My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/22/1996
Clerk
>
Minutes
>
Planning Commission
>
1996
>
04/22/1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 12:58:37 PM
Creation date
1/27/2011 10:43:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PBA
Doc Type
Minutes
Date
4/22/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Charles View, Senior Planner, responded that the petition had been <br /> submitted at the Zoning Administration Hearing and no additional petition had <br /> been submitted since that hearing. <br /> Commissioner Doughty asked what the hours of operation were for the <br /> convenience store; if the adjacent neighborhood had been informed of the <br /> project; and if staff had received any correspondence from the neighborhood. <br /> Mr. Emad Salameh, applicant, responded that the hours of operation were from <br /> 5:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. He also added that throughout the past year of <br /> operations, he had cooperated with staff and he felt that the case was <br /> handled very poorly. <br />' Ms. Perry indicated that the neighborhood had been notified and no <br />ondence had been received <br />corres <br /> p <br />. <br /> Commissioner Nalle asked Mr. Diamond if he had read the chronology and if he <br /> felt the chronology was accurate. <br />Mr. Diamond responded that he had reviewed the chronology of events. He did <br />not agree with the July 17, 1995 entry regarding Judge Seymore determining <br />that the City had responded within a timely manner. The entry should have <br />said that the Police Department approved the granting of the alcohol license <br />with conditions. However, the chronology was essentially accurate. He also <br />expressed that the person who created the chronology used language to cause <br />prejudice and to mislead the Commission. He further added, that the March 24 <br />entry supports his argument that the conditional use permit was recommended <br />to be approved with conditions. <br />Mr. Adams corrected Mr. Diamond and stated to the Commission that staff did <br />not have the authority to approve a conditional use permit. <br />Madam Chair Brown indicated to Mr. Diamond that the chronology indicated that <br />on March 10, 1995 the Police Department revealed that the application was <br />incomplete and asked why the applicants had not addressed that issue. <br />Mr. Diamond responded that the chronology was not true because the Police <br />Department had discussed conditions of approval for the license. <br />Commissioner Segura moved to deny the appeal for Conditional Use Permit No. <br />96-5. She further indicated that she did not feel that the case was unique. <br />There were some items missing when the permit was submitted and the items <br />that staff had requested, had not been submitted within the timeframe. The <br />crime rate may have been lowered due to the applicants management but not <br />having the ability to sale beer and wine was also a contributing factor. <br />Commissioner Oliver seconded the motion. In addition, he indicated that he <br />agreed with Commissioner Segura that not having the ability to sale beer and <br />wine was a contributing factor to the reduction in police related incidents. <br />He also reminded the other Commissioners that there was a narrow issue <br />whether or not a conditional use permit should be approved. Mr. Diamond <br />pointed out a lapse in the process; but that was not the issue at this <br />meeting and there would be ample opportunity to deal with the other issues in <br />another form. However, Commissioner Oliver respectfully stated that the <br />community in that vicinity would be better off not having another outlet that <br />sold beer and wine. <br />Commissioner Nalle commented that this was a case in which there had been a <br />series of errors. He indicated that he felt the errors were not intentional <br />by staff but felt it would not be fair to the applicants to deny their <br />request. <br />Commissioner Doughty indicated that she normally turned down requests for <br />alcoholic sales but she felt that there was a calamity in the process and she <br />would vote against the motion. In addition, she stressed that she felt the <br />City had enough businesses that sold alcohol. <br />AYES: Pedroza, Brown, Oliver and Segura <br />NOES: Doughty, Nalle, and Mondo <br />ABSENT: None <br />2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 96-09 (Tom Childress) <br />Filed by Mr. R.C. Thompson to allow after hour operations at an existing Del <br />Taco located at 2841 West Warner Avenue in the Community Commercial (C1) <br />zoning district. <br />LEGAL NOTICED: April 9, 1996 <br />PUBLIC NOTICED: April 9, 1996 <br />RECOMMENDATION: <br />Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 96-09 as conditioned by staff and adopt <br />the findings as submitted by staff. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 4 APRIL 22, 1996 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.