2000-019RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-19
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING
RESOLUTION NO. 235, SERIES 1959-60,
ADOPTED IN CONNECTION WITH VARIANCE
NO. 1229, AS AMENDED, AND REINSTATING
AND APPROVING THE USE FOR A PERIOD
OF ONE YEAR ONLY, TO EXPIRE FEBRUARY
1, 2001.
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, 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; and
WHEREAS, 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; and
WHEREAS, the property is developed with a 70-unit motel
(Covered Wagon Motel) in the CL (Commercial, Limited) zone; that
the Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element designates the property
for General Commercial land uses; and that the property is
located within the West Anaheim Commercial Corridors
Redevelopment Area and Conununity Planning Area No. 1; and
WHEREAS, the petitioner has requested reinstatement of
this variance, pursuant to Section 18.03.093 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code, and amendment of Condition No. 13 which permits
the use until November 17, 1999, in order to retain the existing
70-unit motel; and
WHEREAS, on November 12, 1999, staff inspected the
property to determine the current condition of the facility and
to determine compliance with the conditions of approval; that
the inspection revealed minor violations and notice of violation
letters were mailed to the property owners which allowed 30 days
for corrections; and that when re-inspected, all of the
violations had been corrected.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public
hearing on November 22, 1999, notice of said public hearing
having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with
the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to
hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed variance
and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in
connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection,
investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and
after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at
said hearing, adopted its Resolution No. PC99-202 amending
Resolution No. 235, Series 1959-60, in connection with Variance
No. 1229; 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 February 1, 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:
1. That the use, as reinstated for a period of one year,
and subject to the conditions contained herein, is properly one
for which a use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code.
2. That the use, as reinstated for a period of one year,
will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth
and development of the area in which it is located.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.
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
2
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:
1. The existing motel facility was approved as a motel use
not as an apartment house.
2. The existing motel facility was constructed in
accordance with the standards and building codes applicable to
motel facilities and not apartment houses.
3. 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-term" 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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) 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;
(c) accumulation of grease on ceilings and walls due to
cooking in unvented rooms thereby creating a fire hazard;
(d) 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
(e) lack of yards and recreational areas for children
which would be required for apartment houses;
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 Impact Report ("EIR") 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
4
amended, does hereby reinstate said Variance No. 1229 for a 70-
unit motel for a period of one (1) year until February 1, 2001;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Anaheim does hereby amend Condition Nos. 3, 11 and 13 of
said resolution, as amended, to read as follows:
"3. That guest rooms shall not be rented, let, or occupied
by any individual for periods of less than twelve (12)
consecutive hours, nor shall guest rooms be rented, let, or
occupied by any individual for more than thirty (30) days within
any ninety (90) day period excluding four (4) employee units.
Guests vacating the premises shall be required to remove all
personal belongings from the guest room.
11. 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,
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.
13. That this Variance shall terminate one (1) year from
the date of this resolution, on February 1, 2001."
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Anaheim does hereby add the following conditions of
approval:
"21. That hot plates shall not be permitted in the guest
rOOmS.
22. That within a period of sixty (60) days from the date
of this resolution, smoke alarms shall be hard-wired (rather than
battery operated) in the guest rooms, and shall thereafter be
maintained in good working order at all times.
23. That within a period of sixty (60) days from the date
of this resolution, the trash storage areas shall be refurbished
to comply with approved plans on file with the Maintenance
Department, Street and Sanitation Division."
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 1st day of February,
2000 ~A
·
HElM
MAY
ATTEST:
CI THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
34497.1
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-19 was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting provided by law, of the
Anaheim City Council held on the 1st day of February, 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
AND I FURTHER CERTIFY that the Mayor of the City of Anaheim signed said
No. 2000R-19 on the 1 st day of February, 2000.
Resolution
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of
Anaheim this I st day of February, 2000.
F ITY 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-19 was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the
City of Anaheim on February 1 st, 2000.
FF~'7~"
ANAHEIM