The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2008-28ROH -10/13/08 RESOLUTION NO. 2008-28 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2008-33 THAT SOUGHT TO ALLOW A TYPE 21 ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2626 NORTH BRISTOL STREET BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Applicant is requesting approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2008- 33 for a Type 21 Alcoholic Beverage Control license, which allows the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits for off-premise consumption, for the property located at 2626 North Bristol Street. • B. Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-33 came before the Zoning Administrator of the City of Santa Ana for a public hearing on September 24, 2008. 1. After conducting the public hearing, and based upon the finding, the Zoning Administrator denied Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-33. 2. Following the denial by the Zoning Administrator, the applicant appealed the Zoning Administrator's decision to the Planning Commission (Appeal No. 2008-02). C. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on October 13, 2008, on the appeal of the Zoning Administrator's denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-33 (Appeal No. 2008-02). D. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-196 requires a conditional use permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-site or off-site consumption. • Resolution No. 2008-28 Page 1 of 6 E. The Planning Commission decision is based upon the following findings: Will the proposed use provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or community? The proposed alcohol license will not provide a service to the community since there are two other establishments in the vicinity that offer beer, wine and distilled spirits for off-premise sales. The off-premise alcoholic beverage license has the potential to attract nuisances to the adjacent commercial and residential areas which will not contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or community. 2. Will the proposed use under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity? The proposed off-premise general liquor license will be detrimental to persons residing and working in the area as the off-premise sale of alcoholic beverages has the potential to create nuisances such as loitering, • disturbing the peace, graffiti and other crimes that impact surrounding businesses and residential neighborhoods. These potential negative impacts to surrounding properties are further compounded by the subject property's location within 1,000 feet of a school attended primarily by minors and a church. 3. Will the proposed use adversely affect the present economic stability or future economic development of properties in the surrounding area? K&S Food Store is located in a commercial center that is suitable for the existing use. However, a concentration of off-premise sale outlets not only increases the availability of alcohol but the nuisance crimes that impact the economic viability of the adjacent commercial area and neighboring residential developments. The denial of this application would support Policy 4.5 of the Economic Element of the General Plan which discourages making land use decisions based purely on fiscal considerations but also the qualitative implications that are associated. This • new alcohol license's potential to increase nuisance Resolution No. 2008-28 Page 2 of 6 • crimes will adversely affect the economic stability of the surrounding properties. 4. Will the proposed use comply with the regulations and conditions specified in Chapter 41 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code for such use? The proposed alcohol license will not be in compliance with all applicable conditions of Chapter 41 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code regarding off-premise general liquor license since this location meets two of the three criteria established for defining over concentration. The Santa Ana Municipal Code defines the over concentration of alcohol licenses as a site that meets any one of the following criteria: The premise is located within 1,000 feet of another existing off-premise license location; 2. The premise is located within 1,000 feet of any property used as a school primarily attended by minors, a church or a park; • 3. The premise is determined to be over concentrated by the State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The subject property is within 1,000 feet of two other off premise alcohol licenses, a Rite Aid located at 2725 North Bristol Street and Adolfo's Liquor located at 2734 North Bristol Street. The subject property is also within 1,000 feet of a school attended primarily by minors at 2709 North Bristol Street and a church at 2500 North Bristol Street. • 5. Will the proposed use adversely affect the General Plan or any specific plan of the City? The proposed alcohol license will adversely affect the General Plan in several ways. First, markets and ancillary uses such as off-premise general liquor licenses are not permitted within the Low-Density Residential (LR-7) General Plan Land use designation which is in direct contrast with Policy 5.4 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan which encourages land uses which are consistent with the Land Use Plan. The upgraded alcohol license will also be inconsistent with Policy 2.9 of the Land Use Element which supports Resolution No. 2008-28 Page 3 of 6 developments that create a business environment that is safe and attractive. The upgraded alcohol license increases the potential for nuisance crimes such as loitering, disturbing the peace, graffiti and other crimes that impact surrounding businesses and residential neighborhoods. The granting of this application is also inconsistent with Policies 5.1 and 5.5 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan which discourages projects that are not compatible with surrounding land uses and have the potential to negatively impact their quality of life. The projects proximity to both residential properties as well as other sensitive land uses identified in the over concentration criteria further support the denial of this application. F. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project is exempt from further review pursuant to Section 15301. This Class 1 exemption allows the licensing of an existing use with no expansion. Categorical Exemption Environmental Review No. 07-144 will be filed for this project. Section 2. This project was reviewed in accordance with the Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act. The recommendation is exempt from • further review pursuant to Section 15301. This Class 1 exemption applies to a project that involves the licensing of an existing structure with little or no expansion involved. Categorical Exemption Environmental Review No. 2008-80 will be filed for this project. ADOPTED this 13th day of October, 2008 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: Alderete, De La Torre, Leo (3) NOES: Commissioners: Betancourt, Mill ABSENT: Commissioners: Gartner, Yrarrazaval (2) ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: None (0) ~~ Christo er Leo Chair an Resolution No. 2008-28 Page 4 of 6 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney ~N r ~' ~~ B~- '.cam ,~_ G- ~~°~ b`~z:~ Ryan O. Hodge t; Deputy City Attorney CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARTHA RAMIREZ, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2008-28 to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on October 13, 2008. Date: '" din tanning Com ion retary City of Santa Ana • Resolution No. 2008-28 Page 5 of 6 PROOF OF SERVICE . (C.C.P. SECTION 1013(a), 2015.5) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE I am employed in the aforesaid county; I am over the age of eighteen and not a party to the within action; my business address is 20 Civic Center Plaza, Ross Annex Second Floor, Santa Ana, California 92701. I served the foregoing document described as: Resolution No. 2008-28 (Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-33) in this action by p acing a true copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes addressed as follows: Robert Zakar Elias Y. Kawaj a Weaam Zakery 1092 South Winoy Court 2626 North Bristol Street, Suite B Anaheim, CA 90808 Santa Ana, CA 92706 Robert Zakar 12849 Rancho Penasquitos Blvd. San Diego, CA 92129 • I caused to be delivered b courier such envelo e b hand to the office of the [l Y ~ p Y addressee(s). [X] BY MAIL I am readily familiar with my employer's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Santa Ana, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. [ ]The document was transmitted by facsimile transmission and was reported as complete and without error. declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on November 25, 2008 at Santa Ana, California. • MARTHA RAM EZ Resolution No. 2008-28 Page 6 of 6