Loading...
PC 72-328RESOLUTION J~ PC72-328 ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OFl 60 CITY OF ANAHEIM THA'T PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BE DENIED WHEREAS, the City Plenning Commission of the City of Anahelm did receive e vetified Petitlon for Con- ~'itionalUse Permitfrom DAVID DOERING, 1203 Weat Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, California 92801, Owner of certafn real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, Sta~P of California described as Lots No. 19, 20, 21 and 22 of Block 3, Summerfield and Op. - heimers Subdivision as recorded in Book 19, Page 44, Miacellaneoas Records of Los Angeles County ; and WHEREAS, the CityPlenning Commission did hold e public hearing et the CityHell in the City ot Meheim on December 11, 1972, at Z:00 o'clock P.M., notice of said publlc hearlag heving been duly given ea required by lew and in eccordance with tF,e provisions oE the Maheim Municipal code, Chopter 18.64, to hear and consSder evidmce for and egeinst soid proposed conditional use and to InvestIgete and meke Eindings and rernmmendetions in connection therewlth; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inepectlon, investi~ation, and study made by itaelf and in its br half, end after due consideretion oE all evidence and reposts oEtered at said headng, does find and determine the following Eects: 1. That the praposed uae is properly one Eor which s Conditionel Uae Permit is authorized by Code Section ?8.44.010(b-2) to wit: establiah a cocktail luunge in an exiating commercial atructure. 2, That the propoaed use would be incompatible with adjoining residential laad uses and would be more acceptable if propoaed in conjunction with reataurent operations. 3. That the proposed use will adversely affect the ad~oining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is propoaed to be located. 4. That the aize and ehape of the eite propoaed for the uae ie not adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the per- ticular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare of the Citisens ~of the City of Anaheim. 5. That the granting of the Cor.ditional Uae Permit will he detrimental to the peach, health, eafety, and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Aneheim. 6. That two persons appeared in opposition. ENI~IRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FINDING: That the Planning Commission finda e.nd determines that the proposal would have no eigni- ficant environmental impact and, therefore, recammende to the City Cauncil that Exemption Declaration statue be granted. CI•D ' 1" ~ ~ ~ NOW, TFIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that !he Aaaheim City Plenning Commiesion does heceby ds-~y subJect Petitlon for Condltional Use Pecmit oa the baais of the atocemeatioaed flndings. THE FOREGOII~G RESOLUTION ie nigned ~nd epproved by me this ~lst day o~-9eicember, 1972. ANAHEIIH CITY ATTEST: ~i~~yl/~'~.~[~ jL'~""..~~ SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNLA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) sa. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, .Apn Krebe,Secretary of the City Planaing Commi~sloa of the City oE Ana6eim, do hereby cedify that the forr going cceoluUon was p~~ssed aad adopted at a meetln` of the City Planalna Commission oE the City oE pnaheim, held on December 11, 1972, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the tollowfng ~vote of the membees thereof: AYES: CQh'~YIISSI0NER5: ALY.RED, FARANO, T,AUER, KAYWOOD, SEYMOUR, NOES: COMMISSIONERS: 1:DNE. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: HERBST, RpWLAND. IId WTfNES~ WF{ErEOF, I hr.ve hareunto set mp 6end tLis 21et day of December, 1972, RESOLUTION H0. PC72-328 SECRETARY MTAHEIM CI'CY PLANNING COMMISSION C2-D '~