PC 71-99
~ , 1, _
t ,
. . , .,,. . _, .. , . ._, ,
.
~ ~.
~~.
,
;
RESOLUTION N0. PC71-99
A RESOLUTION OF THE CI'x'Y PLANNING COMMISSION OF TF1E CITY 0~ ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION F'OR VARIpNCE N0. 2259 BE DENIED
~ WHER~AS, the City Plannin~ Commia~lan oE the City of Aneholm did receive a veriEled Petition for Vecience from
~, PHOGNIX CLUB, INCORPOItATE~, 1566 Douglas Road, Anaheim. California 92806, Ownera of certain
~ real property aituated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, dsscribed
as that portion of. Lot 4 of the Travis Tract, as ahown on a map recorded in book 5, page 120
~.~~ot Miscel.laneous Records oE Los Angelea County. ~:.ginning at a point on the center line of
'.~ Uouglasa SCre~t, as described in a deed to the County of Orange, recorded October 7, 1926, in
,!y:book 682, page 109 oi Deeds, distant North 0~ OG' 30" Weat 743.~+7 feet from the interaection
;~ of said center line with the center line of KaCella Avenue, thence South 89° 32' 10" EasL
i~ 544.96 feet to the Gasterly line of said Lot 4; thence North 0° 14' 10" L'+~st alons said
i~ Gasterly line 337.35 feet to the Northeasterly corner of said Lot 4; thence North 89° 30' 10"
R,~ West along the Northerly line of said L'ot 4, a diatance of 546.80 feet to said center line of
Douglass Street; thence Soutli 0° 04' 30" Gast along said center line 337.69 feet to tY+e point
~ of beginning. EXCEPTING therefrom l•he T3asterly 263.b~ feet.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commiasion did hold a public headng at the City Hall in the City of Aneheim on
June 2, 1971, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of said public heacing having been duly ~,iven es required by
lew end in accordance with the provisions of the An~hetm Municipal Code, Chepter 18.68, to hear and consider evidence for
end ega~inst said proposed variencr and to investignte end meke findings and recommendetions in connection therewlth;
and
WHEREAS, eatd Commission, aEter due inspection, investigetion, end study mede by itaelf and in its behalf,
and aEter due consideration of all evidence and reporte otfered at seid hearing, does find snd determine the follawing
facts:
1. Thet the petitioner requests a vsriance from the following section of the Anahe~m Municipal Code:
a. SLCTI~)iJ 18.16,020 - Perml.tted uses in the R-A Gone, (To permit
a dance hall and on-sale on-sale liquor sales
to the public in an existing private club).
2. That while the petitioner indicated that the front portion of the buildin3 where the
bar is located, would be l•echnically open to the public, while the dance hall section of the
building would be open only to club members, the granting of s~ibject petition, even with
these restrictions, would place a rather difficult burden upon the City in terms of enforcing
said restrictions.
3. That the use proposed would be a public dance hall that could be administered without
various types of controls and restrictions which are normally inherent with an operation of
this type,
4. That the petitioner proposes this Lo be a public restaurant, however, thete is
apprehension on tne parr of the Planning Commissian thr~t the kitchen facilities would not
meet the requirements set forth in the rlnaheim Municipal Code, nor that the bar would be a
separate entity from the restaurant as has been required in the past by the Planning Conunission
5. That the petitioner has not demonstrated that the requested variance is necessary for
the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property
in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to L•he property in question.
n. That there are no exceptiona~ or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable
to the property i.nvolved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally
to the property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone.
7. That Four persons representing 15 persons (residents of the mobile home park) were
present in the Council Chamber in opposition, and that a letter From an adjoining property
was also received in opposition.
~ !
~, Vl'D -1-
wa
, ~
` M
~
I ~~
NOW, TNEREFORE, BE IT RESQLVED thet the Anaheim City Planning Co~nmiasion does h
Petition for Varionce on the besig of the aEorementioned findings.
;;~ THF FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and epproved by me th9s lOth day of June, 1971.
' ':f,
;~
~ c~_ --~ . ~ ~ • ~~
-~ ,~iti .. '~. ~'"
~ ~r. ; .. ••. ,~ ~ . _ . ~.
i~ -''CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
r~ ,
~ ~ ~~r ,-z_ ~~/~.,. G:~.
~ SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
.~
; } STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
~ : COUNTY OF ORAYVGE ) ss, •
; '. CITY OF ANAHEIM )
~ I, Ann Krebs, Secretery of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby cettify that the fore-
going res~lution was passed and adopted at a meeting uf the City Plenning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on
June 2, 1971, et 2:00 o'clock P,M., by the follow'sng vote p{ the members thereof:
AYES: ~~MMISSIUNERS: Allred, Farano, Ga~ier, Herbst, Kaywood, Rowland.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None .
ABSENf;• COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Seymour.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this lOth day of June, 1971.
~ ;^
~~ 1 e. ~ [ .. ` ;~'Zr_ ~~•-~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CaMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 99
_. ` V2-D -2-
6 ~
~
~
- -~..-a ..
~ ~ ~ .
. ,r