Resolution-PC 99-115g~SOLUTION NO PC99-115
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
DENYING REINSTATEMENT OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2;192
WIiEREAS, on March 28, 1988, the Anaheim City Planning Commission adopted
Resolution No. PC88-85 to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2992 permitting a cuntractor's storage
yard with waivers of minir~Um landscaped setback (approved in part) and required screening adjacent to a
residentiai zone (waiver of required enclosure of outdoor uses was denied) on property located at 507
South Lemon Street; and
WHEREAS, said resolution was subsequently amended in connection wilh duly noticed
public hearings, as follows:
(1) On February 22, 1995, the Pianning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC95-19 to approve a
revised plan (Revision 1 of Exhibit No. 1) and amend the conditions of approval in their entirety, including
permitted signs, graffiti removal, providing landscaping and restrictions regarding the outdoor storage, and
(2) On January 22, 1996, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution Nu. PC96-10 to add certain
conditions, consisting of the use being approved for a period of two years to expire on January 22, 1998,
and that the owner would be responsible for the cost of monthly inspections by Code Enforcement for the
following six months to ensure timely removal of any refuse and wast~ generated in the course of
business, and
(3) On March 16, 1998, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC98-31 to amend and add
certain conditions, including provision of landscaping and an automatic watering system along the street
s~de of lhe existing block wall, approv(ng the use for a period of one year to expire on January 22,1999,
and that the owner would be responsible for the cost of monthly inspections by Code Enforcement for the
following one year to ensure continuous compliance with the conditions of approval; and
WHEREAS, this property is developed with a tree service contractor's yard in the ML
(Limited Industrial) zone (Leonard Chaidez Tree Service); the Anaheim General Plan designates the
property for Low Density Residential land uses; and the property is locateo in the C~mmercial/lndustrfal
Redevelopment Area; and
WHEREAS, the petitioner requests reinstatement of th(s conditional use permit (which
expired on January 22, 1999) under authority of Code Section 18.03.093 to retain the tree seriice
contractor's yard; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Comm(ssion did hold a pubBc hearing at the Civic Center (n
the City of Anaheim on June 21, 1999 at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing havfng been duly gfven
as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anahefm Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03,
to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and
make findings and recommendations (n connect(on therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, aker due inspection, investigation and study made by
(tself and in its behalf, and after due cons(deration of all ev(dence and reports offered at said hearing,
does find and determ(ne the following facts:
1. That reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 2992 is denied based on this use befng
detrimental to the surrounding areas, which fnciude res(dential zoning and homes to the soulh, and
resfdential zoning and apartments and homes to the northwest across Santa Ane SUeet and to the
southeast across Lemun Street, due to the unsightly nature of the operation, the dilapidated condition of
the property, lack u' landscaping, code violatians, and the petitioner's non-compliance with the conditfons
CR3671 PK.DOC -1- PC99-115
of approval contained in the resolutions under which this business operates, as evidenced by the
following:
(~) piles of tree trimming debris on the property are located where parking spaces are required
to be provided and visible to the adjacent streets through the open gate and ov?r th~ block wall enclosure,
and
(b) insufficient perimeter landscaping resulting from required clinging vines planted aiong the
enclosure block walis along Santa Ana and Lemon Streets being ron-deciduous and dormant, or having
died, and because the plants are deciduous (instead of non-deciduous) the block walls are exposed to
potential 5raffiti opportunities during the fall and winter months when the plants shed their leaves, and that
these plants should have been replaced with non-deciduous vines (Condition of approval No. 6 and
Anaheim Municipai Code Seckion 18.04.060.030), and
(c) lack of required on-site empioyee parking (the required parking is shown on the approved
site plan, Revision No. 1 of Exhibit No. 1), which apparently is the result of debris generated during the
course of business accumulating in the parking areas, and
(d) a continuously open gate behveen the property and the public street, as observed during
staff inspections (Condition of approval No. 11 requires it to be closed during the day except for one hour
in the morning and one hour in the evening, and at other times when opened by two-way radio
communication between the office and trucks), and
(e) on-street commercial vehicle parking in the nearby residential area instead of on the subjecf
property, contrary to the approved site plan (Revision No.1 of Exhibit No. 1) which shows an on-site truck
storage area, and
(~ lack of responsive gra~ti removal within 24 hours of application (according to Code
Enforcement staff testimony, the applicant has not removed gra~ti from the east gate, which graffiti has
been there for more than five months since January 1999), and
(g) odors that are detrimental to the surrounding area including housing units within ~bout 100
feet, which odors apparently result from debris pilinc~ up on the property and being there too long or being
allowed to compost, and which debris can be seen and smelled when driving past the site, and
(h) overflow parking from this business is located on adjacent residentialiy zoned property (RM-
2400 "Residential, Multiple-Family") where contractors storage yards, including expansion of such uses,
are not permitted; and
2. That the size of the property is not su~cient to support full development of the use
without being detrimental to the surrounding area because the existing use has apparently intensified
resulting in dzbris accumulating on the property, adjacent residentially-zoned property being used for
overflow parking and commercial uehicles being parked on the public streets; and
3. That this conditional use permit has been, and is being, exercised contrary to the terms
and conditions of its approvai, and in violation of statutes, ordinances, laws and/or regulations, based on
on-going and previous Code violations resulting from non-compliance with the conditions of approval,
which violations have been observed during routine Code Enforcement inspections; and
4. That the use for which approval was originally granted has been exercised so as to be
detrimental to the area and the surrounding land uses, and to the public peace, health and safety, so as to
constitute a nuisance because of on-going code violations and detrimental impacts as set forth in this
Resolution; and ~
5. That reinstatement and continuation of this use, which is not in compliance with the
conditions of approval and which is detrimental to the surrounding arQa, is incompatible with the
Commercial/industrial (South Anaheim Boulevard Area) Redevelopment Project plan; and
6. That fhere are tra~c impacts to the surrounding area because commerciai vehlclss are
being parked on a nearby street in the residential area, as observed during routine Code Enforcement
inspections; and
CR?671F'K.LIOC -2- PC99-115
7. That the site is u~sightly due to piles of tree trimming debris, visibility of commercial
vehicles and lark of property maintenance; and
8. That no one spoke in opposition to the proposeu r2instatement at the gublic hearing, and
that no correspondence was received in opposition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City
Planning Commission has reviewed the propusal to reinstate and retain a tree service contractor's yard
on a rectangularly-shaped 0.56-acre property located at the southwest corner of Santa Ana Street and
Lemon Street, having frontages of 213 feet on the south side of Santa Ana Street and 115 feet on the
w~st side of Lemon Street, and further described as 507 South Lemon Street (Leonard Chaidez Tree
Service); and d:i~s hereby find that the Negative Declaration previously approved in connection with
Conditional Use Permit No. 2992 is not adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation, in
connection with this request because the project may have significant adverse environmental impacts
pertaining to tra~c/circuiation, aesthetics and odors resulting from non-compliance with conditions of
approval, and upon finding that the decfara4ion reFlects the independent judgment of the lead agency and
that it has considered the previously approved Negative Declaration together with any comments received
during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments
received that there is substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the
enviranment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anahefm City Planning Commission
does hereby deny subject request for reinstatement of Conditional se Permit No. 2992, on the basis of
the aforementioned findings and evidence.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTiO~s d e lanni g Commission meeting of
June 21, 1999. ~ I~
CHAIRPERSON~4fdAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~~~~ ~~~
SECRETAR , ANA IM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Margarita Solorio, Secretary of ihe Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a n,~eting of the Anaheim City Planning
Commission held on June 21, 1999, by the fnllowing vote of the members therer,f:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOYDS7UN, BRISTOL, ESPlNG, KOOS, NAPOLES, VANDERBILT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this _L/_ day of
~, 1999. .
ll~r,~a~rz~a~ S~~
SECRETARY, AIyAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
CR3671 PK.DOC -3- PC99-115