08-26-1963 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR ~m~i'ING OF AUGUST 19, 1963 0F THE CIT~ COUNCIL, CITY OF BANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA August 26, 1963 The meeting was called to order at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 217' North Main Street. Roll Call was answered by Councilmen Royal E. Hubbard, Harry H. Harvey, James Gilmore, Henry H. Schlueter, and Mayor Ac Allen Hall. cLEP~'S REPORT The Clerk reported that the Regular Meeting of August 19, 1963 was adjourned to this time and place by order of the City Council and submitted a Certificate of Posting the Order of Adjournment. It was moved by Counc~ lman Hubbard, seconded by Councilman Schlueter and carried, that the Certificate he received and ordered filed. CoU.P. 152, Resolution Affirming the Decision of FACTORY DEVELOI~(~T the Pl--~tng Commission and Denying CORPORATION Cond/tional Use~F~rmit N~. 152 filed by Factory Dove'client Corporation was before the Council for consideration, action having been continued fr~ A~Ast 19, 1963o M~yor Hall reviewed the actic~ of the Council, noting the hearing, on the appeal was closed on AU~ASt 5, 1~3, that Council had heard e~ents fr~ the applicant's representative on August 19, 1~63~ and that a ·rit of Mandamus had been filed. The Council agreed to hear further cc~aent fr~a interested persons. Alexander B~wie, representing Segerstrcm and S~ns, refuted statement made by appellant that the Planning C~ission believed it to be a Council policy decision, noting that only one member had made the statement and that ~ther meabers had stressed proposal as an encroachment on industrial district, with traffic pattern problems. Mr. B~wie pointed out that Council minutes reflect extensive hearing was held~ appellant had opportunity to present laformation~ factual conditions required by ordinance did not exist as determined by the Planning C~ission in its denial and by the City Council in its denial of the appeal. Da~e Heinly, representing Factory DeveloI~ent Corporation, noted ~hat in the City there has never been a conditional use permit ~enied because it was the intent that iff a permitted use met operational stand~x~ls then the ~se weald be ~mi~ ~ t~t --one; that he believed the C~cil's ~eeisi~n ~ the attendee of ~fl~t~al ~du~trial le~e~ ~ th~ ~ ~sie of the use ~s n~ c~i~er~; that the a~lie~t ~s ~titleA to ~ the ~t ~ ha~ ri~t to have decial~ ~d ~ the ~a~ to be file~ ~th the t~ a~diti~l ~t~ets, Yale ~ ~; that the pr~osal weul~ n~ ~e ~ot~ental to ~ uae ~ the a~a; ~ aa~ the C~cil te ~verae its position ~ g~t the e~iti~al ese ~t. It was ~ved by Ce~meil~an Hubbard, seconded by Co~tucil~an ~arvey, that Council waive further reading of I~ESOILTX$N A~'FL~X~G ~ DECXSI$N OF T~ PLANNING CO~$~I~$ION AND DE~YING CONDITIONAL USE ~ ~0. 15~ ~ BY FA6"I~I ~ CORPORATISN. I~asmueh ae motion to w~ive the reading of a resolution raquiras a unanimous affirmative vote, the motiem was defeated on the roll call v~ce: AYE5, NOES, CSUSC~: AESENT, Hubbard, Harvey, Schluoter, Hall Gilmore None CITY C0qNCIL - 191 - August ~6, 1963