RES-8104 Denying Zone Change No. 1146-91RESOLUTION NO. 8104
A RESOLUTION OF THB CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ORANGB UPHOLDING THE RECOMMENDA-
TION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THB CITY
OF ORANGB AND DBNYING THB RECLASSIFICATION
OF PROPBRTY SITUATBD ON THB NORTH SIDB OF
KATBLLA AVENUB, 400 FBBT BAST OF GLASSBLL
STREBT.
ZONE CHANGB 1146-
91 REBVES ASSOCIATBS
ARCHITBCTS FOR PBP
BOYS
RECITALS:After due public hearings as required by law, theCityCounciloftheCityofOrangeconsideredarecommendation of
the Planning Commission of the City of Orange recommending
by Resolution No. PC 26-92, that certain property situated
on the north side of Katella Avenue, 400 feet east of Glassell
street be reclassified from the C-l District to the
C-2 District, and denied said recommendation after
finding and determining the hereinafter described facts. The real
property which is the subject of the reclassification is
more
particularly described as follows:1. Parcel 1,2 and 3 shown on a map filed in Book
95, page 43 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the
County Recorder
of Orange County, California.2. All easements for ingress, egress,
motor vehicle parking and for pedestrian ways over and across Parcel 1 asshownontheMapfiledinBook33, Page 19 of Parcel Maps, as
more fully set forth in that certain instrument entitled "
Agreement for Grants of Reciprocal Easements" dated March 16,
1977, executed by National Investment Properties, Inc., Barclays
Bank of California, Robert E. Holmes and Kathleen E.
Thompson, Marie Callender Ventures,Inc., and Marie Callender Pies, Inc., recorded
April 26, 1977, as Instrument No. 38956, Book 12164, Page
1410 in Official Records
of Orange County, California.Upon the public hearing before
the City Council, the
following facts were established:1. On July 21, 1992, the City Council heard
an appeal by Pep Boys of the Planning Commission's denial
of Zone Change 1147-91 and Conditional Use Permit 1947-
91. Their request is to allow the development of an auto
retail and service facility. At that time the City Council referredtheprojectbacktothePlanningCommissionfor
their recommendation since the applicant presented a revised site plan to the City
Council
as part of their appeal package.2. The proposal is a zone
change request for the subject site from C-
service facility is allowed in the C-2 District, but not in
the C-1 District. Furthermore, automotive service facilities
in the C-2 District are allowed only subject to issuance
of a condi-tional use permit. The proposal includes
a conditional use permit request to allow
the automotive use.3. The project site has an irregular shape, is 5.
91 acres in size, and is located on the north side of Katella
Avenue 400 feet east of Glassell street (Katella Plaza
Shopping Center). The site also has frontage on Glassell street
north
of Katella Avenue.4. The applicant's revised proposal
is as follows:A. The demolition of 12,200 square
feet of existing commercial building area. The amount of
area to be demolished was reduced from the original proposal
by 1,
000 square feet.The new Pep Boys building will be
approximately 22,200 square feet in size and will contain 16,900
square feet of retail space and 5,300 square feet for
10 automotive service bays. The Pep Boys building has been
reoriented 90 degrees from the original proposal and moved 16 feet to
the north so as to be built on the property
line. The reoriented building places the service bays on the
south side, the customer entrance on the east side, and the
loading dock on
the west side.The demolition of the existing commercial
building and the construction of the new Pep Boys building will
result in a net increase of 10,000 square feet of
commercial building on
the subject site.The bulk of the proposed building will be 22
feet 8 inches in height. The building within the 20'
rear setback area will be 20 feet in height, while
an architectural feature over the store's entrance will be 30
feet in height.B. The restriping and reconfiguration of
the parking lot area so as to create a total of 362
parking spaces and approximately 22,000 square feet of
landscaping area. The revised lot design has 5 parking spaces
over the initial proposed
parking lot design.C. The dedication of a strip of land ranging from
8 to 6 feet wide
along Glassell street.5. The initial application included a loading dock
on the north side of the proposed Pep Boys building, directly
adjacent to the residential districts and service bays openly to
the west. A noise study was prepared containing a
number of mitigation measures addressing the situation
with project revision reorienting the loading dock and service bays to
the west
and south respectively.Reso
6. The applicant prepared a revised "Acoustical Analysis"
study to evaluate the noise impacts of the redesigned project on
the surrounding land uses. The study found, that with the
exception of the noise levels created by trucks using the
northern drive aisle off of Glassell street, the project's
activities would not create noise levels that would exceed the
City's Noise Ordinance. The study stated that the project would
not exceed the maximum noise levels permitted by the city's Noise
Ordinance only if all delivery trucks gained access to the site
via Katella Avenue.
7. The revised building elevations indicate 36" high
individual channel lettering on the east and south elevations.
These signs exceed the maximum 24" letter height allowed by the
City's Sign Ordinance, and can be permitted only subject to
issuance of a conditional use permit (Orange Municipal Code
section 17.78.080). Because such a request was not part of the
original application, it cannot be acted upon as part of this
hearing process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
city of Orange that the recommendation of the Planning Commission
be upheld and that Zone Change 1147-91 reclassifying the
subject property to the C-2 District be denied for the
following reason:The proposal to change the subject site's
zoning classiica-ions from C-l (Limited Commercial) to
C-2 (General Commercial)would permit land uses that may have an
adverse impact on the
adjacent residentially developed properties.ADOPTED this
10th
day of
1992.ATTEST:1'J1~~~~ci ty Cler of
htV City of Orange I hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City
of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the
10th of November, 1992,
by
the
following
vote:AYES:
NOES:ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL
MEMBERS:COUNCIL MEMBERS:NONE STEINER,
BARRERA,
MAYOR
BEYER, COONTZ SPURGEON
NONE 01t?AA'~ t2 ~City Clerk
th~iW of Orange