Loading...
Resolution-PC 92-35RFSO~UTTON NO PC~2-35 A It~BOLUTION ON THE ANAHLIM cITY PLANNING COHMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3465 d~ D~NIDD I4HEREA5, the Anaheim City Planning Commi~nion did roaeive a vocified PetiCion for Conditional Ude Permit for certain rsnl property ei~:uated in the City of Anaheim, County oE orang9, State oP Cali.forni~, ~eecribod ass TF1AT PORTION OF TFiF ~AST !lA'~F OF T!iE NORTHWEST QUAFtTL~R OF FRJICTIONAL 3ECTION 3, TOWNBFIIP 4 30UTH~ RANG~a~' 10 WEST~ WITHIPi THE R)1NCH0 SA~I JUAN CAJQN DL~ SANTA ANA~ CONVEYED TO HENRY G. METSE~ BY DL~FD RECORDLD IN DOOK 636, PAGE 354 OF DEEDS, TN THE OFFIG~ OF THE COUNTX RECOFtD~R OF SAID COUNTY~ DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWSs HEGINNING AT THE 50UTHL~AST~RLY CORNEIt OP' RARCET~ 4 OF 'PHF HYGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY RELINQUISHED (F1EL-254) TO THL~ CITY OF ANAHEIM BY RESOLUTIGN OP THE CALIFORNIA HTGHWAY COMMISSION~ A CERTIFIEU CGPY OF WHICH RESOLUTION WAS RECORLED NOVEHaER 30, 1965 IN AOOR 7756, PAGE 172 OF OFFICIAL RECOR05j THLNCE NORTHERLY ALONG TFiE EASTERLY LINE OF 3AID PARCEL 4 DEBCRZBLD 'PHEREIN AS NORTH 1 DECi. 36' 48" EAST~ !.41.6g FEET TO THE NORTHERLY TERMIPIUS OF SAIA COUliSE SO DESCRIHEDI THENCE SoUTH 89 DEG. 36' 00" GA~T, 322.00 FEET1 THENCE SUUTH 40 DEG. 56' 24" EAST, 33.03 FEET; THENCE OOUTH 7 DEG. 43' 07" WEST~ 9G.~S0 FEETj TIiENCL~ BUUTH 58 D~C. 28' 27" WEST~ 75.96 FEET TO TF1E SOUTHERLY LIDlE OF SAZD LAND OP' M~:LSER~ THENCE NORTH @S UECi. 51' 29" WL5T~ 271.1A FEF,T TO TfiE POTNT OF HE(iINNINd. WHEREAS, the Cit,y Planninq Commieeion did `nold a public hearing at the Ci.vic Center in the City o~ Anaheim on October 21, 1991 at is30 p.m., notice of said public hoa:ing havinq been duly givon an required by law and in accordance with the p~~oviAi~na of the Anafie~m Mun3aipal Code, Chapter 18.U3, to hear and consider evidence for and againet eaid gropoeed conditional uAe permit and to invoatigata and make findinge nnd recommendat3on~s in connection therewith; end Lhat naid public hQering wae cuntinued to the Decombar 26, 1991, January 27, Fobruary 10, Harch 9 and Haxch 23, 1992 Plannilq Com~a.~aei~n meetinqs; and wHEREAS, oaid Commioaion, diter due inepection, inv~etiqat.ton nnd Atudy mede by tteolL and in it~ bahalf, and after due consideration of sll evlden~e and r~porte offered nt a~id hesaring, doae find nnd deGermine the fullowing factes 1. That the proposed une iu pruperly ons !or whlch n conditional :~ae permiC ir suth~rized by Anaheim Kunicipal Cod~a Section 18.61.050.07n to permit an aatomobile repair center wiEh wafvere ofs CR1454HS -1- PC92-35 (a) ~~CTI-gZI 18•b1,~Q6a•azx -~~.~+mum gtXUC~S]fA1 eotback from ~eman streot. (~Q leat requicedt 10 f~et to trash onclceure and hl !es to building propoeod) (b) ~F.C'PION 18 bl 063 012 ~ M~oimum etry,,rty,xa~ eetl~,ok~r.om froowav r. iaht-of-w~ty. ~~ with l0~eet landACaood re~YuiredJ ~,~Co 25 fQOt with ~,o.na Co a0 faet landocanod prapoeocl) 2. That there are no epecial circumetancee applicablo to the property such as e+ize, ehape, topc+graPhy, location or ourr~undings, wk~ich do not npply tu other identically zonod pro~ertien in the vicinity. 3. That etrict aopl.ication of thA Zoning Code daea not deprive thQ pxoporty o£ privilegon enjayed by other properties ui~der idontical ~oning claesifi.cat.ton in the vicinity. 4. That the ~ropased uae will adverne2y afEeat the adjoining 14nd ueee and the growth an~ develupment of the area in which it io proposed to be located. 5. That tho eize and ohapo of the ei~e propoeed for the uae ie not adequato to allow the full development oE the propooed us+o in a manner noC dotrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, en£ety and general welfare of the Citizone of che City of Anahei.m. 6. That the granting of tho C.onditional Use Pormit will ba deCrimental ta tbe peac9, health, eafety and g9nordl wA;.:are oi~ i:hs Citizono o~ the City nf Anaheim. 7. That tra~fic gonoxatad by the propoaed uee will impoeo an undue burclen upon the etraote and hiyhw3ye d~eignod and improvad to cerry tho traffic in the area because the City Trbffic ancl'lranAportetion Manager h~e detern~i-~ed that, based on ncceptod engin~erinq etandarde and practicee (CALTRANS Highway Deeign Manua~.), the proposod facility would pooc a aeverte traffic hazard ae a r~sult of the vieibi]ity conetrainte impc~eed by the Route 91-Rivoreide FreRway ov~rcroeeing to the eouth and acceeeibility constrainte impoeed by the Route 91-Rivereide Freoway on and off zamp to the north. Fnrther., the TraFfia lmpact Study dubmitted by the appliaant concludee that the project, aa curreatly designed with acceee vin Lemon Street, hae the potential t~ impedu traffic ~.lows and caune traffic accidente baeed on visibility constrainta. 8. That no one indicatad their preaenc~a at ~aaid publ.ic hearinq in oppoaikions artd that no correapondenao wae receivod in oppoeition to the aubject petition. _Z_ PC92-35 C7ILIFOftN~~ENVTAONMENTAL Qy_.~I~.1~ ACT FINDINGe Thnt the Anahaim City Planning Cornmiaeian hne rawiowed l:he prcpoeal to vermit an nutomobilo re~,ai~~ center with weivore of minimum etructural. oetback From Lemon 3treet and minimum str.uctural aetback frcm frAeway right-oE-wxy on an irregularly ehaped parcel of land coneieting of approximately 1.13 acres l~catod at the nort;heaet corner of. Lomon Stroet and the P.iverside (91) Freewaj, having approximatc~ frunl:agao o! 142 feat cn the eaet ~aide of Lemon Street +snd 271 Eeet on the north eide of the Riverside (91) Freeway, having a maximum depth o! t-pproximatelf 322 ~eet and ~urxounded on the two romaining aidao by the Riverei.de (91) Froeway on/oEf ramp, and £urther deoczibed aa 1420 Nnrth Lemon Streot; and doee hereby deny the Negative Declarati~n ~apon ~Fi.nding tha~ the declaration re£lecte tho independent juclgement of th~ lead agency and that it hae conoidRred thd Negativ0 Ueclaration togather with any commente rocaived duriny the public review proce~c~ and further finding on the baei.o that tha initial otudy and any commento rsc~ivod that there ie oubotantial ovidonco that tho project will have a signifiaant eEfect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT R~SOLVED that tha Anahoim City Planning Commiesion does hereby dony eubject Petiti.an for Conditional Uee Permit, on the ba01e of the aforementioned findinqo. THE FOREGOYNG RU~SOLUTION wae adopted et the Planning ~ommiseion meeting of March 23, 1992. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~/. ~ , ANAHEIM CITY PLANNI G MMI9SION ATTEST: SECRE .q~ ~ ANAHEIH CITY ~NING COb1N.IS3ION ( STATE OF CALIF4RNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ea. CI1'Y OL' ANAHEIN ) I, Margaxita solorio, Searet~ry of the Anaheim CiL•y Planninq Commieeiori, do hereby certify L•hat tho toregoing reeoiutian wnr peaoed and adopted at a meetinc; oE Che Anaheim City Planning Cnmmiesion held on March 23, 1992, by the followiay vote o.t th~ mambera thereof: AYESs COMMIuSIONER5: BOUAS~ HRISTOL~ HELLYER~ HEfININGER, PERRZA~ 2EMEL NOE5t COHM2S3IONERSt NONE AHSENTs COMMI3SIUNERSt MESSE ~ry1~~~ 1N W'tTNESS WHF;TtEOF, I have hereunto aet my hand thie ~~~ day of ~L.~~l'u~_.~ 1992. ~ ~~ ~ cs,CRET Y, AHEIM CITY PI.TINNING COMMISSION -3- PG92-35