PC 82-94~
RESOLUTI0~1 rIO, PCa2-94
A R[SOLUTIO~J OF Tfl[ A~lAHEIM CITY PLAr~tdlrJG COM~4ISSIOP!
TH.qT PETITIOFI FOR COWDITIOPI/1L US[ PER~11T IdO. 233? f3C fRAhITEn
blHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified
Pet i t ion for Cond i t iona 1 Use Permi t f rom NORTIi A~1ER I CA?! I h!~/ESTMENTS, 194~ PJorth
Tustin, Suite 100, Orange, California, 926G5, owner, and TOM11Y A. RA71, 21473 La
Capilla, flission Viejo, California }2G91, agent, of certain real property
situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
described as:
PARCELS 1 TO 4 IPaCLUSIVE, AS PER MAP FILE~ IIJ ROQI; 11~$~ p~r,ES ~j
AtlD 9 OF PARCEL M/1PS, I~I TFiE OFFICE OF THE COUtlTY RECDRDER OF SAID
COUIlTY.
lJfiEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearl~g at the City
Nall in the City of Anaheim on May 17, 1482, at 1;3n p,m,, notice ef said pub)ic
hearing liaving been duly given as required by iat•~ and in accordance with the
provistons of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and constder
evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and
make findings and recommendatfons tn connection therewith; and
IJHEREAS, said Commisston, after due inspection, investigation and study made
by itself and in its behalf, and after due cons(deration of all evidence and reoorts
offered at said hearing, does find and determtne the folia+ring facts:
1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use
permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 13.~F4.050.~10 to ~oit:to permit
on-sale alcoholic beverages in a proposed restaurant.
2. That the prooosed use wtll not adversely affect the ad.j~ining land uses
and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located.
3. That the stze and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to
allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the
particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare of the Citizens
of the City of Anaheim.
!t. That the granting of the Conditional Use Permit under the condtttons
imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general
Welfare of thc Citizens of the City of Anaheim.
5. That the traffic generated by the prooosed use wili not tm~ose an undue
burdeR upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in
the ar~a.
6. That no one indicated their presence at sai~i public hearing in
opposition; and that no correspondence was received in oppositio~ to the subJect
petition.
PC82-94
Et~UiRO~lME;JTAL 111PACT FIPIDIF~G: That the ,4naheim City Planning Commission has
reviewed the proposal to permit on-sale alcoliolic heverages in a proposed restaurant
on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 3.1 acres
located at the southa~est corner of [3a11 Road and Gi)bert Street, 242~~-L ~ K West Ball
Road; and does hereby approve the tJe9ative Declaration from the rec~uirement to
prepare an environmental impact report on the basis t~iat there would be no
significant individual or cumulative adverse envfronmental irnpact due to the approval
of this P~egative Oeclaration since the Anaheim General Pian designates the sub.ject
property for general commercial land uses commensurate with the prooosal; that no
sensitive environmental impacts are involved in the proposal; that the Initial Study
submitted by the petitioner indicates no significant individual or cum~lative
adverse environmental impacts; and that tlie F~e9ative ~Jeclaration substantiating the
foregoing findings is on file in the City of Anaheim Planning Department.
tJOIJ, TIiEREFORE, BE !T RCSOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commtssion
does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the fol)owing
conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequislte to the proposed use
of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and genera] welfare of the
~itizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That the oam er(s) of subject property shall submit a letter requesting
termination of Conditional Use Permit tJo. 2293 to the Planning Department.
2. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with
plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibtt
IJos. 1 and 2.
3. That Condition No. 1, above-mentioned, shall be comolied with prior to the
commencement oT the activity authorized under thls resolution, or prior to
the time that the building permit is issued, or within a oeriod of one year
from date hereof, whichever occurs first, or such further time as the
Planning Commission may grant.
4. That Condition No. 2, above mentioned, shall be comolied with prior to final
building and zoning inspections.
[3E IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the .4naheim City Planning Commission does hereby
find and determine that the adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon
aPplicant's compliance tiaith each and all of the condittons hereinabove set forth.
Should any condttion or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the
final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any
aPprovals herein contained, shall he deemed null and void.
TtlE FOREGQItJG RESOLUTI0IJ is signed and approved by me thts 17th day of May,
1g82.
~~ -
fl MA PRO TEMPORE
ATTEST: A~J.4HEIM CITY PLAa~NIFlr CO ISSION
~ .~° ~~~,:
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-2 PC82-94
STATE OF CAL I FORt•I I A )
COUtdTY OF ORAiJfE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
i, Edith L. Harris, Secretary of the Anaheim Citv Planning Commission, do
hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of
the Nnaheim City P)anning Commission held on May 17, 1932, at 1:3~ p.m., by the
following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMt11SSI0t~lERS: DARtJES, DOUAS, FP,Y, HERBST, KI~Jr,, ~qr, BURPJEY
N9ES: COMMISSIOPJERS: tJOtJE
A(iSEVT: COM611SSIONERS: BUSHORE
I!d WITNESS WfIEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 17th day cf t4ay, i9P2.
- ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~
StCRETARY, ANANE I M C I TY PL.417~1 I W~ CQMM I SS I ~N
-3- Pc82-94
~.:,.