Loading...
CC RESOLUTION 3331• RESOLUTION NO. 3331 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING AN APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO CUP # 83 -10 WHEREAS, on August 3, 1983 Liquid Enterprises, Inc. applied for a Conditional Use Permit to serve alcoholic beverages (a copy of the said Application is attached as Attachment #1;) and WHEREAS, on October 27, 1983 the Planning Commission approved Resolution #2048 granting CUP #83 -10 on certain conditions (a copy of the Resolution #2048 is attached as Attachment #2). An appeal of the approval to the City Council failed on a 2 -2 vote to return the matter to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, extensions were granted to Planning Commission Resolution #2048 on September 27, 1984 and May 9, 1985 extending the expiration date of the CUP; and WHEREAS, on June 7, 1985 Hometels, Inc. applied for an Amendment to CUP #83 -10 to eliminate condition #7 of CUP 83 -10 which prohibited "night club dancing or other entertainment" (a copy of the Application is attached as Attachment #3) and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held, on June 27, 1985 and pursuant to law, a duly advertised and noticed public hearing on the application to amend CUP 83 -10 in the Council Chamber of the City Hall; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution #2112 granting the Amendment July 11, 1985; and WHEREAS, a timely appeal was filed by Rev. Ed Erdley; and WHEREAS, the City Council held, on August 20, 1985 and pursuant to law, a duly advertising and noticed public hearing on the appeal in the Council Chambers: of the City Hall; and WHEREAS, the public hearing was continued to October 1, 1985 at which time the public portion of the hearing was closed after testimony was heard; and WHEREAS, the matter was continued for decision to October 2, 1985; and WHEREAS, the Municipal Code requires the City Council to announce its decision no more than 40 days following the termination of proceedings; and WHEREAS, the following facts were established among others at the hearing: 1. The original application filed August 3, 1983 was an application for a CUP for the bar and lounge area for service of alcoholic beverages to be served in conjunction with food and at owner sponsored cocktail hours as an adjunct to the hotel business and the restaurant within the hotel. Guests only would be allowed to consume alcoholic 1. beverages in conjunction with their stay at the hotel. The applicant did not apply for a permit for dancing or enter- tainment in connection with the Application for a CUP to serve alcoholic beverages. 2. Planning Commission Resolution #2048, specif- ically noted that the Application was for permission to consume alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a restaurant - no Application was made for night club dancing or other entertainment. I 3. The E1 Segundo Municipal Code provided, at the time of adoption of Resolution #2048, that a permit was required for dancing and /or entertainment in connection with bar and cocktail lounge uses where the same were located within 150 feet of residences. Dancing and entertainment were not permitted in connection with restaurant uses, nor were they permitted uses. 4. The El Segundo Municipal Code provides that a CUP is required for all on sale consumption or serving of alcoholc beverages, and for entertainment and dancing uses among other uses. 5. Planning Commission Resolution #2048 specifi- cally granted permission to the applicant to sell beer, wine and liquor in conjunction with a restaurant operation at the hotel only, subject to the condition that no night club dancing or other entertainment use was permitted (as no permit was sought for those uses). 6. Since the opening of the hotel in August, 1985 entertainment and dancing have been regularly permitted by management or other authorized persons in various non- residential rooms and areas of the hotel. 7. Original parking requirements do not appear to have been met and parking requirements for recent changes in use do not appear to have been met and no new Certificate of Occupancy has been applied for when uses were, among other changes, changed from meeting rooms to banquet rooms. 8. Residents living near the hotel testified that persons using the hotel and parking on public streets do cause and have caused a considerable nuisance in the neigh- borhood immediately adjacent to the hotel. 9. On one occasion occurring September 18, 1985, the City Fire and Police Departments were called to the hotel because of an advertised event which included enter- tainment. Many persons were cited for illegal parking and the Fire Department had to take steps to reduce significant overcrowding in the hotel. 10. Nearly all persons testifying in favor or opposed to the Amendment to the CUP, including the appli- cant, acknowledged that there was and is a current and continuing parking problem at the hotel. In addition, adequate parking for present uses does not exist. Adequate parking for the proposed new use does not exist. 11. A proposal submitted by the Applicant to pro- vide additional parking through a temporary arrangement with Hughes did not meet City Code requirements, and WHEREAS, the El Segundo Municipal Code provides: "20.74.050 PERMIT - PURPOSE. The purpose of a conditional use permit shall be: 2. 14.07 (1) To assure that the degree of compatibility and the purpose of this title shall be maintained with respect to the particular use on the particular site and in consideration of other existing and potential uses within the general area in which the use is proposed to be located ." NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after hearing the public testimony, considering the testimony and the facts and reports presented and studying the issues, the City Council finds as follows: 1. That under the facts and circumstances an Amendment to the CUP as requested would not in fact be only an elimination of a condition of CUP #83 -10. Rather, an • approval of the Application for the amendment would approve of entertainment uses at the hotel not previously considered or applied for. 2. Under the facts and circumstances an amendment to CUP #83 -10 should not be approved because to permit any or all forms of entertainment or dancing and /or to permit the expansion or addition of other new uses in meeting rooms without providing adequate parking, with or without condi- tions, will cause the hotel, the restaurant, the bar and other uses within the hotel to be even more incompatible (than at present without the amendment) with existing resi- dential uses in the immediate and general areas surrounding the hotel. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that in view of the above facts and findings and the public testimony and re- ports the appeal is upheld and the Amendment to CUP #83 -10 is denied. The subject of parking requirements has been referred to the Planning Commission by motion of the City Council October 2, 1.985for a determination. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk shall forthwith give the Applicant and the Appellant notice of this passage of this Resolution, together with a copy of this Resolution, by mail at the addresses shown on the Application or Appeal by Registered Mail, and to any other person requesting a copy of the same. The decision of the Council is final. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of OCTCBE13 19 8 5. PYayor of the city of E1 s qu California (SEAL) 0 3.