PC 77-52~'
r~ESOLUTION tl0, PC77-52
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANtJING COMMISSIOtJ
THAT PETIT104 FOR CON~ITIONAL USE PERt11T t~0, 1687 BE DENIED.
lJfiEREl1S, the Anahe(m City Planning Commission did receive a verified
Petition for Conditional Use Permit from LARRY R. SMITI{, 13~41 Evans Circle,
Westminstcr, California 92~~~3 (Owner; and LEf+ARD E. COL[BY, P,O. Box 2715, Newport
Beach, California 92663 (Agent) of certain real property situated in the City af
R~aheim, County of Orange, State of California d~scribed as:
TfIAT PORT10~4 0~ TIIE SOUTHE~9ST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEaST QUARTER OF SECTIOtJ 15,
TOWtJSNIP !+ SOUTH, RA~dr,E 11 WEST, IN THE RANCHO LOS COYOTFS, CiTY OF ANAHEIM,
COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CAL~FORNIA, AS SNOWN O~J A MAP RECORDED i~l BOQK 51 PAGE
11 OF P115CELLANEOUS t1/'~PS, IIJ THE OFFICE OF THE COUI~TY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
B[GIt~NING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION; TNE~ICE SOUTH 89° 36' WEST
21~8,02 FEET; THErICE NORTN 53° 24~ WEST ALOnr, THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC RAILROAD RIGHT-
OF-WAY 521•62 FEET; TH[tlCE ~~OP,7fi 0° 13' WES7 72.95 FEET; TfIENCE tlORTt' R9° 36'
EAST 222.3 FEC7 TO THE {4TERSECTION WITH A LINE P/1RALLEL WITH THE EAST LIPJE OF
SAID SECTIOIJ A~~D DISTAtIT WESTERLY 443.on FEET fROM SAID EASTERLY LINE OF SA1D
SECT I OIJ, SA I D I NTEf2SECT I ON BE 1 ~JG THE TRUE PO I t!T OF BEG I Nt~ I DI~ ; TiiENCE PARALLF.L
IJITH SAID EAST LINE, SOUTH 0° 15' ~+5" EAST 170.00 fEET; THE`~CE ~IOP,TH 39° 35~ EAST
240.00 FEET; TNEt4LE PARALLEL IJITH 5~10 EAST LIP~E SOUTH 0° 15' 1!5" EAST 163.74
FEET TO A LIWE PARALIEL WITH A'JD ot57A~~T 53•00 FEET NORTl1ERLY FROt1 THE COURSE
NEREINBEFORE DESCRIE3ED AS "SOUTl1 89° 36° WEST 249,02 FEET"; TfiEtJCc' PARALLEL WITH
SAID COURSE, ~IORTH 8?° 36' EAST 20.OC FEET TO TI1E WESTEf:LY LINF OF THE cASTERLY
133.00 FEET OF SAIO SECTIOt~; THE~~LE ALOtJC, SA(D WESTERLY LIilE, MORTH 0° 15' 45"
WEST 163.74 fEET TO A LINE PARALLEL WITN AND DISTAtJT SOUTHERLY 170.00 FE"eT FROM
TNE EASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THAT CERTAI~1 COURSE DESCRIBED ABOVE AS "NORTH
89° 36' EAST 222.3 FEET"; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE tlORTH S9° 36' EAST
130.00 FEET TO A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND DISTAPIT WESTERLY 53.~~ FEET FR0~1 SAIU
EASTERLY LIt~E OF SAID SECTIOhI; THEt~CE ALOIJG SAID LAST DESCRIBED P~RALLEL LIP7E.
It~RTH 0° 15' t{5" WEST 170.00 FEET TO A LINE WHlCN BEARS t~ORTN 89° 36' EAST AHD
NHICH FASSES TNP,OUGH THE TRUE POINT OF BEGII!NING THENCE ALONG SAID LAST MENTIONED
LINE, SOUTH 89° 36' WEST 330.~0 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINPJIIiG.
WNERErS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at ihe City
1fa11 in the City of Anaheim on February 28, 1977, at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public
hearing having been duly give~ as required by law and in accordance with the
provistons of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Lhapter 12.03, to hear and consider
evidence for and against said proposed conditional use and to investigate and make
findings and recommendations in connection Chere+aith; and
uNERE~S, said Commission, after due lnspectiun, investigatlon and study made
by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports
offered at said hearing, docs find and determine the following facts:
1. 7hat [he proposed use is properly one for whlch a conditional use
permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 13.44.050.010, to ti•iit: permit
on-sale beer in a proposed billiard parlor and arcade in Lhe CL (CO!1t1ERCIAL, LIMITED)
ZONE.
2. That the proposed use is hereby denied on the basis that the subject
location is not deemed appropriate for on-sale beer slnce it is tncompatible v~ith
RESOLUTION N0. PC77-52
existing uses within the cor,mercial center includin~ a nursery school; and the
petitioner did not demonstrate that a ha!•dshtp wouid be created if said waiver was
not granted.
3. That the proposed usa will adversely affect tfie adjoining land uses and
the growth and developme+it c` the area in which it is proposed to be ' xa*ed.
4. That [he size and shape of the site proposed for the use 1s not
adequate to allrno the full development of tlie oroposed use in a manner not
detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safetyt and general
welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim,
5. That the granting of the Conditional Use Permit wil! be detrimental to
the peace, health, safety and general ~velfare of the Citizens of the Ci[y of Anaheim.
6. ThaC no one indicated Lheir presence at sald public hearing in
opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subiect
petition.
Et~VIRJNMENTAL IMPACT F L`~DING: That the Director of the Planning Department
nas determ~ined thaC the propased act vity falls within the definition of Section
3.01, Class 1, of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the Requiremen~s for an
Environmental Impact Report and is, the~~fore, categorically exempt from the
requirement to file an EIR,
tJOW, TH[REFORc, 4E IT RESOLVED that the Anahcim City Planniny Commission
does hereby deny subject Petition for Condicional Use Permit on the basis of the
aforementioned findings,
THE FOREGOING kESOLUTION is signed and apprave' y me this 28th day of
February~ 1977,
~
CHAIRMAN ANA M CITY PLANNINf COMMiSSION
ATTEST:
~~ .. .~ ". ~,~~~
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLAt~NING COMt11SSfON
-2- P.ESOLUTIOh H0. PC77-52
S7ATF OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF ORANGE )ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Patricia B. Scanlan, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission,
d~ hereby certify that the foregoing resolutinn was pa5sed and ad~pt~~d at a meeting
of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, held on February 28. 197?, at 1:3~ p.m., by
the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMHISSIONERS: DAVID, HER45T, Y,iNG, MORIEY, TOLAR„ JOHN50t~
PlOES: COMM I SS i OtJERS: NatJE
ABSENT: C011MISSIOt~ERS: E3ARNE5
~977.
IN WITNESS blHEREOF, I have Fereunto set my hand this 28th ~:,y of Februaty,
L~~%~~,~
SECRETARY~ ANANEIM CITY PLAPINING COMt11SS101~
-g- RESOLUTiON N0. PC77-52