Ordinance No. 599 - Restricting Hotels and MotelsORDINANCE NO. X99
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ROSEMEAD EXTENDING ORDINANCE NO. 595, AN
INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO THE
PROVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858,
RESTRICTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF HOTELS AND
MOTELS IN THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD AND DIRECTING
THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO INITIATE A STUDY
WITH RESPECT TO DEVELOPING APPROPRIATE ZONING
REGULATIONS GOVERNING SUCH USES.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. While this ordinance remains in effect, no
building permits, business licenses, certificates of occu-
pancy, conditional use permits or other permits authorizing
the establishment of hotels or motels on premises within the
City of Rosemead shall be issued.
Section 2. While this ordinance is in effect, no per-
son, firm partnership, corporation, company or organization
of any kind shall commence or construct, or attempt to
commence or construct, any hotel or motel, or expansion
thereof, in the City of Rosemead. This ordinance shall not
apply to any business establishment lawfully engaged in a
hotel or motel operation as of January 27, 1987.
Section 3. For purposes of this ordinance, "hotel"
and "motel" shall have the same meaning as contained in the
Rosemead Zoning Code.
Section 4. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 65858
of the Government Code of the State of California, this is an
extension of an urgency interim zoning ordinance. This ordi-
nance shall take effect immediately and shall expire January
27, 1988 unless extended by the City Council after notice and
public hearing. The facts constituting the current and imme-
diate threat to the public welfare necessitating an urgency
ordinance are as follows:
The City Council finds and determines that
the moratorium extended by this ordinance is
enacted to protect and preserve the public
health, safety and welfare of the local busi-
ness community and residents of the community
pending completion of the Planning Commission
review of this subject. The Council has been
aware of problems with motels and hotels on
major commercial thoroughfares which have a
detrimental impact on surrounding properties
• •
with a potential of increasing this negative
impact in the future. Additionally, the City
has reviewed recent submittals for new motel
developments which exhibit questionable
aesthetic design and for which, with prolif-
eration of motel and hotel development, the
long-term economic viability is questionable.
Accordingly, there is a current and immediate
threat to the public welfare, and the approval
of subdivisions, rezonings, land use permits,
variances, building permits and business
licenses for such uses would result in a threat
to the public welfare.
Section 5. The City Council may grant relief from the
provisions of this moratorium ordinance upon recommendation
of the Planning Commission, subject to a finding of the
following:
1. The strict application of the provi-
sions of the moratorium to a particular project
would result in practical difficulties or un-
necessary hardships inconsistent with the
general purpose and intent of the moratorium;
• 2. That there are exceptional circum-
stances or conditions applicable to the deve-
lopment that do not apply generally to the
other projects covered by this moratorium;
and
3. That the granting of relief would
not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare as defined above.
Section 6. If any provision of this ordinance is held
to be unconstitutional, it is the intent of the City Council
that such portion of this ordinance be severable from the
remainder and that the remainder be given full force and
effect.
Section 7. Violation of this ordinance is a misdemea-
nor and punishable by a fine of not more than one thousand
dollars ($1,000) or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a
period of not more than six (6) months or by both such fine
and imprisonment. Each day during any portion of which any
violation of any provision of this ordinance is committed,
continued or permitted, constitutes a separate offense.
2
•
Section 8. The City Clerk shall certify to the
adoptio~tTFTs ordinance.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 10th day of March
1987.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK'
C]
•
3