RES-9229 Upholding Appeal Nos. 468-A and 468-BRESOLUTION NO. 9229
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ORANGE UPHOLDING APPEALS 468-A AND
468-B AND DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
2298-99 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION 1606-99 WHICH WOULD ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A PARKING STRUCTURE AND A
SECOND STORY ADDITION
TO ORANGE HILL RESTAURANT.Appeal
Nos. 468-A and
468-B Conditional Use
Permit 2298-99 Mitigated
Negative
Declaration 1606-99 Applicant: Specialty Restaurants Corporation RECITALS:WHEREAS, on January 25, 2000, the City Council
of the City of Orange held a public hearing as required by law to consider two
appeals to the Planning Commission's approval of Conditional Use Permit
2298-99 and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1606-99; and WHEREAS, the proposed
project was to construct a one-story parking structure over the existing parking
facility and a 3,070 square-foot second story restaurant addition; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is commonly known
as Orange Hill Restaurant and located at 6410 E. Chapman Avenue; and WHEREAS,
Appeal Nos. 468-A and 468-B were timely filed by the appellants; and WHEREAS,
Orange Hill Restaurant is located on a prominent hill
in the City of Orange;WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act and
Mitigated Negative Declaration 1606-99 require that the proposed development
include mitigation measures that will reduce potential negative impacts to a level
of insignificance; and WHEREAS, prior to approving the proposed development the City Council
must find that the development will have no potential significant impacts on
the environment; and WHEREAS, Orange Municipal Code Section 17.10.
030 provides for the following criteria in reviewing an application for a conditional use
permit:1) A conditional use permit should be granted
2) A conditional use permit should not be granted if it will cause deterioration of
bordering land uses or create special problems for the area in which the site is
located.
3) A conditional use permit must be considered in relationship to its effect on the
community or neighborhood plans for the area in which the site is located.
4) A conditional use permit, if granted, should be made subject to those
conditions necessary to preserve the general welfare, not the individual welfare of
any particular applicant.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VE,D by the City Council of the City of OrangethatthesubstantialevidencepresentedleadstothedecisionthatAppealNos. 468-A and
468-B should be upheld and that Conditional Use Permit 2298-99 andMitigatedNegativeDeclarationNo. 1606-99 are denied. Such denial is based
on the following reasons:A. The prolect will cause a deterioration of bordering land
use or create special problems for the area in which the site
is located in that:1. The restaurant site is prominent in the City and
is surrounded by residential development and agricultural open space. Many homes in the adjoining hillsides
have a view of the restaurant and the proposed second story to the restaurant andparkingstructurewillbevisiblefromthesehomes, impairing the
views of such homes.2. The project will require additional lighting, especially
for the parking structure,which will cause additional light and glare which will impactnighttime
views of neighboring homes.3. The project will require the destruction of additional coastalsagescrubwhichisthenaturalhabitatforseveralandendangeredspeciesandwhichwill
degrade the
views from neighboring homes.4. The presence of the restaurant has resulted in complaints
of noise from outside music systems, drinking parties, trash being discarded onto
the adjoining wildlife area,depositing of trash dumpsters in locations where they block the fire accessroad, improper use of the fire access road for additional restaurant parking, the building
of structures without first obtaining the proper permits, excessive removal of natural habitat along the
fire access road and on one occasion, the unauthorized grading of natural habitat at the base of thehilltocreatespaceforadditionalparking. With this past record, expansion of
the restaurant
could exacerbate existing problems.5. The site currently presents fire access challenges andalongwithrecentinstancesinwhichrestaurantpersonnelhaveblockedthefireaccessroadbyparkingcarsonitorbyplacingtrashdumpstersonit, to expand the capacity for even more cars andpeopleonthehilltopsitecreates
additional fire safety
issues.
Reso.
B. The project has the potential to have a significant adverse effect on the
environment.
For the reasons noted in A.1 - A.4 above, the City Council finds the project could have a signi.
ficant adverse effect on the environment.C.
The project will have a negative effect on the surrounding residential community.For
the reasons noted in A.1 - A.4 above, the City Council finds the project could have a significant adverse
effect on the neighboring homes.ADOPTED the
22nd day of February 2000.L/'Joanne
Coontz,
Mayor, Ci V 7
ATTEST:
l1
I
hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of
the City of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the 22nd day of February , 2000,
by the following vote:AYES:NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
COUNCIL
MEMBERS:
MURPHY, SLATER, COONTZ, SPURGEON, ALVAREZ COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NONE COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NONE COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NONE c#~Cassandra
J.
Cathc 3 Reso.
No.
9229 DAD:ajj