Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010 043 CC RESO2010 043 CC RESOHÄ—@¸— ¹DÍ«RESOLUTION 2010-043 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO REVOKE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CP-659 THAT ALLOWED A STAFF RECYCLING FACILITY IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GROCERY MARKET IN THE C-2 COMMERCIAL ZONE LOCATION: 14103 RAMONA BLVD.; CASE NO.: CP-659) WHEREAS, Planning Commission Resolution PC 02-22 was adopted on October 23, 2002 which allowed for a staffed recycling facility in conjunction with a grocery market in the C-2 General Commercial Zone; and WHEREAS, on May 6, 2010, the City of Baldwin Park City") notified the Property Owner K.V. Mart) and the Business Owner Shahryar Shawn" Hashemi) of its intent to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. CP-659 the CUP"), which allowed a manned recycling facility in conjunction with a grocery market in the C-2 Commercial Zone on property located at 14103 Ramona Boulevard; and WHEREAS, notice of the time, date and place of the public hearing on the revocation of CUP No. CP-659 was duly posted in the time, form, and manner as required by law; and WHEREAS, CP-659 was brought before the Planning Commission for potential revocation on May 26, 2010; and WHEREAS, Planning Staff asked that the Planning Commission to continue the public hearing on CP-659 to June 30, 2010 so that staff would have additional time to work with the applicant on the possibility of modifying the conditional use permit as opposed to the revoking CP-659; and WHEREAS, on June 30, 2010 the Planning Commission voted to continue CP- 659 to July 28, 2010 to allow for additional time for contact between the business owner and staff. WHEREAS, on July 28, 2010 the Planning Commission of the City of Baldwin Park conducted a public hearing on the revocation of CUP No. CP-659, issued on October 23, 2002, which allowed a manned recycling facility in conjunction with a grocery market in the C2 Commercial Zone on property located at 14103 Ramona Boulevard; and WHEREAS, at the public hearing, the Planning Commission received and considered documentary evidence, copies of which had been provided to the Property Owner and Business Owner prior to the hearing; and BIB] 40564-U01 2010-U02 043-U02 CC-U02 RESO-U02 LI3-U03 FO8417-U03 FO128036-U03 DO132209-U03 C6-U03 RESO-U03 1/20/2011-U04 ROBIN-U04 2010 043 CC RESOHÄ—@¸— ¹DÍ«Resolution 2010-043 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at their July 28, 2010 meeting after a public hearing voted 4-0 to revoke CUP No. CP-659; and WHEREAS, on August 17, 2010 the Business Owner Shahryar Shawn" Hashemi) submitted a timely appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to the Planning Division; and WHEREAS, this project has been Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act CEQA). THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Based upon the evidence presented at the public hearing of October 6, 2010, and the recitals set forth above, each of which is incorporated herein by reference, the City Council of the City of Baldwin Park does hereby find, determine, and declare as follows: a) On October 22, 2002, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution PC 02-22 subject to several conditions of approval. b) On or about January 2010, the City began receiving complaints regarding the subject business. The complaints involve 1) continuous graffiti 2) transients loitering in the area, 3) storage of the recycling bins outside of the approved area, 4) illegal signage, 5) an illegally erected canopy, and 6) sanitation issues. c) On January 14, 2010, January 19, 2010, February 3, 3010, March 24, 2010, April 23, 2010, April 28, 2010, May 4, 2010, May 5, 2010, May 11, 2010, May 14, 2010, photos of the subject property were taken clearly illustrating numerous violations of the City ordinances and the conditions of approval for CP-659. d) On January 20, 2010, the City issued correspondence to the Business Owner informing him that the Business was not operating in accordance with the conditions of approval of CP-659. The Business Owner was reminded of all of the conditions of approval, which were attached to the correspondence. The City indicated that it would continue to monitor the operation and use of the Business at the Subject Property. e) On March 23, 2010, the City issued correspondence to the Business Owner, to the fact that a recycling storage container continued to be placed in an area outside of the approved boundary, in violation of CP-659 condition of approval a) stating that That the property shall be developed and maintained in substantial accordance with Exhibit BIB] 40564-U01 2010-U02 043-U02 CC-U02 RESO-U02 LI3-U03 FO8417-U03 FO128036-U03 DO132209-U03 C6-U03 RESO-U03 1/20/2011-U04 ROBIN-U04 2010 043 CC RESOHÄ—@¸— ¹DÍ«Resolution 2010-043 Page 3 A", dated October 23, 2002." Exhibit A was a site plan which indicated that the recycling storage containers were to be stored inside a specific, enclosed area on the Subject Property. f) On March 24, 2010, the City issued an Administrative Citation to the Business and identified continued violations at the Subject Property. The Administrative Citation noted that the Subject Property maintained junk, trash or salvageable materials and was also operating in violation of its conditional use permit. g) On April 23, 2010, the City issued a second Administrative Citation to the Business identifying continued violations at the Subject Property. Specifically, the Administrative Citation noted that the Business was not operating in accordance with its conditional use permit, referring specifically to the recycling storage containers that were stored outside the approved area. In addition, signs had been posted without the necessary permits in violation of the City's sign ordinance. h) On June 7, 2010, Salvador Lopez, Associate Planner and Amy Harbin, City Planner met with the Business Owner. The goal of the meeting was to provide the Business Owner with a list of potential conditions of approval which would assist in mitigating the on-going nuisances associated with the business. Staff wanted to provide the Business Owner with an opportunity to amend the conditions of approval to CP-659 rather than revoking the conditional use permit altogether. i) Subsequent to the June 7, 2010 meeting, Planning Staff made numerous telephone calls and mailed several correspondences to the Business Owner asking for a response to the proposed modification to the conditions of approval. To date, no response has been received. The Business is still operating in violation of City ordinances and conditions of approval to CP-659. j) On July 28, 2010, the Planning Commission met and after a noticed public hearing found based upon the evidence presented that the Applicant continues to operate the Business in violation of City Ordinances and conditions of approval to CP-659 and as such voted to revoke the CUP. SECTION 2. Based on the evidence presented at the hearing on October 6, 2010, the findings set forth in Section 1, above, the City Council does hereby find, determine, and declare as follows: a) The Business Owner failed to comply with the conditions of approval set forth in Resolution 02-22 related to CP-659 in that the recycling collection center use was operated in violation of Condition of Approval a) and b) as follows: BIB] 40564-U01 2010-U02 043-U02 CC-U02 RESO-U02 LI3-U03 FO8417-U03 FO128036-U03 DO132209-U03 C6-U03 RESO-U03 1/20/2011-U04 ROBIN-U04 2010 043 CC RESOHÄ—@¸— ¹DÍ«Resolution 2010-043 Page 4 i) The Business Owner failed to comply with Conditional of Approval a) of Resolution 02-22 which requires that the property be developed and maintained in substantial accordance with Exhibit Ato Resolution 02-22. Exhibit A" requires the Business Owner to store and maintain the recycling containers in the enclosed area. As observed during multiple site visits conducted on January 14, 2010, January 19, 2010, February 3, 3010, March 24, 2010, April 23, 2010, April 28, 2010, May 4, 2010, May 5, 2010, May 11, 2010, May 14, 2010, the Business was not keeping its recycling storage containers within the enclosed area as illustrated in the Exhibit A to CP-659. ii) The Business Owner failed to comply with Condition of Approval b) which requires that the use shall be operated and the subject property maintained in a neat and orderly manner, the parking and landscaping areas shall be maintained free of litter." As observed during a site visit conducted on January 14, 2010, January 19, 2010, February 3, 3010, March 24, 2010, April 23, 2010, April 28, 2010, May 4, 2010, May 5, 2010, May 11, 2010, May 14, 2010, there was debris on and adjacent to the recycling collection facility, such as shopping carts, trash left or stored on the Subject Property by transients, plastic bags that previously held recyclables, and miscellaneous trash and debris. b) Specific continuous problems with compliance CP-659 conditions of approval exist and the use is being exercised in a manner detrimental to public health, safety, welfare, and constitutes a nuisance as specified in correspondences dated January 20, 2010, March 23, 2010, March 24, 2010, April 23, 2010 and in a meeting held on June 7, 2010 and documented in the Staff Report dated October 6, 2010, and as follows: i) During the period of January 2002 to present, the Baldwin Park Police Department has received thousands of calls for service to the Subject Property and the immediately area, many of which are related to robbery, burglary, drug use, public urination, graffiti, transients, and panhandling. ii) The CUP has been so exercised as to be detrimental to the public health, or welfare, in that numerous responses required of the Police Department generated by the business adversely affects the ability of public safety personnel to be responsive to other calls for service within the City of Baldwin Park. iii) The Business Owner failed to comply with Conditional of Approval a) of Resolution 02-22 which requires that the property be developed and maintained in substantial accordance with Exhibit Ato Resolution 02-22. Exhibit A" requires the Business Owner to store and maintain the recycling containers in the enclosed area. As observed during multiple site visits conducted on January 14, 2010, BIB] 40564-U01 2010-U02 043-U02 CC-U02 RESO-U02 LI3-U03 FO8417-U03 FO128036-U03 DO132209-U03 C6-U03 RESO-U03 1/20/2011-U04 ROBIN-U04 2010 043 CC RESOHÄ—@¸— ¹DÍ«Resolution 2010-043 Page 5 January 19, 2010, February 3, 3010, March 24, 2010, April 23, 2010, April 28, 2010, May 4, 2010, May 5, 2010, May 11, 2010, May 14, 2010, the Business was not keeping its recycling storage containers within the enclosed area as illustrated in the Exhibit A to CP-659. iv) The Business Owner failed to comply with Condition of Approval b) which requires that the use shall be operated and the subject property maintained in a neat and orderly manner, the parking and landscaping areas shall be maintained free of litter." As observed during a site visit conducted on January 14, 2010, January 19, 2010, February 3, 3010, March 24, 2010, April 23, 2010, April 28, 2010, May 4, 2010, May 5, 2010, May 11, 2010, May 14, 2010, there was debris on and adjacent to the recycling collection facility, such as such as shopping carts, trash left or stored on the Subject Property by transients, plastic bags that previously held recyclables, and miscellaneous trash and debris. v) On May 24, 2010, City staff observed an employee of the Business washing the area with a water hose and sweeps the water towards the public right-of-way. vi) The CUP has been so exercised as to be detrimental to the public health, or welfare, and so as to constitute a nuisance in that the business owner of the use has been unable or unwilling to control the patrons of the business. SECTION 3. Based upon the findings set forth in Sections 1 and 2 above, the City Council hereby finds that the grounds for upholding the revocation of the conditional use permit established by the Baldwin Park Municipal Code Section 153.645 have been met and that Conditional Use Permit No. CP-659 shall therefore be and hereby is revoked. The City Council further finds that each finding set forth in Section 2 above is alone sufficient to revoke the conditional use permit, and that it would have determined to revoke the conditional use permit based upon such finding along regardless of the existence of any other finding. SECTION 4. That the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and forward a copy hereof to the Secretary of the Planning Commission and the Property Owner and Business Owner. SECTION 5. Notice is hereby given that the time for initiating proceedings for judicial review of the decision to revoke the conditional use permit is governed by Section 1094.8 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which provides that such proceedings must be initiated within ninety 90) days of mailing of the decision, including a copy of the affidavit or certificate of mailing. BIB] 40564-U01 2010-U02 043-U02 CC-U02 RESO-U02 LI3-U03 FO8417-U03 FO128036-U03 DO132209-U03 C6-U03 RESO-U03 1/20/2011-U04 ROBIN-U04 2010 043 CC RESOHÄ—@¸— ¹DÍ«Resolution 2010-043 Page 6 PASSED AND APPROVED this 6th day of October 2010. ATTEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ss. CITY OF BALDWIN PARK I, LAURA M. NIETO, DEPUTY CITY CLERK do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2010-043 was duly and regularly approved and adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 6th day of October 2010 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Monica Garcia, Susan Rubio, Mayor Pro Tem Ricardo Pacheco and Mayor Manuel Lozano NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Marlen Garcia NONE AURA M. NIETO, CMC EPUTY CITY CLERK BIB] 40564-U01 2010-U02 043-U02 CC-U02 RESO-U02 LI3-U03 FO8417-U03 FO128036-U03 DO132209-U03 C6-U03 RESO-U03 1/20/2011-U04 ROBIN-U04