Resolution-PC 96-94~ ~
RESOLl1TION NO. PC96-94
A RESOLUTION OF THE MlAHE.IM CITY PIANNIMG COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3872 BE DENIED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commisslon d(d receNe a vs;ified °etttion for
Conditional Use Permit for certain real properry sftuated in the Cfty of Anaheim, County of C~range, Stata of
Caiifomia, described as:
LOTS 7 AND 8~OF TRACT lJO. 483, AS SFIOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK
17, PAGE 20 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORGS OF ORANGE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, the City Planning Comm(ssion did hdd a pubiic hearing at the Cfvic Center in
t;;e Ciry of Anaheim on September 76, 1996 at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly
g++en as required by law and in accordance wfth the provisbns of the Anaheim Munfcipal Code, Chapter
18.03, to hear and consider evidenca for and against sakJ proPased co~dh~onal use perrnit and to irnestfgate
and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, irnestigatlon and study mada by ftseif
and ~n (ts behalf, and after due considoration of a~f evidence and repores offered at said hea~ing, does find
and determine the following tacts:
t. That the proposed use is properly or~e for which a condftional use permR is authorized by
Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.44.050.Q25 to permft an arnusemertit arcade wfthin an exfsting retail
store;
2. That the proposed use is hereby denied;
3. That the existtng retali store (Shop-N-Sava 95) currenUy has four amusemenE games and
two pool tables; ar.d that the petitioner propases to add addftional video arcade games to a 1,500 sq•ft.
area located within tha existing 4,500 sq.ft.retail store; artd that the proposal is for efther (a) 36 video arcade
games or (b) up to 28 video games, two pod tables, and three sports-oriented games (f.e., basketball,
iootball, etC.);
4. That the proposed use is properly one for which a condit(onal u~? permft is authorizecf by
ihe Zoning Code;
5. That the Anaheim PoBce Department and Code Enforcement DNision staff indicate an above
average c~ime rate for the area and a history of ~ode vidations on the subJect property and, therefore, the
proposed intdnsfffed use would adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growch and development
of the area in which it is proposed to be tocated due to safd high crime rate;
6. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is not adequate to allow the full
developmem of the proposed use in a manner not detrfinentai to the particular area nor to the peace, health,
safety and general weffare;
7. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved tr, carry the tra~c in the area;
g. That the granting of the condir'ona! use permft wfll be detrimental to the peace, health, satety
and general welfare of the cftizens of the Ciry of Anaheim; and
CA2740DM.WP -1- PC96-94
~ ~
9. That no one indicated their presence at ~atd pubiic hearing in oppositfon; and that no
correspondence was receNed in opposition to the subJect petftion.
rAUFORNIA cNVIRONMENTAL QUAUTY ACT FINDING: That the Anahelm City Planning
Commisslon has reviewed the pro~osal to permit an amusement arcade wfthin an existing retap store on
a rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisUng of approximately 0.6 acre havir~g a ftontage of
approximately 100 feet on the north side of La Palma Avenue, having a maximum depth of approximately
130 feet and being located approximateiy 340 feet west of the c:enterline of Eucl~d Street anci fi!!*.har
described as 1727-1731 West La Palma Ave~ue (Shup-NSave 95); and dc~es hereby approve the NegatNe
Declaration upon flnding that the declaration reflects the independent judgement uf the lead agency and that
ft has considered the Negative Declaratfon togethor with any cnmmants received during the public review
process and further flnding on the basia of the initial study and any comments recetved that there is no
substant(al evidonce that the project will have a signHicarrt effect on the environment.
NO~+:; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOWED that the Anahe(m Cfty Plannfng Commisslon does
hereby deny subJect Petition for Condftional Use Permit, on the basis of the aforementfonsd ~ndings.
THE FGREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Ccmmission meeting of
September 16, 1996. ~~
' CHAIRMAN, ANAHEI CIN PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTES7:
SECRETARY, EIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
ST~ ~ OF CA~~nRNiA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEiM )
I, Margarita Solorio, Secretary of the Anaheim Ciry Planning Commission, do hereb~~ certHy
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meetfng of the Anaheim Cfty Planning
Commission held on September 16, 1996, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, BOYaSTUN, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, MAYER, MESSE, PERAZA,
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ~((J~day of ~a'~ItX~'~J ,
1996. Q,RC, ft:v ~lL~(~
SECREfARY, EIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-2-
PC96-9+1