R-060-12 Denying the PC appeal for 7 Eleven

Browse Search

1 WHEREAS, on July 19, 2012, a timely appeal of the Planning Commission's denial was received by the City Clerk ("Appeal"); and 2 WHEREAS, on August 21, 2012, the City Council of the City ("City Council") 3 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Appeal at which time all persons wishing to 4 testify in connection with the Appeal were heard, and the Appeal was comprehensively reviewed and considered; and 5 WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have 6 occurred. 7 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 8 CITY OF COLTON: 9 SECTION 1. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated 10 herein by reference. 11 SECTION 2. Based on the entire record before the City Council, all written and oral evidence presented, and the findings made in this Resolution, the City Council hereby denies 12 the Appeal and upholds the decision of the Planning Commission denying the Project. 13 SECTION 3. Based on the entire record before the City Council and all written and 14 oral evidence presented, including the staff report, the City Council cannot make the following 15 required findings in accordance with Colton Municipal Code Section 18.58.060(H) as follows: 16 A. The proposed use is not in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance, and the purposes of the zone in which the site is located. 17 1. The Zoning Ordinance allows for alcohol sales for off -sale consumption 18 through Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval. 19 2. CUP's are required for land use classifications typically having unusual site development features or operating characteristics requiring special 20 consideration so that the use is designed, located and operated compatibly with uses on adjoining properties and in the surrounding 21 area. 22 3. The proposed use for alcohol sales is located in the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial Zone. The C-1 Neighborhood Commercial Zone is 23 intended to serve the neighborhood needs for convenience goods only. Stores within this designation are intended to fit into the residential 24 pattern of development and not create either architectural or traffic conflicts. 25 4. During public testimony, many members of the public testified that the 26 proposed alcohol use would result in increased traffic, noise and 27 vagrancy and would negatively impact adjacent residential uses. 28 5. Based on the evidence in the record, including evidence from the Planning Commission meeting and evidence concerning the operating