PC 75-176- .~~~~,~
s
~ ~
RESOLUTION N0. PC75-176
A RESOLl7fI0'~ OF THF: CITY PLAMNING COMMISSIQy ~F THF. CI;Y QF ANAHF.IM
11~/lT PETI7'I(1N FOR COWITIOY.4L USE PERMIT KQ. 1557 IiE GRANfF.D, IN PART.
WHERF.AS~ the City Planning Co~ission of the City of Anaheim did receive
a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit frora RAYMOND SPEHAR~ 913 Paloma
Place~ Fullerton, California 92635 (Owner); RICfiARD F.. IfUST~y, 109 South Clementine.
Anaheim, California 92805 ~Agent) of certain real property situated in the City of
Anaheim, County of Ot^ange, Statc of California, described as:
That portion of Parcel 2 as shoxn on a map recorded in boak 56~ page 2 of
parcel maps~ records of Orange County, California. bounded Easterly by the
Westerly :ine~ and Southerly prolongation thercof, of Pnrcel 1 of said par-
cel map, and IVesterly by a iine 260.00 feet Westerly from and parallel with
said Westerly line and the Nortlierly and Southerly prolongations thereof.
F.XCEPTING THEREFR(1M any portion thereof lying witliin the land described in
the deed to the Orange County Flood Controi District, recordcd February 6,
1939. in book 980~ pagc 303. Official Records.
y,~{gREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold u public. hearing at the City
}iall in the City ef Anaheim on August 18, 1975, at 1:3~ p,m.~ notice of said puhlic
hearing having becn duly given as required by law and in accordance with thc provi-
sions of the Anaheim Dtunicipal Code, Chapter 1R.03~ to hcar and consider cvidcnce foti
and against said proposed conditional use and to investigate and make findings and
recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection~ investiga~ion ar,d study mac't
by itself and in its behalf. and after due consideration of all evidence and rtport:.
offereJ at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts:
1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use perm.'t
is ai-thorized by Code Section 18.44.OSD.G10, to wit: permit construction of a
restaurant xith a cocktail lounge in the Scenic Corridor~ aith aa.ivers of:
(a) SECTION 18.05.091 - Permitted si nin .(free-standing signN
not permitte ; 1 frea-standfn~ sign
, pioposed)
(b) SECTIQN 18.05.091.020 - Maximum number of wall si ns. (1 pcr-
mitLe ; 4 proposc
(c) SC:CTIO!J 18.05.Q91.030 - Permitted directional. si ns. (display o;
directional in ormation only)
(d) SF.CTION lii.84.062.032 - Prohibited roof-mounted e ui ment.
permitted roo -mounte equi~ment propose
2. That I4aivcr 1-a, above-mentioned~ is hercby denied on that basis that t e
petitioncr did not demonstrate that a hardship nould be created if said r.aiver were ot
granted und similar requests have been denied for commercial free-standing signs in he
Scenic Corr:dor.
3. That WaivPr 1-b, above-mentioned, is heraby denied on the basis that th~
petitioner did not demonstrate that a hardship would be crcated if said waiver were r~t
granted and similar requests hbve been denied for multiple commercial uall signs in t~e
Scenic Corridor; howcver. the peti.tioner stipulated that the psaposed "cocktail" an3
"restaurant" signs Would consist of nameplate-type signs attached to the building Nal s
and having a maximum arca of two (2) square feet each.
4. That Waiver 1-c, above,rmentioned, is hereby dcnied on the basis thnt sai.
proposed sign displays the name of the establishment as well as directional informati<n
x~d, as such, is interpreted as a free-star~ding sign; that the petitioner did not demc~-
strste that a hardship xould be created if said waiver were not granted; that similar
requests have been dtnied for such siRns in the Scenic Cerridor; and that the petitior~r
stipulstsd that said sign NiYl be modified to conform to the Code standards for direct~on-
al signs.
RESOLlffION N0. PC75-176
~ ~
5. That 1Vaiver i-d, above-mentioned, is herel~v grlnted on the basis that the
petitioner stipulated that said roof-mounted equipment will be effectively screened
from gromttl and overhead vietia, and Plans for said screening shall be subject to approval
of the Development Services Department.
G. That the Pet~tioner stipiilated to constructing a full screen between the
proposed dining room and cocktai: lounpe, and plans for. saici screening shail he suhject
Co approval of the Develapment Services Department.
7. That the proposed use, as granted, will not aciversely affect the adjoining
land uses and ttia growth and development cf the area in which it is proposed to be
located.
8. That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use, as granted, is
adeqi~ate to allow the full development of the proposed iise in a manner not detrimental
to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare of the
Citizens of the City of Anaheim.
9. That the Conditional Use Permit, as granted, and under the conditions imposed,
will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety, and general welfate of the Citizens
of the City of Anaheim.
10. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition;
and no correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition.
E,dVIROPn1GNTAL IbiPACT REPORT FIVDING:
That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council thnt the
si~bject project be exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report,
pursuant to the provisions of the California P.nvironmental Quality Act.
NOIV, TIjERF.FORE, BE IT RF.SOLVF.D that the Anaheim City Plannir.g Commission does
hereby grant siibject Petition for Conditional Use Permi.t, itpon the following conditions
whicli are ]iereU~r foun~i to be a necessary prerequisite to the proPosed use of the siibject
property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of t}~e City
of Analieim:
1. That strect li~htin~ facilities along La Palma Avemie shall be insta11e3 as
require<i by the Director of Public fJtilities, and in accordance with standarci plans ancl
sPecifications on file in the Office o£ the Dir=ctor of Public Utilities and that a honct
in an amount and form satisfactory to the City o£ Anaheim shall be posted with the City
to guarantee the installation cf the above-mentioned requirements.
2. That the owner(s) of siibject property siiall pay to the City of Anaheim the
swn of 6Q cents per front foot alang La Palma Avenue fox tree planting purposes.
3. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans
on file with ihe Office of tlie Director of. Public 14orks.
4. That fire hydrants shall be installeZ and cha*ged as required and determined
to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to commencement of structural
framing.
5. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities.
6. That drainage c.f siibject property sha>1 he disposed of in a mann~r satis-
factory to the City Fngineer.
7. In the event that siibject property is to be divided for the purF±ose of sale,
lease, or financing, a parcel map, to record the approved division of subject property
shall be submitted to and approved by the Cit}~ of Anahcim and then be recorded in the
Office of the Orange County Recorder.
8. That appropriate ~iater assessment fees as determined by the Director nf
Public Utilities shal.l be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a biiilding
permit.
9, That all sir-conditioning facilities 1nd other roof-mounted equipment shall
be effectively screened from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties; anJ
plans for said screening shali be submittecl to the Development Services Department for
approval.
RESQLIfTI(1N NQ. PC75-176
-2-
' ~ ~
1Q. That subject property shall be cleveloped substlntially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file with the City af i~nalicim marke~ Exhibit Nos. 1,
2, anci 3; p;avided, hc:eev~r, that the proposed dining room and cocktail loun~e shall
be separated by a fiill screen and plans far said screen shall be siibmittecl to the
Development Services Department for apprnval; as stipulateci to by the petitioner; and
tliat the signing for the siibject :ise shall be in conformance to the Code standards
for tlie CL(SC) Zone.
11. That Condition Nos. 1, Z, and 7, above-mentioned, shall be complied
with prior to the coRSnencement of the activity ~titho:ized under this zesoliition, or
prior to the time that the building permit is is~ued, or within a period of one year
from clate liereof, wliichever occurs first, or such fiirt}~cr time as the Planning
Commission and/or City Coimcil may grant.
12. That Condition Nos. 3, 5, 6, 9, and 1Q, ahove-rnentione~l, sliall be
complied with prior to final building and zoning .inspections.
1975.
T[fE FORF.GQIVG RP.SOLUCIO`3 is si~ned and approve~l hy me this 13th day of Au~ust,
~ ~ ~
C IR6 N, ANAtIF.I 1 CITY PI.ANNING CO~AtISSION
ATTFST:
i
l ~f~t~c-~ ~/ ~ ~rr~C~st/
F.CRF.TARY, ANAl1EI~l CITY P.i,AI`JNIVG CQhIIdISSIOiI
STATTi OF CALIPORNIA )
COIINTY OF QRAVGL ) ss .
CITY OF A*IAHEIDt )
I, Patricia li. Scanlan, Secretary of tl~e City Planning Commission of the
City of Analieim, do llereUy certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and
adopted at a meeting of tlie City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on
August 18, 1975, at 1:3Q p.m., by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: CODP.•fISSIQNERS: BARNES, HERBST, JOHNSO*I, KING, D10RLEY, TOLAR, FARANO
NOGS: C01•RdISSI~NF:RS: NONE
ABST:NT: CQf~tISSIO:dF.RS: NONE
IN WITNF.SS tVfafiRF.~F, I have hereunto set my hand this lSth day of August, 1975.
~~~ ~~~~
SECRETARY, A?IAHF.IM CITY PLANNING COMM .SION
_3_ RGSOLlfTION N0. PC75-176