Loading...
RES-8106 Denying Conditional Use Permit No. 1961-92RESOLUTION NO. 8106 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TKE CITY OF ORANGE UPHOLDING THE RECOMMENDA- TION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TKE CITY OF ORANGE AND DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A SELF-SERVICE CAR WASH IN THE M- 2 ZONE UPON PROPERTY SITUATED AT TKE NORTHEAST CORNER OP BATAVIA STREET AND TAFT AVENUE.CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1961-92 APPLICANT: MANUEL RUBIO RECITALS:After report thereon by the Planning commission and after due public hearings as required by law, and after receiving a recommendation from the Planning commission, recommending, by Resolution No. PC-50-92, that Conditional Use Permit 1961-92 be denied to allow construction of a self-serve car wash in the M-2 zone upon property situated at the northeast corner of Batavia street and Taft Avenue, the city council considered Conditional Use Permit 1961-92 and determined that the recommendation of the Planning commission should be upheld and Conditional Use Permit 1961-92 be denied. Subject property is more particularly described on Exhibit " A".During the public hearing, the City council found the following facts:1. The applicant is proposing the construction of a self serve car wash in the M-2 (Industrial District) zone. Car washes are similar in character to automotive sales and service facilities,and therefore may be considered by Conditional Use Permit.2. The subject property is located in an industrial area surrounded by a mixture of existing commercial, office and industrial uses, and is currently used for growing strawberries.The proposed car wash consists of 7 covered wash bays with 8 open vacuum/drying stalls, and is to be open 24 hours a day. The facility is to be self served utilizing coin operated equipment.The facility will be unattended at most times. 3. At their regularly scheduled public meetings of April 8, June 17, and July 22, 1992, the Design Review Board reviewed the proposed project and has expressed concern as to whether or not a self serve car wash is an appropriate use for this corner site,since this is a prominent arterial street intersection. The DRB noted the quality of some of the recent developments in the vicinity, and that this project should be designed to be consistent with the contemporary architectural styles of low profile as possible, and that an abundance of landscaping should be provided for screening. The DRB also suggested that the vacuum/drying area should be left opened. 4. The DRB worked with the applicant to accomplish the following: A. height, keeping Reduced the mass of the building by lowering its overall and changing the design to a more contemporary style in with the surroundings. B. Shifted the driveway approach along Taft Avenue further east and reduced its width to 30 ft., thereby increasing the landscaping area. C. Deleted the canopy over the vacuum/drying area to allow for open stalls. 5. The DRB took action to recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission, subject to a final submittal of the building elevations and landscaping plans to the DRB, prior to issuance of building permits. All the improvements as suggested by the DRB have been incorporated in the revised plans submitted to the Planning Commission.) 6. At their regularly scheduled public hearing on August 17, 1992, the Planning Commission took action to deny the project for the following reason: 1. That based on the construction of recent new industrial developments in the surrounding area, the establishment of a self serve car wash would be under utilizing the full potential of the subject property. 7. The applicant is appealing the Planning commission's decision for denial for the following reasons: 1. There is a definite need in the community for the proposed use, and it will enhance the aesthetics of area in which it is located. 2. The subject property is relatively small in size, and since the adjacent properties are already fully developed, it is unlikely that this parcel can be consolidated to be further developed to its highest and best use at this time. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Orange that Conditional Use Permit 1961-92 be denied for the following reason:1. That based on the construction of recent new industrial developments in the surrounding area, the establishment of a Reso No. 8106 self serve car wash would be under utilizing the full potential of the subject property. ADOPTED this 10th day of November 1Jt tvd1:i 5Y (hw", /41/ ci y Clerk of t~ C~y of Orange ATTEST: 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 10th of November ,1992, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: MAYOR BEYER, COONTZ, SPURGEON STEINER, BARRERA NONE Ci~~~/~heR:~ SSH:dg 3-Reso No. 8106 WHEN RECORDED, PLEASE MAil THIS INSTRUMENT TO 85--276150 EXHIBIT RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTYCALIFOANlAManuel Rubio 1574 Batavia 114 Orange CA 92667 1 !>! PM JUl26 ' 85 Order NoEscro..., No I $, 500 / C6 r-.r:. a '>~ ; COu",EU~ Df~SPACE ABOVE FOR RECOROER'~ USE 0""1.-'0' loan No. Full Reconvevance t(g~1rELDORADOBANK, a California Corp. duly Appointed Trustee under tht- follOWing described deed of trust. TRUSTOR MANUEL L. RUBIO AND DORA M. RUBIO, husband and wife as joint tenants Pecmded March 29, 1984 . as InSlr No. 84- 130073 page of OffICialRecord!. In the office of the Recorder of ulid deed of trust describes the followmgpropert' t'.in book Orange County;PArcel 3 in the City of Orange, County of Orange, State of California, according to the Parcel Map filed in book 55, Page 38 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of Said County.Aka: Vacant lot, corner Taft and Batavia, O; anget"ldvlng oeen requested In wfltlng. by the holder of the obligation secured by said deed 01 trust, to reconvey the estate granted to trustee under said deed of trust. DOES HE RE BY RECONVE Y to the person or persons legally entitled thereto. Without warranty. all the estate, title, and mterest aCQUired by Uustet under said deed of tru~ t.O.ned Julv 23. 1985 Eld r ~o }l";9kJ a California ByriJ/'U' U 8y ~ y---.:--,-S.";: \\\1) L '"U-... Corp. SVP Charles Moore, VP AH O~ CAUFORI\;'.A COll"J1yor ORAN~ 0,.., 111TL ?~. lQRc; T ~ THArK~Rv ANn rHAR1FS l!lCL"J~RESlllENL * MOORF belOrr' me, the undersigned.. NOI.rv PUbliC m and lOr laid Slate, known to me to be the SF:NTOR VTC:F. personallv IIPPured PreslOtnl, and ilnown to me to be i (,; 1!"It' COrporationthat executed the wlthm tnltrumenl, known to me to be th,. persons who ('_('cvled the Wlln,!"l 1"'>~Hurr.{' nl 0" bf'h.M 01 tht co'porill ('~, mer!", named, .nd .cknowledged to me that such corporation e.eculed Ihe Wlthlf,! lr'lHrumentpursuantto ill by I.....! or Ii reSOlut.on ot Its boald 01 r: teton WITNESS m: : 7nd 1'. 011 ...1 / J /0 .;) S,gn.,"," ~ I J!.f.IYL (J ~tv'lor.\\ i1t Cb\",\.c.,fA)OFFICIAL SEAL MARll VN C BUTS NOTAt:l' 1' PUBLICa CAUFORNIA ORANGE COlIIfTY Ny tomm. IIphn SfP 16. 1988:m. IT ~ I)-<! Or Ptl"t.CI)a. _._This .rea fOf' official notlirial ieal)RESO, 81D6