Loading...
Resolution - 8263RESOLUTION NO. 8263 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT NO. 365 DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEREBY DENYING UNCLASSIFIED • USE PERMIT NO. 365 (Jack in the Box Restaurant) • WHEREAS, there were filed with the City of West Covina, verified applications on forms prescribed in Chapter 26, Article VI, of the West Covina Municipal Code, requesting approval of an Unclassified Use Permit relating to the construction and operation of a drive through restaurant on that certain property generally described as follows: A portion of lot in the Phillips Tract filed in Book 9, Page 3, of Miscellaneous Records, in the office of the Los Angeles County Recorder; and WHEREAS, hearing on said application was duly noticed and conducted by the Planning Commission on August 17, 1988, at which time the application was approved; and WHEREAS, the action of the Planning Commission was appealed in a timely manner by the applicant after proper legal notice to the September 26, 1988, City Council meeting for hearing and consideration, and that the applicant's appeal of the Plannning Commission decision raises the project in its entirety for City Council consideration; and WHEREAS, the action of the Planning Commission was also appealed in a timely manner by the senior citizens who reside in the Olive Tree Terrace Apartments adjacent to the proposed project, and that this appeal of the Planning Commission decision also raises the project in its entirety for City Council consideration; and WHEREAS, studies and investigation made by the City Council and in its behalf reveal the following facts: 1. The Planning Commission approved an unclassified use permit for a 62 seat, 2,301 square foot drive through restaurant at the above location. -in the Neighborhood -Commercial (N-C) Zone. 2. The development in which this use is located meets or exceeds all minimum requirements of the N-C Zone. 3. The applicant is appealing for relief from Condition No. 4k of the Planning Commission Resolution 8-88-3659 approving Unclassified Use Permit No. 365, which reads as follows: "k. Hours of operation shall be limited to between 6:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m., subject to periodic review by the Planning Commission. Should these f hours of operation prove to be an annoyance or nuisance to adjacent properties, the project shall be returned to the Planning Commission for further review." • 4. The application for Unclassified Use Permit No. 365 was filed in conjunction with an application for Variance No. 905. 5. Variance No. 905 was denied by the Planning Commission through Resolution No. 8-88-3660, and the Planning Commission decision for denial was also appealed to the City Council. Page 2 6. Appropriate findings for approval of an unlassified use permit are as follows: • a. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or community. • b. That such use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, • safety, peace or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. C. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and is so shaped as to accommodate said use, as well as, all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and any other features necessary to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood and make it compatible thereto. d. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and improvements to carry traffic generations typical of the proposed uses and that street patterns of such a nature exist as to guarantee that such generations will not be channeled through residential areas on local residential streets. e. That the granting of such unclassified use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City, any other adopted plan of the City or the adopted plan of any other governmental agency. 7 An initial study has disclosed that the proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment. A Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has been prepared for the proposed project pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of West Covina does resolve as follows: 1. On the basis of the evidence presented, both oral and documentary, the City Council makes the following findings for approval of an unclassified use permit: a. The proposed use at this particular location is not desirable in that a senior citizen apartment complex is adjacent to the site on two sides, to the north and to the west, and a majority of the residents object to the proposed drive -through restaurant. Considering the sensitivity and needs of the adjacent senior citizen complex, the subject site is an inappropriate location for a drive -through restaurant. b. The proposed use, under the circumstances of this particular case would be detrimental to the health, safety, peace and general welfare of persons residing . in the adjacent senior citizen complex. Noise from cars, customers and the intercom speakers would be extremely objectional, especially in the late hours of the night and early morning hours. Traffic generated by the use would create a hazard by impeding the use of the driveways of the senior citizen complex. Page 3 • C. The site for the proposed use is not adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use and make it compatible with the adjacent senior citizen complex. Noise of parking, the drive -through lane and intercom • speakers cannot be buffered or mitigated to the point of acceptability, when considering their proximity to senior citizen dwellings. • d. Although located at the intersection of Azusa and Puente Avenues, principal and minor arterials, the traffic generated by the use will impede the traffic entering and leaving the adjacent senior citizen apartment complex. e. Zoning regulations are implemental tools of the General Plan. Approval of a use that does not meet the standards or violates the findings as set down in the zoning regulations, will reduce the quality of the development and the surrounding environment, thereby adversely affecting the General Plan. THEREFORE, of the five findings necessary for approval of an unclassified use permit, none have been met. 2. That pursuant to all of the evidence presented, both oral and documentary, and further based on the findings above, the appeal of Unclassified Use Permit No. 365 is denied, and Unclassified Use Permit No. 365 is denied. 3. That the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution. ATTEST: 0 ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 26th day of September, 1988. City 61 Mayor Page 4 I, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of West Covina, California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 14th day of November, 1988. • AYES: Councilmembers: McFadden, Lewis, Bacon, Manners NOES: Councilmembers: Tarozzi • ABSENT: Councilmembers: None APPROVED AS TO FORM: • . City Attorhey • • city Cleyl