Resolution-PC 92-91~~
RES9LUTION N0. PC92~9,~„
A R~SOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3528 B~ GRANTED
WHEREAS, the Aruiheim City Planning Commfsslon dki recoive a v~rmed Petition for
Conditional Use Pernft for certaln reai property situated :,~ the CKy of Anaheim, County of Oranqe, State
oi Caii(ornla, descrlbed ag:
PARCEL 18, AS PER MAP FILEn IN E100K 202, PAGES 41 TO A4 INCLUSIVE OF
PARCEI. MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID
COUNTY.
WHEREAS, the Clty Planning Commission dld hNJ a puWic hearing at the Civic Center
In the City oi Anahetm on July 13, 1992, at 1:30 p.m., notice of sald pu~lic hearinq havinp been duly glven
es required by law and In accordance with the provfsions of 4ho Anaheim Municipal Codo, Chapter 18.03,
to I~oar and considor evidence for and against 3aki proposed conditlonal use permft and to investig~te and
rr~ako ftndinps and recommendations in connect(on therewith; and that said public heariny was continued
to the July 2~, 1992 °Ianninp Commission meettng;
WHEREAS, sakl Comm(ssion, after due Inspc3ction, Irrvostigallon and study mude by ftselt
and In its bohalt, and atter due considerat(on of all svfdence and reports offered at safd hearing, daes tind
and determino the fc,llowing tacts:
t. That the proposocf use is properly ona for whicl~ a corxlitional use permft ~s
authorized by Anahetm htuniciprii Coc1o Socti~ns 18.03.030.010 and 1D.41.050.070 to permft twv (2)
tempoiary traflens In conjunction wfth a prevlausly approved ch~rch use;
2. T~hat tl~e proposed use Is prope~ly one for which a conciftlonal use permft Is
authorized by ihe Zoninp Cocle, or ihat sald uso is not Ilsted there In as being a pArmltted use;
3, 1'he proposed modular structures are intended tor a t~mporary 2-year perlod only,
during which time the prevlously-t+pproved permanent chur~h facflfty wfll be constructed;
4. That tl~e praposed t~mporery use of modular structures, ag condittoned herel~,
will not odversety atfACt the ad~oining land uses and tho qrc~v-^ch and development or the ar~ In whlch saki
trailers er~ proposad to be ~ucated;
5. Thilt the aize end ehapo of the ske ta tha preposdci use is adequate to allow tho
lutt de~~elopment of tho propostxi uso in a manner not detrtmentnl to the particular aree nor to the peace,
t-ealth, sa(ery, end ganera! weliare:
8. That the troflic ~onorated by the proposed use w~l ru~t Impose an urxlue bunlon
upon the atreets and hfflhways designed and improved ta ca-ry traflic in the area;
7. T~at the graMtng ol tho cwxlRional use porrnR under the conditl~ns imaosad w0t
not be detrfrnental to the peace, hnalth, safoty and goneral wel(are of the cklzens of tho ~iry of Anahalm;
g. That no one Indicvtod their presance et sakl public hearing in opposNion; and that
~o car~spondence waa recolv~cl U opposhlon ro the subJect potklon.
CRt586MS.wp '~' P~~91
lffYd4
CALIFQRNIA ENVIRQ~IM~NTAL OUALITI' ACT FINDINC~; The Pl~nnln~ Dlroctor or hls
authorized reprssentative has determined that the proposed proJect falls withln the definition of Categarical
Exemptions, Class 3, as defined In the State EIR Guidoline~ and is, thereforo, categorically exempt from
the requlremont to preparo an EIR.
NQW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVFD that the Anal~eim Ciry Planri(n~ Commisslon tlaes
hereby flrant subJect Petition tor Condftional Use Permit, upon the following conditlons which ete heroby
found to bo a nocessary prerequisito to tho propo5od use of the subJeot property in order ta preserve the
satety and floneral welfare of tho Citizens ut the City of Anehelm:
1. That subject traflera shall be permitted tor a meximum pericxi of two (2) yaars until July 27, 1994.
2. That, in the ovRnt subJect trallers remaln ~n subJect property for more than e one (1) year perlai,
sald trailors sh~l! be equippec! with fire sprinklers to tho satisiection o{ the Fire Departmant.
3. ThAt unless proaf of oxemption is submltted in compllance with City Councll qesolution No. 89R-
440, the appropriate -n~(or thoroughfare and bridge foe shall be poid to the City of Anaheirn in An
amount as speaft~ed in the ma)nr thoroughfare and Hridge Fee Program for ti~e ~oothfll/Eastern
TranspoRatlan Corridor, as establishecl by City Councll resolutton.
a. That thR approprl~te trafiic slgnal assessment fee shall be pald to the Ciry of Anaheim in an
amount established by Cfty Councll =tesolution No. 91R-193.
5. That the eppropri~te iea shall be pafd to the City of Anaheim (qr Santn Ane Canyon Road wldening
purposes, in an amount as established by the Giry Counr,il Resolutlon Nn. 89R-371,
6. 7hAt plans ahali be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for hi3 revlew and
approvai showln0 contonru-nce with the current verslons of Enqineerfnfl Stnndard Plan Nos. 436
and GU2 pertalntng tu parking standards and drivaway location. Subj9ct property shail thar9upon
be developed nnd malntainec! In can(ormance wlth st~W plans.
7. That the driveway on Ct~aparral Court shall be constructed with ten {10) toot radlus curb returns
as roqufred by the Clry Engineer Ih conformance wfth Engfneerlny Standarci No. 137.
p. That sub)ect proporty shall bo developed substantially In accordance with rylane and apocificatlons
submittad to the Cky of Anahe!m by the petltlonor and which plans are on ilie wfth th9 Pfanning
pepartment marked Ezhlbtt Nos. t ihrou4h 5.
9. That prtor to commencement uE the activfty authorized by thfs resolutlon or within a pertod of ane
(1) yoar (rom thA date of this resolutio~, whichever occurs first, Condkion Nns, 3 through ~,
above-mentioned, bhall be cnmplied wfth. Extensions tor further time to comGlote said conditlons
may ba granted in accordance with Sectfon 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Murncipal Code.
10. That prior to ilnal buiidinp and zoninq Inspoctfons, Cursdition Nos. 7 and 8, obove•rnentioned, shall
be complled wfth.
t t. That epproval oi this ap~l{cPt~on constitutes epproval oi the proposed requect ~My to the extent
that k com~tlas wfth the Anahefm Mun~lpal Zoning Code and any othe- appllcal~la Ctry, Stato erui
Federal regulatlon$. Approval does not Irclude any actlon or findings aa to compliance or
apprc,val of the request re~aidinq any other appiicable ordlnance, regulatlon or requlrement.
.2_ PC92•9i
,~•.
BE 17 FURTWER RESOWED that the Anaheim CKy Planning Commisalon doa~ hereby (Ind
and determino that adoption of thla Rosolutlon Is expresaly predicated upon appllcant's c~mpliance wlth
each and all ol the conditluns heroinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any pert ther9of, be
dectared Invalid or unan ~p 81s~ ofg~^tcomm ~~o , shellnbe deemod nul snd v lo atent ~urisdlction, then thls
fiesolutlun, anci any epp
TH~E FOREGOIN(3 RESOLUTION w~s adopted at the Plenning Commisslon meeting oi
July 27, 1992, ~ "
` ~ /
MAN, ANAHEIM I PLAN G C MISSION
AT7EST:
...P1~'~.Bn1G_
CNETARY, A IM CIlY PLANNING CUMMISSlON
STATE OF CAUFORNIA )
COUNTY OP ORANGE ) s~v
CITf AF ANAH~IM )
I, Janet L. Jensen, Secretary of the Anaheim Ctty Planning Commiasion, do hereby cenffy
Commission held on July 27, 9J2, bygt e toi o ng~voe of the membors thereoAnahelm Ciry Planning
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: pERAZA,gZEMEL~ H~~YEH, HENNIN(3ER,
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ;
AB8ENT: COMMISSIONERS: MESSE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have horeunto set my hsiind this ~ d~y of ;
. 14)92. I
, CRETARY, ANg~~C~ I~Tf P~IAN~I PII G GOMMISSION
.3_ PC92-91