazate statementis required for each Code waiver)
PERTAINING TO: Building Setback Variance
Sections 18.74.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Cade requires that before any varinnce or Code waiver maybe granted by the
Zoning Administrator. or Planning Commission,. the following shalIbe shown:.:
L That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, incIudingsize, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and
2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
Lt order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assisithe Zoning P,dministrator or Planning Commission to
arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which n variance is sought, fully
and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages.
1. Are there special circumstances that apply to the property in matters such as size; shape, topography, location or
suiroundings'! ` X 'Yes _ No.
If your answer is "Yes," describe the special circumstances: 'The Cities requirement for -
10"feet of street rirxht of wan' orn Crescen*` Atae 'reGtr; ~t'a n„r
a fii 1'i ~y "tr
addition:
2. Are.ihe special'2
same zone asyoi
If your answer is
renuired-;
Need:to lie 'able tp build !to the current. setback, ncsti the',.
~cumstences that apply to the "property different from other properties in dre vicinity which are in the
property? ~ Yes _ No ' . o
ti
yes;'descnbehowthepropertyisdifferent: A11 `adioinina oroberties "are not
3 Do the special circumst
properties located witlii
If your answer if "yes,"
We are the bn_
- ability toc3 «1ona"balanced rl aGCrnntp~ar3di ti nn
m
4. Were the special circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property '
..owners)? X Yes _No
EXPLAIN The eities demand for l0 feet'of our orooerty for street
-right of `wan
The sole. purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall lie:to prevent discrimination, and no variance or Code waiver shall be
approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone
which ' rot~otiteJrai~se e~xpr~essly authorized by zone regulations governing subject property. Use variances are not pevnitted. '
~~ ii~ /~ Fin ~ ~t5 c~ 1~ r3C
Signature of Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date
CONDTITONAL USE PERMITNARIANCE NO.
Pre ^ FI l2 -~` ~,ea 6-ocdSK
,w
~:,,a.,,
-~o ~~
~e~>z+~
14G-~~~!
ie~-0
i
.r~,6
r~o 9''x"60 \1a1
R~L6 \N~USSR\P~
SF1R~Lp\RF3
D
item rvo. -i 1
c5-6- 1~
RGI.. 66.61 ~6
RCS 002'p4
;: J~p Lp 4p3i
pO~~piG ~
SF6~~~g
/4 o v~
F 5G.1
pP5 E915=~
6~.y2-i4
6g.69 n31 _
j.VF
T
~"~ I
piR e i
0
5p9~A1161
6 Q
,
1 ~p1~ 9
2
G~- 66-69.3 ® ~ ,
tGG~p 19`ND.
SPt~ Rp1~5 ~ 'A
® m
a o
1~A1 X61 y9
¢ m m
®
i
h
P 3 s 2
6 ®m m (/j~\\
Redevel DPih88st A ®
P
®
®
)P 3p6
p A
'o /
\
{ ®°
~V
Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05171
Requested By: Karl Sator TR
3152 East La Palma Avenue
iozos
Subject Property
Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: 1" = 200'
Q.S. No. 140
Subject Property
Conditional lJse :Permit No. 2006-05171
Requested By: Karl Sator TR
Date: January 8, 2007
Scale: f" = 200'
G!.S. No. 140
3152 East La Palma Avenue
mzas
- Date of Aerial Photo:
JuIY 2005
Staff Report to tfie
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 11
11 a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 3 (Motion)
11 b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS 2006-05171 (Resolution)
SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
(1) This irregularly-shaped, 11.5-acre property has a frontage of 450 feet on the south side of
La Palma Avenue, a maximum depth of 1';035 feet, and is Iodated 445 feet east of the
centerline of Kraemer Boulevard (3152 East La Palma Avenue -Unit H),;
REQUEST:
(2) The applicant requests approval'of a Conditional Use Permit under authority of Code
Section No.' 18:120.100.050.0524 to retain a theaterand dahce studio.
BACKGROUND:
(3) Tfiis property is developed with an existing industrial complex and is zoned SP94-1, DA 5
(fJortheast Industrial. Specific Plan No. 94-1; Development Area 5 -Commercial Area) and
is located in the Merged RedevelopmenfA~ea. The Anaheim General Plan designates this
site and tfie surrounding properties for Commercial'Iand uses.
PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS:
(4) The following zoning action pertains to this`property:
• Conditional Use Permit No. 4151 (to permit an automotive repair facility) was approved
by the Planning Commission on October 25, 1999 and was'subsequently reinstated by
the Planning Commission on January l7, 2001 and expired on October 25, 2005.
Conditional Use Permit Nd. 4142 (to construct a 60-foot high telecommunications
monopalm) was originally approved by the Planning Commission oh October 11, 1999,
and was subsequently reinstated (Tracking No`. CUP2005-04980) by Commission on
June 1; 2005, for an additional five (5) years to expire oh October 11; 2009.:
• Variance No. 2634 (to permit a sandwich shop) was approved by the Planning
Commission on September 4, 1974. This entitlement is no longer needed and a
condition of approval has tieen added fo terminate this variance.
e Conditional Use Permit No. 1509 (to permit the safes and distribution of office supplies.
in an existing industrial complex) was approved by the Planning Commission on
January 6, 1975.
PROPOSAL:
(5) The applicant requests a conditional use permit to retain a theater and dance studio in an
existingeight (8) tiuiltling 195,150 square foot. industrial complex: The site plan (Exhibit
No. 1) and the Floor plans (Exhibit No. 2) indicate an industrial complex with the theater unit
located in the middle of tfie complex as indicated in the following aerial photo.
Page 1
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2002
Item No. 11
'„4
,
y
~ ~~~"~
~
~ ~
~. ,, i
~ ~~ ~'
~ ~~
r.
s
'
m .~.
~s .
. az r.
~ L
N~ ^.fir e. ~ Si}
y
'
~*
~
i? e45 ~rs`
Industrial Uses 148,879'. 1.55 spaces per 1,000 s.f. 231
Office Uses 27,406 d s aces Y 1,000 s.E 110
Auto Uses 16,340 3.5 s aces er 1,000 s.f: 57
Theater Use 2,525 .4 aces. er seat 49 20
Page 2
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 1 b
Use S ware Feet Cod®-Re wired Parkin Parkin Re wired
seats)
6
.8 space per employee
includin erfarmers 6
Totals 195,150 Totals aces required 424
(8) The applicant has submitted the attached letter of operation and project. description
indicating that the Gallery,Theatre's season would oonsist of up to 6 plays that would.
provide a variety of entertainment to the community and the use of local taleht to perform in
the plays.. The theater will also conducYactinglsinging and dancing classes as follows:
Adult Belly Dancing
Monday from 6:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
Adult Acting Classes
Tuesday from 7:00 p,m. to 9:00 p.m.
Hollywood Kids
Sundays from 12:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Theater Performances
Tuesday through Sunday 8:00 p.m. and Saturday and Sundays 2:00 p.m:
Rehearsals
Monday through Thursday from 7:00 p:m. to 11;00 p.m.
(9) No sign plans were submitted with the application. A small wall sign consistent with other
signs in the complex currently identifies the business: Code permits wall signs not to
exceed ten (10) percent of the building elevation with a maximum letter height of twenty-
four (24) inches: Any proposed new signage would need to meet code requirements.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS:
(10) The Planning Director's authorized representative has determined that the proposed project
falls within the defihition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15303, Class 3 (New '
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines
and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare additional
environmental documentation.
.Page 3
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January 8, 2007
Item No. 11
EVALUATION:
(11) Theaters are permitted in the SP94-1, DA 5 (Northeast Industrial Specific Plan No. 94-1,
Development Area 5 =Commercial Area) zone subject to a conditional use permit: The
dance studio component is a permitted use within this zone.
(12) Community Preservation records indicate that there are no open cases for this Unit H, and.
there have been no cases over thelast year for this operation.'.
(13) `This request to retain the theater is supported by staff as the facility is compatible with the
existing industrial`complexas mosf of the activity for the theater occurs at night when most
of the businesses within the aomplezere closed'Adequate parking is provided on-site for
the performances because the mainuse of the facility is oh' evenings and weekends when
the other uses in the complex are closed. In addition., since this property is within the
Commercial Area of the Specific Plan, it is .anticipated that ttie area will become
increasingly commercial in nature. Based on the forgoing, staff recommends. approval of
the request.
FINDINGS:
(14) Before the Planning Commission grants any conditional use permit, ifmust make a finding
of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist:
(a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the
Zoning Code, or isan unlisted use as defined in Subsection '030 (Unlisted Uses
Permitted) of Section 18:66.040 {Approval Authority);.
(b) That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses dr the growth and
developmenf of ttle'area in which it is' proposed tdbe located;
(c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area
or to the health and safety;
(dp That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and
(e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if
any; will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of
Anaheim...,..
RECOMMENDATION:
(15) Staff recommends that, unless additionalbr contrary information is received during the
`meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted tb the Planning Commission, including
the evidence presented in this staff report, and'oral and writteh evidence presented at the
public hewing; the Planning Commission take the following actiohs as indicated in the
attached resolutions including the findings and conditions contained therein:
Page 4
Staff Report to the
Planning Commission
January S, 2007
Item No. 11
(a) By motion, a rove a CEQA Categorical Exemption -Class 3 (New Construction or
Conversion of Small Structures) for the project.
(b) By resolution, ao rove Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-05171.
Page 5
[DRAFT]
RESOLUTION NO. PC2007--"`
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-05171 BE GRANTED
(3152 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE)
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional
Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
described as:
PARCELS 1 AND 2 AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 58 OPAGE 43 OF PARCEL
MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on January 8, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said hearing having been duly given as required
by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60, 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 18.120.100.050.0524 to retain a theater. The dance studio is a use
permitted in the zone.
2. That the use is compatible with the existing industrial complex with the activity at the facility
occurring mainly during the evenings and weekends when the other uses within the complex are not open
which will not adversely affect the ad}'oining land uses or the growth .and development of the area in which it
is proposed.
3. 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.
4. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed .and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the times the theater will
be in operation is at night and on weekends during which the rest of the businesses in the complex are not in
operation.
5. That the size and shape of the site is adequate tq allow the full development of the theater in
a manner not detrimental to the health and safety of the particular area,
6. That "` indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no
correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING:. The Planning Director's
authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical
Exemptions, Section 15303, Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), as defined in the
State CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental
documentation.
CrIPC2007- -1- PC2007-
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does
hereby grant subject Petition for ConditionalUse 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 any signage shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval: Any
decision by staff regarding signs may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports.and
Recommendations" item.
2. 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 the time of discovery.
3. That the property owner shall submit a letter requesting termination of Variance No. 2634 (to :permit a
sandwich shop) to the Planning Department.
4. That four (4) foot high address numbers shall be displayed flat on the roof of the building in 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.
5. That an Emergency Listing Card;. Form ADP-281 shall be completed and submitted in a completed
form to the Anaheim Police Department.
6. That existing trash storage areas shall be maintained in a location acceptable to the Publid Works
Department, Sfreets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said
Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily
identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from
graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum 1-gallon size clinging vines planted on
maximum 3-foot centers or tall shrubbery:.
7. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications
submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning
pepartment marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 2, and as conditioned herein.
8. That within sixty (60) days from the date of this resolution, Condition Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 6above-mentioned,
shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted to
accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code..
9. 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.
10. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon
a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent
and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code and
(iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved
development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and
all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared
invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution,
and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
-2- PC2007-
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related
to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or
prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges
shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
January 8, 2007. 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 tie replaced
by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission
held on January 8, 2007, 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
.2007.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
_3_ PC2007-