PC 67-258RESO~UTION NO.
PC67-256
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. ~~~ BE GRANTED
WHEREAS. the Ciry Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive a verified Petition for Conditional
Use Permit from WiLLIAM ,I„ h9ESSECAP,, 446 South Poplar Street9 Brea, California, Owner; SAMUcL
HUMPHREY, 5124 Deeboyar, Lakewoody Ca;iiornia 907i2, Agent of certain rea~ prope:ty situated
in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of Ca~:iforniay described a; Lot 3 of Tract tdo~
162y as per mao recorded in book 12; pag? 6 of Miscellaneous Maps, in the office of tne County
Recor7er o: sai.d County~ EXCEP?' the east 88~G0 feet thereo:.
; and
WHI;REAS, the City Planniog Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Hall in thr City of Anaheim on
Dacember a, '_967, at 2:W o'clock P.M., noGce of said public hearing having been duly given as required by
law end in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal code, Chapter 18.64, to hear and consider evidence
for and ageir.st said proposed conditionel use and ta investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection
therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation, and study made by itself and in its behai[, and
after due consideration of ell evidence and reperts oEfered at said hearing, does find and detecmine the follo wing Eacts:
1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized by this Codc=
~~.tions 18,40,.060,e) an~ i8,40,.060(gj to estabiish s•Nalk-up restaurant; and to oermit on-sale
_i:~uor in a proposed enciosed restaurant with the foiiowing waivers:
SECi ION 1R~40o070(2-a-5-a) - Aiinimum side vard setback (Minimu~.. o: 10 : eet rec,uired; :'one
proposed along the east proper~y lir,ee
SEGTIOIJ 18~40,070(3-a - Builoinq heioht limitations (26 foot setback required from
the east property line for tne oroposed ].3-foot hicn builoino:
Buiidino proposed to be deve?oped up to east property line)
2. Thet the pmposed use will not edversely affect the adjoining lend uses and the growth and development of
the area in which it is proposed to be located.
3, That the size and shape ot tfie site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the
proposed use in a manner not detrimmtal to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare of
the Citizens of the City of Anaheim.
4. Thet the granting of the Conditional Use Permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental
to the peace, health, sefety, and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Maheim.
5. That undas the authority of Code: Section 18~ti4.070, waiver of t:e required minimum
side yard setback to permit develepment on the pro~erty line is hereby granted because oi
the fact that the adjacent property to the east is zoned R-A.
5~ Tnat under the authority of Code: Section 18~64.070, wa:ver of the building neiaht
limitation to oermit a i3-foot high building without setback is hereby granted because of the
fact that tne adjacent property to the east is zoned R-A.
7. That the petitioner stipuiated to the submission of revised plans which will indicate
that the N:oposed bar •noui~ be compietely separated and enclosed,
* C1.G .1_
~
NOW, Tf9EREFORE, BE 17 RE50LVED th~t th~ Aaah~l~ City pl~e~i~~ Cos~IMip~ ~~ ~~ny~, ~gt ay~
Petition for Conditional Use P~rmit, upon the followln~ coadltlon~ ~Ueb ~n 6se~by towd to b~ ~ n~ces~~ry pe~r~wi~~~~
to the propoaed use ot tM a~bject property in eed~r to pee~~rve tA~ pfety ~nd ~en~t~l welf~re of the Cltisws et W
City oE An~heim: •
la That this conditional use permit is granted subject to the comp~etion of R.ec~assificatioc
No~ 67-68-32.
2~ That trash storag? areas shail be p:ovi~ed in accordance m~ith approved p:ar,s on fiie
in the office of the Directo~ of Pubiic Works~
3. That fire hydrants shaii be insta~ied as required ~nd ~etermined to be necessa_y by
the Chier' of the Fire Department~
4~ That any air-conditioning faci~ities proposed shaii be proper_y ~hielded irom vie~r.,
5~ That Condition tJos~ 2, 3, and 4, above mentioned, sha11 be complied wltt~ prior to
final building and zoning inspectionse
6~ 'fhat subject prooerty shali bP developed substantial~y in accordance with p~ans and
specifications on file•Nith the Citv oi Ananeim marked Exhibit '~los. i, 2, and 3; provided
however, that tne development pians for the restaurant sh211 ircorporate s=oaration o.` the
proposed bar from the dining area, said oians to be submitt~d to the Planning Commission for
approval prior to issuan_e of a bu~ldina oermit.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is si~~d ~ed ~ppioved by me this ~~h da) o; ;' .,,., _ ,96~.
~ /
i ~
1 ~/,~r/ / c. ~
~HAIRf1AN ANAHEIIM CITY PLAN ING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~j ~;
~-- ~.
/ ~~ ~'L ~ C f.<<,/
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CpYMiS90N
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
rOUNTY OF ORANGE ) Bi,
CITY OF ANANEDN )
1, Ann Krebs, Seeret~ry ot ths City~Plae~fs~ Co~al~~io~ e[ tha City of An~M~ia, do h~reyy certify Uat
the foregoine resolution wu passed a~d ~dopt~d rt ~~Mti~~ of tr~ City P1~enin~ Cooioiuim of the City of Anehai~,
held on December q, ,~F~ ~ 2;pp o'cloct P.Y., by t}~~ followin~ vote o( th~ m~bere tl~~rooL•
AYES: COINSIISSIONERS: Farano, Gaue:, Herbst, Munga;;, C~mp,
NOES: COYIQ390NElt3: :Jone.
ABSENT: C0~1!lISSIONERS: 4 i i r e~ 9 ~~ o~N i an d ~
IN Y~i'T'iVESS IINEREOM', I h~w 6a~eueto aet siy h~d Nis ,4~h day of De~ember, 1967.
~~
,
~ i RESOLU770N N(a %58
~ _
~ C3G
.~
~ ~x
'i
~~
C'
! ~ _.. ~
. ~
t ~,
-~~~J2 ~2 ~ /!l~~-~~.%
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CODUMISSION
'2.
~
C