PC 79-100{ ,
RESOLUTION N0. PC79~100
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 1978 BE GRANTED, IN PART
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Gity Planning Commission dfd recetve a ve~ified
Petition for Conditiona) Use Permit from CHEW NAR CHEN6, 6981 Country Club Lane,
Anaheim, California 92807, owner, and JOHN DOMANIC, 10251 Sunrise Lane, Santa
Ana, California 92705, agent, of certain real preperty situated in the City of
Anaheim, Lounty of Orange. State of California, described as:
The North 66 feet of the South 5z8 feex of the Nest 330 feet
of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of the
Northwest quarter of Section 13, Tawnship 4 South, Range ii
West, in the Rancho Los Coyotes, City of Anaheim, as shown
on a map thereof recorded in 6ook 51. Page 11, Miscellaneous
Maps, records of said Orange County. Except the Westerly
92.00 feet thereof.
WHEFEAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public tiearing ?t the
City Nall in the City of Anaheim on Nay 21, 1979, at 1:30 p.m., notice of said
public hearing having been duly given as requfred by law and in accordance with
Yhe provisions of [he Anaheim Municipal Code, Chap[er 18.03. to hear and consider
evidence for and agatnst said proposed conditional use and to investigate and
make findings and recommendations in connectio~ therewith; and
WHERfAS, said Commission, after due lnspection, investigation and study
made by itself and in its behalf, and aft~sr due cansid~ration of all evidence
and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the foilowing facts:
1. That the proposed use is properly une for which a conditional use
permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Sectfon 18.44.050.160 to wft: to
permit a 23'unit mote) with wafvers of:
(a) SECTION 18.06.060.0243 - Minimum re uired parking.
2 spaces required; 21 spaces proposed}
(b) SECTION 18.44.Ob2.011 - Maximum structural hei ht.
1 an 15 eet perm tte ; 21.5 feet
proposed
(c) SECTION 18.44.063.040 - Minimum lardsca ed setback.
10 feet requ red; 0 to 2 feet proposed)
2. That the proposed use is hereby granted for 23 units only, subJect
[o the petiticner's stipulation at the public heartng to eliminate two (2) units
from ttie originally requested units~ and reducing the motet to a onc-story
structure near the east property lTne and providing a 10-foot wide landscaped
buffer area along the east property line to pratect the existing single-famlly
residential uses to the east.
Pc79-too
;
3. That the requested waiver (a) is hereby granted, in part, for a
mi~imum of twenty-one (21) parking spaces instead of twenty-six (26) on the basis
that the petitioner stfpulated to reducing the number of motel units co twenty-
three (23), thereby reducing the parking requirement, and also that a cer[ain
percentage of the 9uests will arrive via a transportation mode other than private
automobile; and that denial would deprive subject property of a privilege being
enJoyed by other similar properties under identical zoning classification in the
vicinity.
4. That [he requested waiver (b) is hereby g;anted, in part, permitting
the two-story structure near the south proper[y llne only, on the basis that
although the adJacent property to the south is zoned RS-A-43,000 (Residential/
Agriculturai), it is developed with a motel and dental wouid deprive subject
property of a privilege being enJoyed by other properties under ide~tical zoning
classification in Che vicinity; and denying waiver for the two-story structure
proposed along the east property 11ne on the basis that the petitioner stTpulated
at the public hearing to develop a stngle-story structure adjacent to the RS-7200
(Residentiat, Single-Family) Zone [o the east.
5• That the requested waiver (c) is hereby granted, in part, permttting
the proposesJ two (2) foot wide landscaped sstback adjacent to the RS-A-43,000
zoned property to the south which is developed with a motel, on the basis that
denial would deprive subJect property of a privilege being enjoyed by other
properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and denying
the requested waive~ on the east property li~e on the basis [hat the pe[itioner
stipulated at the public hearing to provide a ten (10) foot wide landscaped
buffer on the east property line adjatent to ttie RS-7200 Zone.
6. That the proposed use, as granted, will nat adversely affect the
adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which tt is
proposed to be located.
7. That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use, as
granted, i$ adequate to allav the full development of the proposed use in a
manner not detrimental to the Farticular area nor to the peace, health, safety
and general welfare of the Cttizens of the City of Anahelm.
8. Tha[ the granting of the Condttional Use Permit under the conditions
imposed will not be detrimental to the peace, heaith, safety and general Helfare
of the Litizens of the Ci~y of Anaheim.
9. That no one indicated their presence at safd public hearing in
opposition; and thai no correspondence was received in opposition to the subJect
peti tion.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAC7 FINDING: That the M aheim City Planning Commtssion
has reviewed the proposa to permit a 23-unit mot~l with waivers of minimum
required parking, maximum structural height and minimum landscaped setback o~ a
rectangularly-shaped parcef of land consisting of approxlmately 66 feet on the
east stde of Beach Boulevard~ hav(ng a maximum depth of approximately 240 feet,
and being located approximately 461 feet north of the centerline of Orange Avenue;
and does hereby approve the Negative Declaratian from the requlrement to prepare
an environmsntal impact report on the basts that there would be no signiffcant
-2- PC79-too
,
indfvidual or cumulatlve adverse environmental impact due to the approval of this
t~egative Declaratton since the A~aheim General Plan designates the subJect property
for general cortmercial land uses commensurate -+ith the proposal; that no sensitive
environmental impacts are invalved in the proposal; that the Initial Study
submi[ted by the petitio~er indicates no signiflcant Individual or cumulative
adverse envlronmental impacts; and that the Negattve Declaration substantiating
[he foregoing findings is on file in the City of Anahetm Planning Department.
t~ON, 7HEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED [hat the Anaheim City Planning Commfssion
does hereby grant, ln part, subject Petition for CondiLional Use Permit, upon the
following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequistte to the
proposed use of the subJect property in order to preserve the safety and general
welfare of the Cttizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance~~rith
approved plans on file with the office of the Director of Public Works.
2. That fire hydran[s shalt be installed and char9ed as required and
determined to be necessary by the Ghief of the Fire Department prior to cammence-
ment of structural framing.
3. That the owner(s) of subJect property shall pay the traffic signal
assessment fee (Ordinance No. 3896), in an amount as determined by the City
Council, for each new motel unit prior to the issuance of a building permit.
4. That the proposed moiel shall comply with all signing requirements
of the CL (Commercial, Limited} Zone.
5. That subject property shall be developed su6stantially in accordance
with plans and specifi wtions on file witli the Lity of Anaheim marked Exhibi[ Nos.
1 and 2; provided, however~ tha[ kitchen efficiency units with a maximum of six-
cubic foot refrigerat~rs, two-burner stoves excluding oven and baking facilities,
and single-compartment sinks may be installed, except that the manager's unlt will
be allowed to have full kitchen facilities; and also that the maximum numi,er of
rtatel units shall ba t.+enty-three (23) with twen[y-one (21) parking spaces, that
the two-story structure (21.5 feet high) shall be reduced to one story (15 feet)
near the east property iine~ and that a minimum ten (id} foot iandscaped pianter
shal) be provEded along [he east property line.
6. That Condition Nos. t and 5, above mentioned, shall be complied with
prior to final building and zoni~g inspectlons.
BE IT FURTHEa RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commissio~ does
hereby find and determine that adop[ion of this Resoluiion is expressly predicated
upon the appiicant'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 thr final Judgment of a~y court of competent jur(sdiction, Yhen
this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is sfgned and approved by me this 21st day of
May~ 1979•
~
AI N~ ANAH CI Y PLANNING COMMISSION
_3- Pc79-lo0
ATTEST:
~~ ~° ~~
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CfTY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANANEIN )
(, Edith L. Harris~ Sccratary of the Anaheim City Planning Comm(ssion~ do
hereby certify that the foregoing resolutton was passed and adopted at a meeting of
the Anaheim City Planning Commisston hetd on May 21, 1979~ by the followi~g vote of
the members thereof:
AYES: COMHISSIONERS: BARNES, BUSHORE~ DAVID. HERFIST, JOHNSON, KING, TOLAR
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
t979.
IN WITNE55 WNEREOF, I hava hereunto set my hand this 21st day of Hay~
~i-c~ ,t~ ~,~.
SECRETARY, AFIAHEIH LI~Y L NN N COMM
-4- PC79-t0o