Laserfiche WebLink
REL:adg <br />3/17/82 <br /> <br />RESOLUTION NO. 82-44 <br /> <br />A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF <br />THE CITY OF SANTA ANA OVERRULING THE <br />PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF <br />VARIANCE APPLICATION NO. 81-33 AND <br />GRANTING SAID VARIANCE FOR A SIX-MONTH <br />TERM FOR PROPERTY AT 1411 EAST FIRST STREET <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, a public hearing was duly held before the <br />City Council of the City of Santa Ana on March 15, 1982, on <br />an appeal (Appeal No. 462) from the action taken by the <br />Planning Commission in denying Variance Application No. 81- <br />33, which application seeks to allow a "public premises," <br />located at 1411 East First Street, selling liquor for <br />consumption on the Uremises as its primary business within <br />300 feet of property used for residential purposes; <br /> <br /> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL <br />OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: <br /> <br /> 1. That based on such public hearing and the oral and <br />documentary evidence submitted therein; the City Council <br />does hereby overrule the Planning Commission's denial of <br />Variance Application 81-33, and does hereby grant said <br />Variance for a term of six (6) months commencing with the <br />date of adoption of this Resolution. <br /> <br /> 2. That the City Council hereby adopts, as its <br />findings of fact for the granting of said Variance, the <br />following: <br /> <br /> (a) The proprietor of the subject property <br />intends to convert such property to a "bona fide" restaurant <br />within the next six months. Such use would not require a <br />variance from the zoning regulations. This Variance is <br />granted only for the purpose of allowing a temporary use <br />of the property as a "public premises" pending the <br />establishment of such restaurant status and will terminate <br />in six months, whether or not such restaurant status is in <br />fact obtained. Due to these special circumstances, a strict <br />enforcement of the zoning regulations would deprive the <br />subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance <br />with the intent and purpose of such regulations. <br /> <br /> <br />