The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About18-01 - PA-17-36 Denial, Animal Shelter - 642 Baker StreetRESOLUTION NO. 18-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PA -17-36 TO ALLOW AN ANIMAL SHELTER FOR DOGS AND CATS TO BE OPERATED BY THE ORANGE COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY (OCHS) AT 642 BAKER STREET THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, an application was filed by Ramy Eskander, representing Dr. Samir Botros, DVM, the property owner, requesting approval of the following: Planning Application PA -17-36: 1. Conditional Use Permit to allow an animal shelter for dogs and cats that will be operated by the Orange County Humane Society (OCHS). The shelter will be open to the public and receive and hold stray animals to be put up for adoption (no animals will be destroyed at this location). Outdoor walking and exercising of leashed animals is also proposed within the confines of the site, along with veterinary services for the animals brought to the facility (no veterinary services will be provided to the public). Hours of operation will be 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Saturday and Sunday. 2. Minor Conditional Use Permit to allow a reduction in the number of required on- site parking spaces based on unique operating characteristics (11 spaces required; 10 spaces proposed). WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing held by the Planning Commission on October 23, 2017 with all persons having the opportunity to speak for and against the proposal, and the project was approved by the Commission on a 5-0 vote. Resolution No. 18-01 Page 1 of 5 WHEREAS, reviews of the Planning Commission's approval of the project were filed on October 26, 2017, and October 27, 2017. WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing held by the City Council on December 5, 2017, with all persons having the opportunity to speak for and against the proposal. WHEREAS, the project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines, and the City environmental procedures, and CEQA does not apply to this project because it has been rejected and will not be carried out, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(5) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15270(a). BE IT RESOLVED that, based on the evidence in the record and the findings contained in Exhibit A, the City Council overturns the approval of the project by the Planning Commission and DENIES Conditional Use Permit PA -17-36 with respect to the use described above. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any section, division, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this resolution, or the documents in the record in support of this resolution, are for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of January, 2018. r/ 1 Sandra L: Genis, Mayor Resolution No. 18-01 Page 2 of 5 ATTEST: My& Brenda GreeH, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss CITY OF COSTA MESA ) F.A199001NADIFTIMC03101: MA 4Toma . PDu�Cityney I,BRENDA GREEN, City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 18-01 and was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa at a regular meeting held on the 2nd day of January, 2018, by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Foley, Stephens, Mansoor, Genis NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Righeimer ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of Costa Mesa this 3rd day of January, 2018. 'kP - Brenda GreenUCity Clerk Resolution No. 18-01 Page 3 of 5 EXHIBIT A FINDINGS (DENIAL) A. The information presented does not comply with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(g)(2) in that: Finding: The proposed project is not compatible with developments in the same general area and would be materially detrimental to other properties within the area. Facts in Support of Findings: The project site is located on the north side of Baker Street, west of Enterprise Street. The property contains a one-story, 3,700 -square -foot vacant building and an abutting surface parking lot which is enclosed with walls and a rolling vehicle gate. The property is bounded by industrial buildings to the north and east, multiple family residences (apartments) to the south (across Baker Street), and an Orange County Flood Control District Channel to the west. The property is zoned MG (General Industrial) and has a General Plan Land Use Designation of General Industrial. Evidence was presented during the hearing, through testimony provided by surrounding business owners, that the use would result in adverse noise impacts from surrounding uses, including automotive uses that produce loud noises that could be harmful to the animals at the facility, including, but not limited to, engine dynamometers, metal work, brake work, etc. Additionally, evidence was presented during the hearing that an abutting office use and nearby residential apartment units could be disrupted by the noise of the animals at the facility, specifically, barking dogs. The applicant was not able to provide evidence during the hearing that these noise impacts could be sufficiently mitigated. Finding: Granting approval of the project will be materially detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of the public or otherwise injurious to property or improvements within the immediate neighborhood. Facts in Support of Findings: The proposed use is located on Baker Street, a busy major street in the City of Costa Mesa. Evidence presented during the hearing indicated that the proposed use could result in traffic hazards from vehicles leaving and entering the facility. Additionally, evidence was presented that the on-site parking spaces proposed (11 spaces required; 10 spaces proposed) would not be sufficient for the proposed use as the majority of the parking spaces would be occupied by staff and animal control vehicles, resulting in potentially only 2 parking spaces being available to the general public, potentially creating adverse overflow parking impacts on nearby properties. Resolution No. 18-01 Page 4 of 5 Finding: Granting approval of the project will allow a use, density, or intensity which is not in accordance with the General plan designation. Facts in Support of Findings: Based on evidence presented during the hearing, the proposed use is not consistent with the following policies and objectives of the 2015-2035 General Plan. Objective LU -1 A: Establish and maintain a balance of land uses throughout the community to preserve the residential character of the City at a level no greater than can be supported by the infrastructure. Lack of Consistency. The proximity of the proposed use to nearby residential apartments, and the potential for adverse noise impacts from barking dogs, makes the proposed use not consistent with this General Plan objective. Policy LU -3.1: Protect existing stabilized residential neighborhoods, including mobile home parks (and manufactured housing parks), from the encroachment of incompatible or potentially disruptive land uses and/or activities. Lack of Consistency. As noted earlier, the proximity of the proposed use to nearby residential apartments, and the potential for adverse noise impacts from barking dogs, makes the proposed use not consistent with this General Plan objective. Objective LU -3A: Establish policies, standards, and procedures to minimize blighting influences, and maintain the integrity of stable neighborhoods. Lack of Consistency. The proposed use could create blighting influences on surrounding properties and uses, including adverse noise impacts and lack of available on-site parking. Therefore, the use is not consistent with this General Plan objective. B. The project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines, and the City's environmental procedures. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(5) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15270(a), CEQA does not apply to this project because it has been rejected and will not be carried out. C. The project is exempt from Chapter XII, Article 3, Transportation System Management, of Title 13 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code. Resolution No. 18-01 Page 5 of 5