PC 78-34~
R[SOLUTIOW N0. PC73-3u
A RESOLUTIQN OF THE ANAHEI!1 CITY PLANf~I?~!; COMNISSIOq
TfiAT PETITION FOR CONDITIO~lAL USE PERMIT t~0. III~~~ BE D[NIED
WF4EREl15, [he Anahelm City Planni~g Commission did receive a verified
Petition for Conditional Use Permit from Y.0!ISTA.tiTIt~05 NAt~aAS, ET AL, 910 South Euclid
Street, Anaheim, California, 92802, orrners, and ELENI M. POUKIDIS, 5F2 Thalia StrEet
Suite B. Laguna Beacfi, California 92G51 2%3n5, aqent, of certain real proper[y
situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Oranae, S[atc of California, described as:
~o[s 46, 1i7, 43 and 49 of Tract tlo. 231~n as per nap recorded in
Book 83 Pagcs 19 and 20 of Iliscellancous P1aps, Records of said
Orange Caunty.
WHEREl~S, thc City Plannina Commisslon did hold a ouhlic hearinq at the City
Hall in ttie City of Anaheim on Fehruary 27, 1°73, at 1:3n p.~., notice of said pubiic
hearing having been duly given as required by lao-i an~1 in accordance with the
provisions of ihe Anaheim tlunicipal Code, Chaoter 1c3,03, to hear and consider
evidence for and against said pro~osed conditional use and to investigate and make
findings and reconmenciations in connection therewith; and
WYE4EA5, said Commissio~, af[r..r dur_ insocction. investiaation and study made
by itseif and in its hehalf, anJ after due consideration of a11 evidence and reports
offered at said hearing, docs find and dctermine the following facts:
1, That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use
permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 1b.4h,n5o,30^ to wit: to
permit a drive-through restaurant ~•~ith waiver of:
SECTIO~~ 18.44.064,011 - Reauired block wall.
oot hiqh masonry wall required alon~
B~acon Street; none aronosed)
2, That thz proposed use is hcreby denled on the basis that it is a
generai ccxnmercial land use and Lhe Anaheim General Plan designation for the subject
property is conmercial professlonat and the oroposed drive-through restaurant oiith
vehicular access onto Beacon Street would ~ot be comFatible with thc nearby sinGle-
family residences and orould be d~trimental to said residences.
3, That the proposed waiver of required hlock rrall is hereby denied on the
basis that praposed use ts hereby denied, chcreby climinatinc~ the nced for requested
waiver; and that subJect propertv does n~t differ from ~ther ~roperty in the same
zone and vicinity as to size, shape, topo~raphy, ~~+~atlon, or surrounding,,
t{, That the proposed use witt advrrsclv afr~ct the adJotning land uses and
the growth and deveiopment of the area in ~rhich it is aroposed to te lacated.
5, That the stze and shape the site pronosed for the use is not
aJequatc to allow the full developnent oF thr_ proposed use in a manner not
detrimental to the particular area nor to the peace. health, safety. and general
welfarc of thc Cittzens of the City of An~heim,
Pc78-34
, ~ ~,
6. That the grantiny of the Gonditional Use Pcrmit wlll be de[rimental to
tfie peace, health, s~fety and gcncral ti~lfare of thc Citizens of tlie CiCy of Anahetm.
7. That apProximately !sl persons indicated their presence at said pubiic
hearing in opposition.
ENVIRONMENTAL IyPACT FIDIDINGS: That the Anahcim City Planning ~~mission
has reviewed the subject proposal to reclassify the zoning from RS-7~~~ ~qESIDENTIAL,
SINGLE-FAHILYj to CL (COMHERCI~L, L R11TE0) on a rectangularly-shaped parcel of tand
consisting of approximately O.o acre located at the southeast corner of Beacon ~venue
and Euclid 5[reet, having approxina[e frontages of 247 fer_t on the souch side of
Beacon Avenue and 110 feet on the east side of Euclid Street; and does hereby approve
the Negative Deciaration from the requirement to orepare an environmental impacC
report on the besis [hat there orould be no significant individual or cumulative
adverse environmental impact due [o tf~e approval of this Nega[ive Declaration since
the Anaheim Ge~eral Plan designates the subJect Rroperty for comemrcial, professional
anJ low-density residential land uses cornmensurate r,ith thc proposal; that no
sensitive environmPntal impac[s are involved in the ~roposal; that the Initiai Study
submicte~ by the petitioner indicates no significanc individual or cumula[ive adverse
environmen[al impac[s; and that the Ne~ative Declaration substantiating the foregoing
findings is on file in the City of An~heim Planning Deoartnent.
MON, THEREF02E, BE IT RESOLVED tha[ tfie Anaheim Lity Planninn Commission
does herehy deny subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit on thc b~sis of the
aforementioned findings.
TlIE FOREGOIt1~ RESOLUTION is 519ned and aporoved by me this 27Lh day ~f
february, 1973.
i~~~",~G~.~-f~ ~
L A I!lt1AN ~ ANl11!E I'1 C I TY LA~~~~ ~~,~,1155 I OPI
AT7EST:
~~,~~~ ~ ~
SECRETAR ,~ ANAHE I'i C I TY PLAt~N I t~G COMM I SS I Od
STATE OF CAtIFOR~~IA )
COUI~TY OF ORAlJGE 1 ss.
CITY OF Jt~1AfIEIN )
I, Edith L. Harrls, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning ~~Zssion. do
hereby certify that the foregoina resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of
thc Anaheim City Planning Commission held on February 27, 1'~73, ac 1:3~ p•m•. by the
followina vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COt1MI5510~~ERS: BAR~IES, DAVID~ HERBST, JOHPISOtI, KI~I(;, TOLAR
NOES: COM`tI5510~~ER5: tlONE
ABSENT: LO'1HISSIONERS: LINN
IN l1ITNE55 WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ?.7th day of February,
~97s. ~ .
-2- PC7~-3~i