Laserfiche WebLink
AYES; <br /> <br />NOES; <br /> <br />ABSENT: <br /> <br />Griset~ Ysma~oto~ Markel~ <br /> <br />None <br /> <br />Evans <br /> <br />Garthe~ p~tter$on, Ward <br /> <br />RECESS <br /> <br />Councilmen present. <br /> <br />At 9:20 P,M. a 10 minute <br />recess was declared. <br />Council reconvened at <br />9:35 P.M. with the same <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARINGS The Mayor announced that <br />APPEAL NOS. 324 333 this was the time and place <br />CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 73-9 for the Environmental <br /> Impact Report hearing of <br />Appeal Nos. 324 333, inclusive, appealing the Planning Commis- <br />sion's approval of Conditional Use Permit 73-9, filed by W. F. <br />and Maurine Croddy, to construct a multi-screen drive-in theater <br />facility in the M 1 District at 2730 South Harbor Boulevard. <br /> <br />He stated further that all of the appellants were appealing the <br />granting of the Conditional Use Permit and that Appeal No. 331 <br />was also appealing the Environmental Impact Report Procedure; <br />and that he proposed to hear both matters at the same time, since <br />they related to the same subject, and to incorporate all the <br />evidence relative to the EIR and the CUP into one hearing. <br /> <br />The City Attorney requested that the record indicate that all <br />parties and their counsels were present following a roll call <br />taken by the Mayor. <br /> <br />The following persons objected to the combined hearings, stating <br />that they should be conducted separately: <br /> <br />John C. Gamble, Attorney, Appeal No. 327 <br />Verlyn N. Jensen, Attorney, Appeal No. 330 <br />Donald E. Smallwood, Attorney, Appeal No. 331 <br /> <br />The Council consensus was to proceed with the combined hearings <br />based on a ruling by the City Attorney that all evidence on both <br />matters could be presented and considered during one combined <br />hearing. <br /> <br />Mr. William Daugherty, Planning Staff member, stated that 16 <br />exhibits, identified as Exhibits "A-O", inclusive, had been <br />filed with the Planning Commission by the applicant, and that <br />9 exhibits, identified as Exhibits 1 9, inclusive, had been <br />filed by the opponents. He distributed them and described them <br />to Council. <br /> <br />The aforementioned exhibits were <br />unanimously approved motion (6 <br />seconded by Councilman Garthe. <br /> <br />received and filed on the <br />0) of Councilman Yamamoto, <br /> <br />In addition Council Agenda material included: <br /> <br />1. Appeal Nos. 324 - 333, inclusive; <br /> <br />2. Planning Commission Minutes, October 23, 1973, page 1; <br /> <br />3. Site Maps (2) ; <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL MINUTES <br /> <br />444 NOVEMBER 19, 1973 <br /> <br /> <br />