2000-150RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-150
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AMENDING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF VARIANCE NO.
1229 AS HERETOFORE APPROVED BY RESOLUTION NO. 235,
SERIES 1959-60, AS AMENDED, AND REINSTATING AND
APPROVING A MOTEL USE FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS ONLY,
TO EXPIRE ON JULY 25, 2005 (COVERED WAGON MOTEL).
WHEREAS, on April 18, 1960, the Planning Commission
adopted Resolution No. 235, Series 1959-60, approving Variance
No. 1229 and permitting construction and operation of a 70-unit
motel and coffee shop at 823 South Beach Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, the property is developed with a 70-unit motel
(Covered Wagon Motel) in the CL (Commercial, Limited) zone,
designated in the Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element for
General Commercial land uses, and located within the West Anaheim
Commercial Corridors Redevelopment Area and Community Planning
Area No. 1; and
WHEREAS, on July 21, 1997, the Planning Commission
adopted Resolution No. PC97-89 to amend said Resolution No. 235,
Series 1959-60, and impose new conditions including Condition No.
13 which specified that the variance shall terminate on July 21,
1998, which termination date was imposed due to abnormally high
police activity and numerous Code violations. The permittee did
not seek further administrative review of said decision and said
decision became final on August 12, 1997; and
WHEREAS, on August 3, 1998, the Planning Commission by
its Resolution No. PC98-117 denied a request to reinstate the
Variance, which had expired July 21, 1998. The Commission's
decision was timely appealed to the City Council and on November
17, 1998, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 98R-249 to
further amend Resolution No. 235, Series 1959-60, as amended, to
reinstate Variance No. 1229 and impose new conditions including
permitting the use until November 17, 1999, thereby reversing the
Planning Commission's decision. The permittee did not seek
further administrative review of said decision and said decision
became final on December 11, 1998; and
WHEREAS, on November 22, 1999, the Planning Commission
considered a request to reinstate the Variance and adopted its
Resolution No. PC99-202 modifying the conditions of approval of
the variance (including Condition No. 3, which provides in part
that guest rooms shall not be rented for more than thirty days
within any ninety-day period) and permit the use until November
22, 2000. The Commission's decision was appealed to the City
Council and on February 1, 2000, the City Council by its
Resolution No. 2000R-19 upheld the Planning Commission's
decision, including Condition No. 3, and approved reinstatement
of the variance for a period of one year to expire on February 1,
2001. On March 7, 2000, the City Council denied the petitioner's
request for rehearing and the decision became final on that date.
The permittee did not seek judicial review of said decision; and
WHEREAS, at its March 21, 2000 meeting the City Council
(1) directed the Planning Commission to initiate a hearing to
review Variance No. 1229 for the Covered Wagon Motel to determine
compliance with conditions of approval and to consider
modification of the conditions, including the 30-day in 90-day
occupancy limitation, as recommended by the Motel Task Force [The
City Council directed staff to develop for Planning
Commission/City Council consideration a modification to the
Variance at the Covered Wagon Motel that would provide for an
orderly transition of the motels from long-term occupancy to
their original intended uses, to possibly "grandfather in"
current long-term occupants for 6 months, but not allow new long-
term occupants to move in effective upon implementation of the
modifications.]; and
WHEREAS, on March 27, 2000, the Planning Commission
initiated proceedings for modification of the Variance, pursuant
to the provisions of Section 18.03.050 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code, the purpose of said hearing being to provide for an orderly
transition of the motel from long-term occupancy to its original
intended use; and
WHEREAS, on May 22, 2000, the City Planning Commission
did hold a public hearing to consider a modification of the
Variance 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
WHEREAS, the City Planning 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 the public hearing on May 22, 2000, adopted its
Resolution No. PC2000-59 (amending Resolution No. 235, Series
1959-60, in connection with Variance No. 1229) modifying the
conditions of approval of the Variance to permit the use until
May 22, 2000 and modifying Condition No. 3, renumbered Condition
No. 18, to retain the limitation that guest rooms shall not be
rented for more than thirty days within any ninety-day period,
and adding a procedure for orderly transition of existing long-
term occupants); and
WHEREAS, thereafter, within the time permitted by law,
the property owner appealed said decision to the City Council;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public
hearing on July 25, 2000, at which hearing the City Council did
receive and consider evidence, both oral and documentary,
relating to said request; and
WHEREAS, after due inspection, investigation and study
made by itself or on its behalf, and after due consideration of
all evidence and reports offered at said public hearing, the City
Council of the City of Anaheim does hereby find and determine as
follows:
That the use, as reinstated for a period of five years,
and subject to the conditions contained herein, is
properly one for which a use permit is authorized by
the Zoning Code.
o
That the use, as reinstated for a period of five years,
will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and
the growth and development of the area in which it is
located.
That the size and shape of the site for the use, as
reinstated, is adequate to allow full development of
the use in a manner not detrimental to the particular
area nor to the peace, health, safety and general
welfare.
o
That the traffic generated by the use, as reinstated,
will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and
highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in
the area.
o
That reinstating the use, under the conditions imposed,
will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety
and general welfare of the citizens of the City of
Anaheim.
o
That, as modified, the permit is being exercised
substantially in the same manner and in conformance
with all conditions and stipulations originally
approved by the approval body.
That reinstating the use for a period of five years,
under the conditions imposed, will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the
property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in
which the property is located.
WHEREAS, the City Council does further find and
determine, based upon the evidence and reports presented and
considered at said public hearing, that said motel use for which
said variance was granted has been so exercised as to be
detrimental to the public health or safety, and that the
modification of the existing conditions of said variance, and the
imposition of the additional conditions, as hereinafter provided
and described, including specifically the limitation on the
period of occupancy permitted for any guests of the motel, are
reasonably necessary to protect the public peace, health, safety
or general welfare for the following reasons:
The existing motel facility was approved as a motel use
not as an apartment house.
o
The existing motel facility was constructed in
accordance with the standards and building codes
applicable to motel facilities and not apartment
houses.
o
Hotel and motel facilities are designed, intended and
generally occupied by persons for short durations
ranging from one day and usually not exceeding thirty
days in length (hereinafter referred to sometimes as
"short-ter~' occupancies). The required amenities,
construction codes and zoning restrictions applicable
to motels are designed to protect the public health,
safety and welfare with regard to such short-term
occupancies.
Apartment houses are designed, intended and generally
occupied by persons for periods ranging from one month
to unlimited duration (hereinafter referred to as
"long-ter~' tenancies). The required amenities,
construction codes and zoning restrictions for
apartment houses are designed to protect the public
health, safety and general welfare with regard to such
long-term tenancies.
The maximum density for apartments allowed by the
City's current zoning standards would permit up to 36
dwelling units per acre. This density could only be
achieved if development standards such as recreational
leisure area, landscaped setbacks, minimum uni sizes,
parking, and similar considerations could be met in
order to make the units livable.
If the Covered Wagon Motel were considered an apartment
complex, it would have a density of 54 dwelling units
per acre and would not comply with the City's minimum
development standards.
10.
The existing motel facility was approved by the City of
Anaheim under Variance No. 1229 as temporary guest
rooms for sojourners and travelers needing temporary
lodging while away from home and visiting the City of
Anaheim and surrounding locales. Said motel facility
was neither approved, intended nor authorized by the
City as long-term housing for dwellers, or lodgings to
be occupied predominantly by persons needing or seeking
long-term residency.
The existing motel facility, as a temporary guest
facility, fails to contain and provide the amenities
required for, or generally provided in, apartment
houses for long-term tenants, such as kitchens, stoves,
sinks, garbage disposal units, yard areas and open
space.
The existing motel facility has a history of being
used, and is currently predominantly being used, for
long-term tenancies. Requiring tenants to vacate the
premises for one day per month, as is the property
owner's current practice and requirement, does not
effectively prevent the facility from being used
primarily for long-term tenancies nor does such
practice resolve or eliminate the health and safety
problems and concerns associated with the use of such
facility as a de facto apartment house as hereinafter
described.
Although the permittee has recently significantly
reduced the number of code violations on the property,
allowing the existing motel facility to be used for
long-term tenancies has previously resulted in, and,
unless the conditions hereinafter set forth are
imposed, may result in:
(a)
tenants improperly and illegally using the guest
rooms for cooking purposes without the benefit of
proper appliances and ventilation;
(b)
disconnection, deactivation or disabling of room
smoke alarms due to unvented smoke from such
cooking activities causing the activation of such
alarms; and
(c)
accumulation of grease on ceilings and walls due
to cooking in unvented rooms thereby creating a
fire hazard.
11.
12.
Allowing the existing motel facility to be used for
long-term tenancies has resulted in, and, unless the
conditions hereinafter set forth are imposed, will
result in:
(a
Lack of sufficient long-term living area in rooms
which were designed and built as sleeping
facilities for travelers rather than as dwelling
units, and lack of yard areas and open spaces
required or normally provided for tenants in
apartment houses resulting in a high concentration
of people in a small amount of space which, when
combined with the long-term tenancies by a
substantial number of the occupants, has resulted
in a disproportionately high number of calls for
police service and need for police protection at
the motel facility; and
(b
lack of yards and recreational areas for children
which would be required for apartment houses;
(c
conditions at the motel contributed to the blight
which led to the creation of the West Anaheim
Commercial Corridors Redevelopment Area, which now
includes the subject property.
The property has had a history of criminal activity,
which although a substantial drop from its peak, has
continued and has shown a recent increase, as indicated
in the memorandum dated July 18, 2000 from Investigator
Joe Tocco to Sergeant Randy West, Vice detail and in
testimony of Mr. West to the Planning Commission and
City Council as follows:
so
From July 16, 1997 through July 15, 1998 there
were 182 instances of police activity on the
property.
bo
From July 16, 1998 through July 15, 1999 there
were 106 instances of police activity on the
property.
From July 16, 1999 through July 16, 2000 there
were 135 instances of police activity on the
property.
During the 1999 calendar year, there were 60
instances of police activity on the property.
If the rate of police activity for the year 2000
is maintained at its present rate, the result will
eo
go
be approximately 155 instances of police activity
for the year 2000.
From January 1, 2000 through July 16, 2000, there
were 84 instances of police activity on the
property, of which 33 were directly attributable
to the property. If the instances of police
activity directly attributed to the property is
maintained at its present rate, the result will be
approximately 61 instances directly attributed to
the property. From January 1, 2000 through March
31, 2000, there were 38 instances of police
activity on the property, of which 9 were directly
attributable to the property. Consequently, 24
calls directly attributable to the property have
occurred since April 1, 2000, an increase in such
calls compared to the first three months of the
year.
Police activity on the property has included a
Fullerton parolee arrested on January 26, 2000; a
prostitute arrested at a room on the property on
February 10, 2000; a prostitute arrested on Beach
Boulevard March 15, 2000 who stated that she had a
room at the Covered Wagon Motel; an arrest for
assault and battery of a male assaulting a female
in a room on the property; a disturbance call
where female employed as maid at the hotel, later
revealed to be a known prostitute, had offered a
tenant sex for money and attempted to sell him
methamphetamine; an arrest for possession of
narcotic paraphenalia on the property on April 20,
2000; an arrest for possession of marijuana on
April 22, 2000 of a subject sleeping in his
vehicle at the motel; arrest of person under the
influence of a controlled substance on the
property parking lot on May 5, 2000; arrest of a
woman drunk in public who said she had an argument
with the manager on May 28, 2000; security guard
assaulted on the property on July 2, 2000; arrest
of husband for spousal abuse on July 8, 2000;
officers responded to call that guests were
intoxicated and causing a disturbance on July 13,
2000, and the police advised the guests, who
complied.
Sergeant West testified about an additional call
which does not appear on the July 17, 2000
memorandum because it was attributed to another
address. On July 13, 2000, a male subject from a
room at Covered Wagon allegedly was told by the
management of the motel to go to Denny's, which is
down the street, to call the police so the call
would not be attributed to the property. The
gentleman who called the police was threatened
with a knife by another man in his room at the
Covered Wagon and the male suspect was
subsequently arrested at another motel.
Comparison police activity data on other motels on
Beach Boulevard was provided indicating that
police activity was higher at the Covered Wagon
Motel than at other similarly situated motels on
Beach Boulevard [except for the Pacific Inn, for
which the City Council denied an application for a
conditional use permit on July 11, 2000] as
follows:
MOTEL
NUMBER OF POLICE
ROOMS ACTIVITY
ATTRIBUTABLE
TO PROPERTY
Moonlight Motel 42
20 (.48)*
5 (.12)**
Best Budget 41 18 (.44)* 9 (.22)**
Anaheim Lodge 45
25 (.56)*
12 (.27)**
Americana Motel 44
17 (.39)*
11 (.25)**
Pacific Inn*** 23
27 (1.17)* 17 (.74)**
Covered Wagon 70
84 (1.2)*
33 (.47)**
Total Instances of Police Activity Per Room
Instances of Police Activity Directly Attributable to
Property
[The City Council denied an application for a conditional
use permit for the Pacific Inn on July 11, 2000.]
all of the above of which are detrimental to the public
health, safety and general welfare of the occupants of such
motel facility, to persons residing in the vicinity of such
facility, and to the citizens and residents of the City of
Anaheim.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: The
Planning Director or his authorized representative has determined
that the proposed project falls within the definition of
Categorical Exemptions, Class 21, as defined in the State of
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"} Guidelines and is,
therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare
an EIR.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City
Council of the City of Anaheim does hereby amend Resolution No.
235, Series 1959-60, as adopted in connection with Variance No.
1229 and as amended, does hereby reinstate said Variance No. 1229
for a 70-unit motel for a period of five (5) years until July 25,
2005; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Anaheim does hereby find that modification of the
Variance, including the imposition of any additional conditions
thereto, is reasonably necessary to protect the public peace,
health, safety or general welfare, or necessary to permit
reasonable operation under the conditional use permit or variance
as granted, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does
hereby adopt the following conditions which are found to be a
necessary prerequisite to the proposed reinstatement of the use
of subject property in order to preserve the safety and general
welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
That this Variance shall terminate five (5) years from
the date of this resolution, on July 25, 2005.
o
That the property owner shall pay the cost of random
Code Enforcement Division inspections totaling twelve
(12) during this one (1) year reinstatement period, and
as often as necessary thereafter, until the subject
property is brought into compliance, and/or as deemed
necessary by the City's Code Enforcement Division to
gain and/or maintain compliance with State and local
statutes, ordinances, laws or regulations.
That appliances for the heating and preparation of food
shall not be permitted in the guest rooms.
That smoke alarms in the guest rooms shall be hard-
wired (rather than battery operated), and shall
thereafter be operable and maintained in good working
order at all times.
That the trash storage areas shall be refurbished to
comply with approved plans on file with the Maintenance
Department, Streets and Sanitation Division.
o
That licensed uniformed security guards in such number
(not to exceed two (2)), as required and approved by
the Anaheim Police Department, shall be provided upon
the premises specifically to provide security and to
discourage vandalism, trespassing and/or loitering upon
or adjacent to the subject property.
o
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
That the owner/manager shall maintain a complete guest
registry or guest card system which includes the full
name, address, verified driver's license or legal
identification and vehicle registration number of all
registered guests, date of registration, length of stay
and rood rates; and that said registry or guest card
system shall be made available upon demand by any
police officer, code enforcement officer or license
inspector of the City of Anaheim during reasonable
business hours.
That every occupied guest room shall be provided with
daily maid service.
That the owner and/or management shall not knowingly
rent or let any guest room to a known prostitute for
the purposes of pandering, soliciting or engaging in
the act of prostitution; or any person for the purpose
of selling, buying or otherwise dealing, manufacturing
or ingesting an illegal drug or controlled substance;
or to any person for the purpose of committing a
criminal or immoral act.
That no guest room shall be rented or let to any person
under eighteen (18) years of age, as verified by a
valid driver's license or other legal identification.
That all available room rates shall be prominently
displayed in a conspicuous place within the office
area, and that the property owner and/or motel
management shall comply with the provisions of Section
4.09.010 of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to
the posting of room rates.
That the property owner and/or motel management shall
comply with the provisions of Section 2.12.020 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to the operator's
duty to collect transient occupancy taxes.
That this property and these buildings and accessory
structures shall be maintained in compliance with the
statutes, ordinances, laws or regulations of the State
of California, as adopted by the City of Anaheim,
including the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Housing
Code, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Plumbing Code,
National Electric Code and Uniform Mechanical Code, and
permanently maintained thereafter in compliance with
such statutes, ordinances, laws or regulations.
That the on-site landscaping shall be refurbished as
necessary and permanently irrigated and maintained,
15.
16.
17.
18.
including the regular removal of trash or debris, and
removal of graffiti within twenty four (24) hours from
time of occurrence.
That a statement shall be printed on the face of the
guest registration card to be completed by each guest
when registering, advising that the register is open to
inspection by the Anaheim Police Department or other
City of Anaheim personnel for law enforcement purposes.
That no guest room(s) shall be rented or let to any
person unless compliance is determined by the
appropriate City division or department with statutes,
ordinances, laws or regulations of the State of
California, as adopted by the City of Anaheim,
including the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Housing
Code, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Plumbing Code,
National Electric Code, and Uniform Mechanical Code.
That any tree planted on-site shall be replaced in a
timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged,
diseased and/or dead.
That guest rooms shall not be rented, let or occupied
by any individual for more than thirty (30) days within
a ninety (90) day period, excluding one (1) manager's
unit, subject to the following:
(a)
Existing guests who have occupied a unit on the
premises for a continuous period over thirty (30)
days and are occupants on May 22, 2000, shall be
permitted to remain on the premises until and
including January 15, 2001.
(b)
The owner shall provide the Code Enforcement
Manager with a list, certified under penalty of
perjury, of all existing guests who satisfy the
conditions of subparagraph (a) above (the
"qualifying long-term guests").
(c)
Following vacating of any unit by a qualifying
long-term guest, or on January 15, 2001, whichever
occurs earlier, any occupancy of said unit shall
be for a period not more than thirty (30) days
within any ninety (90) day period.
(d)
Within a period of thirty (30) days from the date
of this resolution, the owner shall notify all
guests of the occupancy limitations set forth
herein and shall continue to notify all guests of
said limitations upon occupancy.
19.
That any new signage, beyond that legally existing on
the date of this resolution, shall be submitted to the
Planning Commission for review and approval as a
~Reports and Recommendations" item.
20.
That within a period of sixty (60) days from the date
of this resolution, Condition Nos. 4, 5 and 13, above-
mentioned, shall be complied with.
21.
That approval of this application constitutes approval
of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any
other applicable City, State and Federal regulations.
Approval does not include any action or findings as to
compliance or approval of the request regarding any
other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the conditions of approval
of Resolution Nos. 235 (Series 1959-60), PC97-89, 98R-249 and
2000R-19, adopted in connection with Variance No. 1229, are
hereby superceded in their entirety by the above-mentioned
Condition Nos. 1 through 21.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Council
does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution
is expressly predicated upon applicant'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 the final judgment of any court of competent
jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein
contained, shall be deemed null and void.
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 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 2~th day of July, 2000
MA OR OF TH~-~ITY OF A~HEIM
ATTEST:
ICkY CI~ERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
36627.1
12
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, SHERYLL SCHROEDER, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2000R-150 was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting provided by law, of
the Anaheim City Council held on the 25th day of July, 2000, by the following vote of the members
thereof:
AYES:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, McCracken, Daly
NOES:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kring, Tait
ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of
Anaheim this 25th day of July, 2000.
Cl'l'~ CLERI~'OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
(SEAL)
I, SHERYLL SCHROEDER, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing
is the original of Resolution No. 2000R-150 was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of
the City of Anaheim on July 25th, 2000.
~TY CLER~ OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM