92-061 92R-6!
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3487.
WHEREAS, the City Planning commission of the City of
Anaheim did receive an application for a conditional use permit
with a waiver of certain provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code
to permit a 184-unit, 3- and 4-story deck-type apartment complex
with 10,000 sq. ft. of ground floor commercial uses on certain real
property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State
of California, described as:
THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 8,
TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO
LOS COYOTES, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF
ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP
RECORDED IN BOOK 51 PAGE 10 OF MISCELLANEOUS
MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF
SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE
OF SAID SECTION 8 WITH THE SOUTHERLY
PROLONGATION OF THE CENTER LINE OF MULLER
STREET, 60.00 FEET WIDE, AS DESCRIBED IN PARCEL
1 OF THE DEED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, RECORDED
NOVEMBER 1, 1957, IN BOOK 4089 PAGE 397 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 0° 02 MINUTES 24
SECONDS WEST 835.43 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY
PROLONGATION AND SAID CENTERLINE TO A POINT
SOUTHERLY 480.01 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF
SAID CENTER LINE WITH THE EASTERLY PROLONGATION
OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 1775, AS PER
MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 50 PAGE 15 OF SAID
MISCELLANEOUS MAPS; THENCE NORTH 89° 37 MINUTES
14 SECONDS WEST 351.68 FEET PARALLEL WITH SAID
NORTHERLY LINE TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID
TRACT NO. 1775; THENCE SOUTH 1° 16 MINUTES 54
SECONDS EAST 835.16 FEET ALONG SAID EASTERLY
LINE TO SAID SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION; THENCE
SOUTH 89° 31 MINUTES 00 SECONDS EAST 333.59
FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public
hearing upon said application at the City Hall in the City of
Anaheim, notices of which public hearing were duly given as
required by law and the provisions of Title 18, Chapter 18.03 of
the Anaheim Municipal Code; and
CUP #3487
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection,
investigation and studies made by itself and in its behalf and
after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said
hearing, did adopt its Resolution No. PC92-17, denying Conditional
Use Permit No. 3487; and
WHEREAS, thereafter, within the time prescribed by law,
an interested party or the City Council, on its own motion, caused
the review of said Planning Commission action at a duly noticed
public hearing; and
WHEREAS, at the time and place fixed for said public
hearing, the City Council did hold and conduct such public hearing
and did give all persons interested therein an opportunity to be
heard and did receive evidence and reports, and did consider the
same; and
WHEREAS, the City Council does find, after careful
consideration of the action of the City Planning Commission and all
evidence and reports offered at said public hearing before the City
Council, that all of the conditions and criteria set forth in
Section 18.03.030.030 of the Anaheim Municipal Code are not present
for the following reasons:
1. That the proposed use will adversely affect the adjoining
land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is
proposed to be located because a) the proposed project is located
contiguous to and immediately east of single-family zoned
residential dwellings; and b) the proposed project is not located
in a pedestrian-oriented area of the city which would be suitable
for the proposed mixed use type of development; and c) the proposed
project is out of scale and character with the adjoining
residential land uses; and d) the density of the proposed project
is higher than the density of other residential projects existing
in the area, to wit: the single-family homes westerly of the
project site and recently approved multiple-family dwelling
projects.
2. That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use
is not adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use
in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the
peace, health, safety, and general welfare for the reasons set
forth in subparagraphs a, b, c and d of paragraph 1 above; and
3. That the granting of the conditional use permit would be
detrimental to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare of
the citizens of the City of Anaheim for the reasons set forth in
subparagraphs a, b, c and d of paragraph 1 above; and
WHEREAS, the City Council does further find and determine
with regard to the requested waiver(s) of Anaheim Municipal Code
requirements, other than the requested waiver of off-street parking
requirements, as follows:
- 2 -
CUP #3487
1. That no substantial evidence exists that there are
special circumstances applicable to the property which do not apply
to other property in the same vicinity and zone; and
2. That no substantial evidence exists that strict
application of the zoning code deprive the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property in the same vicinity and zone.
WHEREAS, the city Council does further find, after
careful consideration of the action of the Planning Commission and
all evidence and reports offered at said public hearing before the
City Council regarding said requested off-street parking
requirement waiver, that said waiver should be denied, for the
following reason:
Although the petitioner has submitted a traffic and
parking demand study which has been approved by the City Traffic
Engineer, said waiver is denied on the basis that the conditional
use permit for the proposed project is hereby denied and that such
approved parking study relates solely to the denied project;
consequently such waiver is moot due to denial of the underlying
project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Anaheim that said conditional use permit with a waiver of
certain provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same
is hereby, denied for the reasons hereinabove specified, and that
the request to permit a 184-unit, 3- and 4-story deck-type
apartment complex with 10,000 sq. ft. of ground floor commercial
uses be, and the same is hereby, denied.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the time within which
rehearings must be sought is governed by the provisions of Section
1.12.100 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and the time within which
judicial review of final decisions must be sought is governed by
the provisions of Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure and
Anaheim city Council Resolution No. 79R-524.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is approved and adopted by the
City Council of the city of Anaheim this 24th day of March, 1992.
IM
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
JLW:dnl
R34DC3487.12
040192
- 3 -
CUP #3487
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, LEONORA N. SOHL, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 92R-61 was introduced and adopted at a regular
meeting provided by law, of the Anaheim City Council held on the 24th day of
March, 1992, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle and Hunter
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson and Pickler
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
AND I FURTHER certify that the Mayor of the City of Anaheim signed said
Resolution No. 92R-61 on the 25th day of March, 1992.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the
City of Anaheim this 25th day of March, 1992.
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
(SEAL)
I, LEONORA N. SOHL, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that
the foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 92R-61 duly passed and adopted
by the City Council of the City of Anaheim on March 24, 1992.
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM