ITEM NO. 2
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
DATE: OCTOBER 25, 2021
SUBJECT: ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2021-00179,
ADJUSTMENT NO. 3 TO THE EAST CENTER STREET
DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 90-2 (SPN90-2C),
(DEV2021-00138) CODE STREAMLINING AND
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
LOCATION: Citywide
APPLICANT: City of Anaheim
REQUEST: This is a C ity-initiated request to amend various chapters of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Code) to provide clarity, create consistency of terms and definitions, streamline approval processes and amend Code requirements to reflect current market trends. The proposed Zoning Code Amendm ent (ZCA) includes adjustments to the East Center Street Development Specific Plan.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission, by motion, determine that the proposed actions are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines; and, recommend City Council approval of ZCA 2021-00179, including Adjustment No. 3 to the East Center Street Development Specific Plan No. 90 -2 (SPN90-2C).
BACKGROUND: On September 27, 2021, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider several Zoning Code amendments as a part of the City’s Code Streamlining and Improvement Program. Similar to previous amendments, this request in cludes modi fications to per mitted l and us es, d evelopment st andards, procedures, and definitions contained in the Zoning Code. Attachment 1 to this staff report shows the redlined changes to the Zoning Code; Attachment 2 provides a description of each amendment and an analysis of why staff believes that the Planning Commission should recommend that the City Council approve the amendment.
At the September 27 Planning Commission meeting, staff provided a presentation on this year’s proposed amendments and received input from the Planning Commission.
After staff’s presentation, the Planning Commission had questions regarding the proposed amendment which would allow outdoor dining within outdoor parking spaces. Staff requested that the Planning Commission continue the item to the October 25, 2021, Planning Commission meeting in order to allow staff additional time to review and edit the amendment in accordance with the Planning Commission’s input.
Staff has included the September 27, 2021, staff report as Attachment 3 to this staff report.
PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS: The table below describes additional changes that staff is recommending to the Draft Ordinance that staff previously presented to Planning Commission.
Staff believes the revisions to the proposed Outdoor Dining Parking Permit section of the Draft Ordinance will allow for a high quality of design and maintenance, as well as limit parking issues.
In addition, following the September 27 Planning Commission Meeting, staff identified additional amendments that staff would like to add to the Code Streamlining and Improvement Program this year, related to:
• Stealth Ground-Mounted Telecommunications in Public and Special-Purpose Zones • Retaining Wall Landscaping Requirements
• Fences and Walls for Sound Attenuation
• Appeal Provisions for Planning Director Decisions related to Shared Parking Permits
Staff has added these amendments to Attachment 1 (Draft Redline Ordinance).
Proposed Additional Changes to the Draft Ordinance
Ordinance
Section(s) Subject Description
18, 30, 37 Outdoor Dining
Requirements
The previously proposed amendment would:
• Allow the conversion of up to three parking spaces to outdoor dining space
• Update the definition of, “outdoor dining”, in order to provide clarity on the use
• Remove the requirement for the outdoor dining to be
accessible directly from the restaurant, if the use does not include the sale of alcohol
• Require the restaurant to enclose the outdoor dining area with permanent improvements such as landscape
planters, fencing, decks, patio or shade structures, and/or other decorative barriers, which physically define and/or separate the outdoor dining area from other open or
public areas.
Staff has incorporated the following changes in response to the questions posed by the Planning Commission:
• The conversion of parking spaces to outdoor dining
spaces would be limited to restaurants within
Commercial Retail Centers – Large;
• The amendment creates an Outdoor Dining Parking
Permit that outlines requirements regarding health,
safety and design.
• The Outdoor Dining Parking Permit would require the
dining area to be:
o Compatible with the design of the restaurant building in a manner that is safe, provides proper access and is fully visible from the restaurant
o Designed in a manner which does not interfere with
the flow of pedestrian or other traffic
o Maintained in a good state of repair and in a safe,
sanitary and attractive condition
9 Stealth Ground-
Mounted
Telecommunications
in Public and
Special-Purpose
Zones
This amendment provides regulatory relief by changing the permitting requirements for stealth ground-
mounted telecommunications antennas in Public and
Special- Purpose Zones.
The amendment would change the permitting from a
Conditional Use Permit to a Telecommunications Antenna
Review Permit consistent with the permitting requirements in Commercial and Industrial Zones and FCC6409, which
requires application determination from municipalities
within 150 days.
The amendment also clarifies that the Zoning Code prohibits non-stealth ground-mounted telecommunications antennas
within the Public and Special Purpose Zones.
The following zones are Public and Special Purpose Zones:
• “OS” Open Space Zone
• “PR” Public Recreational Zone
• “SP” Semi Public Zone
• “T” Transition Zone
33 Retaining Wall
Landscaping
Requirements
This amendment provides clarity that the Zoning Code only requires crib walls and retaining walls that are visible to public rights-of-way, public trails, private streets or adjacent residential properties, to be constructed with landscaping and irrigation facilities.
32, 34
Fences and Walls
for Sound
Attenuation
This amendment pertains to homeowners with single-family residences abutting either a major highway, scenic
expressway, or primary arterial highway that have alley access with no driveway along the arterial street.
This amendment reduces the required landscape setback area in the above locations, between fences and walls and the public right-of-way, from 10 feet to three feet; however, it also reduces the maximum permitted wall or fence height from eight feet to six feet.
The proposed amendment would allow these homeowners to
construct walls or fences up to six feet in height, outside of the three-foot setback area, subject to administrative review.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that the proposed ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) . This determination is pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. Pursuant to this section, the proposed amendments and adjustments fit within the general rule that CEQA only applies to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. In that, the proposed amendments and adjustments would provide clarity, create consistency of terms and definitions, streamline approval processes, and amend Code requirements to reflect current market trends, the proposed adjustments and amendments will not have a significant effect on the environment; and, therefore, the activity is not subject to CEQA.
CONCLUSION: Staff recommends approval of this request , for the reaso ns set forth in Attachment No. 2, which in summary are to pr ovide staff, decision makers, and members of the public with clearer standards, procedures and definitions.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Christine Nguyen Niki Wetzel, AICP
Associate Planner Deputy Planning and Building Director
Attachments:
1. Draft Redline Ordinance
2. Summary of Amendments
3. September 27, 2021 Staff Report
29 Appeal Provisions
for Shared Parking
Permits
This amendment corrects a typographical error, which states the City Council has appeal authority over shared parking permit review. The amendment replaces that authority with the Planning Commission, which is consistent with current practice.