Resolution-PC 92-42r"W"
RF~nI-UT[OIV I~TO P~92_4'2
A RESOLUTIUN OF THE ANAHEIM Cl'fY PLANNIN~ COMMISSION
THAT PF,TITION FOIt CONDITIUNAL USE PERMI'f I~10. 3510 BE GRANTED
WHER~AS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified
Petition for Conclitional Use P~rmit for cer!ain real property situated in the City of
pnaheim, County of Orange, St<<te of California, described as:
PAl?CEL 3, IN TI-IE CITY OF ANAI-IEIM, COUNTY OF
URANGE, S'TATC OF CA.LIFURNIA, AS PER MAI' RECORDED
IN BOOK 111, PAGE 45 UF PARCEL NIAPS IN 'TH~ OFFICE OF
TI-TE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COTJNTY.
PARCEL 2, AS SHOWN C7N A MAI' RECORDED IN BOOK 111
YAGE 45 OT' PARCEL MAPS, TN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
REC(~RDER OF SAID CO'UN'~'Y.
VVHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public he~uing at the
Ci~ic Center in the City of Anahcim on April G, 1992, at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public
hea.ring having Mcen duly given as required by law~ and in accordance with the provisi~ns of
the Anaheim Municip~l Code, Cliapter 18.03, to l~ear and consider evidence for ~and against
said propc~sed conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and
recommendations in connection therewith; and
WH~;REAS, said Commission, after due inspectian, investigation and study
made by itself and iri its behalf, <<nd after due consideration of all evidence and reports
offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts:
1. That the proposed use i~ properly one for which ~ conditional use
permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.61.OSO.S07 ~nd 1R.61.OS0.070
to permit a truck repair and storlge facility with waiver o£ the follawing:
~~ • a{~q50.02~ - Minimum t~rr~ r i °
1$ O6 OSOA222 (~2 requircd; .1~ proposed)
!$~952950.0 1
13 06.050.~33
1 g,06•4$4
~ il !5!
2, That tt~e requcsted parking waiver was substantiated by a parking study
submitted by the petitioner and approved by the City Traffic and Trarsportation Manager;
-1- F(.''92r42
CR1465MS.wp
3. That the purking variance will not cause an increase in traffic
congestion in the immediate vicinity nor adversely aff.ect ~.ny adjoining land uses;
~l. 'Chat the granting of tl.~e parking vaciance under the conditions imposed
will not hs detrimental to the peace, health, sufety or general welfare of the citizens of the
City of Anaheim;
5. That th~ proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use
permit is authorized by the Zoning Code;
6. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses
anci the growth and davelopment of the area in which it is proposed to be located, ~tnd that
the proposed use will not be visible to the public on Sall Ro~td;
7. That tt~e size and shape of the site for the proposed use is ade~uate to
allow the full develooment of the proposed use in a manner not detr~mental to the
particullr area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare;
8. That th~ traffic generated by the proposeci use will not impose ~n
undue burden upon the streets anct hiahways designed and improved to carry ttie traff.ic in
the area;
9. TYiut the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions
imposed wil! nc~t be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the
citizens of the City of Anaheim; ancl
10. That no une indicated their presence at said public hearing in
opp~sition; 1nd th~l correspondence was received in ~pposition to the subject petition.
("ALIFORNIA FTIVIRONMENTAL QLJ~~T~~~NDING: That the Anaheim City
Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a truck repair and storage
facility with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces on an irregula~ly-shaped paresl
of land consisting of approximately 4.17 acres, having a frontuge of approximately 155 feet
on the south side of Ball Ro1d, having a maximum depth of approximately 58S feet, being
located approximately 9G0 feet west of the centsrline of Lewis Street, and further described
as 610 and 620 East Ba11 Road; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon
finding that t!le declaration retlects the independent judgement af the lead agency and that
it has considered the Negative Illeclarution together with any comments received during th~
public review process and further findin~ on the basis of the initial study and any comments
received that th-•re is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect
on the environment.
..2.. PC9'~.~42
NOW, THEREf'ORE, BF, IT RESO.LVED that the Anahc~im City Planning
Cc~mmission does hereby grunt subject Petition for Conditional Use !'ermit. upon the
following conditions wh;ch are hereby found to be u necessary prerequisite to the proposed
use of thc subject prc~perty in order to preserve the saFety and ge~~eral wclfare of the
Citizens of the City uf ~lnaheim:
1. 'That all driveways shall be rcconstructed with ~fteer~ (15~ f~ot i•adius curb returns
:~.c reyuired by the Gity Engineer in canformance with Engineering Stundard No. 137.
2. That prior to the removal of any undergrouncl storage tan{cs~ the petitioner shall
obtain all appropriate permits from all responsible lgencies.
3. 1'hat a Plan Sheet for solid w~ste starage :ind rollection and a~lan far rec~~cling shall
be submitted to the Uepartment of hfaintenance for review and approval.
4 That an on-site tra.h truck turn-around arca shall be provided and muintained, as
required by the Dcpartment of Maintenance. Said turn-uround lrea shall be
specifically shc~wn on plans submitted for buildii~g permits.
5. That prior to commencement of the activity authurized under this resolution, or prior
to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of ninety (9~) days from the date
of thix resolution~ whichever occurs first, the legal owner(s) of subject property sh~ll
execute and recorc! an unsubordinated cuvenant in a fotm approved by thc -,
A:torney's Officc whercin such owner(s) agree not to contest tlie formation of an•;
asses.cment district(s) which may hcrcaftcr bc formcd pursuant to thc provisians of
Dcvclopmcnt Agreemcnt No. 83-01 betwccn th~ City of Anaheim and tlnaheim
Stad~um Associates, which district(s) CQUI(J include suCh legal proPerty owner s
property. A copy of the recorJed coven;int shall then be subrnitted to the Zc~ning
Division.
6. '!'hat any proposed freestanding sign on ~~ubject property shai! be a monument-type
not exceeding eight (8) feet in height anci shall be subjeet to the ti•evicwv anci approval
of che City'1'raffic and ~'ranspartation htai~ager to determinc adcuu:ite lincs•of-sight.
7. Th:~t any trcc planted un-sitc shall be rcplacccl in a timciy mxnner in the evcnt tho.t
it is removcd. damaged, discascd ~nd/or Jcsd.
S. That thc rnvnc~ of s~.ajcct pr~pcrty shall submit a Icttcr rcyLCSting terminuti~n of
Conditic~nal Usc I'crmit Nn. 1773 (~:rmiuing ~ truck stnrage yard) :xnd 11~2.'~
(pcrmitting •r truck unJ trailcr r~ntal y.7rd with incidcnt:il truck repafr) to th: 7_oning
Divizicm.
.3. R.~'L4?
y. Tht~t subject property shall be developed substlntially in accordance with plans and
specificatir~ns submitted to thc City c~f Anahcim by the petitioner s~nd which p~lo ~ed,
on file with the Planning Department marked Euhibit Nos. 1 through 3; p
however, that:
(a) There shall be a minimurt~ of one hundred thirty seven (137) pazking spttces;
(b) That all driveways and parking are:~s shnll be paved; and
(c) That the fencing along the west property line shall be screenc:d in a manner
which obscures on••sitc activitics.
10. 'That prior to issuance of a building permit or within a period of ane (1) year from
the d~te o[ th:s resolution, whichever occurs first. Condition Nos. 3. 4 and 8,
above-mentianed, shaU be complied with. Extensions for further xime to compl~te
said conditions may be granted in accardance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim
Municipal Codc.
ll. That prior to ~nal buiiding ...ld ionink iiupections, Condition Nos. 1, 2 and 9~
above-mcntioned. shall be complied with.
12, That approval of this applicat.ion constitutes appraval of the proposecl request only
to the extenr. that it complies with the Anaheim Mu:~icipal Zoning Code and ssny
o-her applicable City. State and l~ed~ral rc~~lations. Appcoval does nct include any
:-ction ur Cndings as to compiiance or apUroval uf the rcquest regarding any other
applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
I3E 1T I~UR'TfIF.R RESOLVFD that the Anahei~n City Planning Coni;r~ission
does hcr<<~y find and dctcrrnine that adnption of this Resoluti~n is expres.aly predi~tcd
upon applicant's compliance with each and al' ~i the conditions hereinabrne set forth.
Sllould any such condition, or any part therenf. he desla~.d invalid or u~enfurceable by the
final jucigment of au~ court uf competent jurisdiction, then this Resolutian, and any
apprcrvals herein conwined, shall be deemcd nul~ and void.
TNE FORFGOING RESOLUT[ON w:s:~ adoptcd s-t thc PlanningCommission
mccting of April 6, 1992. ~• / ~
~ti_z~..~v .r
P NN1NG CUM14fISSiON
,, IE-Ii2PAAN, AN AH ~ - CITY
A7'Tf~.ST:
~~ i /~ < < ~~~,.~ '
SEC~ ,~ANAIiCiM C1TY P[..ANN1-~r COMMiSStON
J
~. PC92~
STATE OF CAL[FORNIA )
COiJNT :' OF UItANGE ) ss.
CYTY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Mar6arita Solorio, Secretary of the Anulieim City Planning Commission, do
hereby ccrtifv that the foregoing resolutian wa.5 passed a~d adopted at a meeting of the
Anah~im City Planning Commission held on Aprit 6, 1992~ by the following vote of the
memben thereof:
AYES: COMMIS5IOI~fE,I2S: BOiJAS, BRISTOI., HELLYER, I~iENNINGER, NiESSE,
FERAZA, ?EMEL
NOE`~: Ct~MMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NOIdE
IN WITNESS WHEREOP,1 have hereunto s~t my hand this 1~ day of
r }'~ U~. 1992.
~~ ~~
SC~f , ANAHEIM CIT~I PI..A~NNiNG COMMiSSION
,5. A'1...J"L42