The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC Res 94-32 - 1994-07-20 RESOLUTION NO. 94-32 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT NEGATIVE DECLARATION 94- 5, RELATING TO A NEW CHAPTER lIE TO THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RELATING TO ADULT-ORIENTED BUSINESS, AND AMENDING RELATED SECTIONS OF THE CODE (ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 94-1) Section 1 The Planning COIllIllIsslOn of the CIty of Seal Beach wishes to promote the City of Seal Beach'~ great Intere,t m protectmg and pre~ervmg the quahty ot resIdentIal, commercIal and lI1du~tnal area, of the CIty, and quahty of hfe through effectIve land use planning Sl'cfion 2 The Planning ComnmslOn of the CIty of Seal Beach beheves as true the studIes conducted In the cltIe~ of Au,tm, Texas, BlloXI, MIS~ISSlppl, Garden Grove, CalIforma, Indlanapohs, IndIana, La, Angeles, Cahforma, and PhoeniX, Anzona whIch show Adult-Onented Busmes~e, cau~e secondary Impact, whIch degrade the area, of the CIty 111 whIch they are located, cau,e a bhghtll1g effect on the City, and mcrea,e enme m general, and ,ex- related cnmes In partIcular, m the vlel11lty of the Adult-Onented Busmess Section 3 Pnor to the adoptIon of tlm Ordinance, the Planning CommissIOn revIewed detaIled ,tudres prepared by other Jlm~dlctlOns regardmg the detnmental SOCial and economIc effect~ on per,on~ and propel tie, lInmedlately surroundmg e,tablIshed Adult-Onented Businesses The,e ,tudle~ Included tho~e prepared by the cItIes of Austm, Texa" BIloXI, MISSISMppl, Indlanapohs, IndIana, Garden Grove, CalIfornia, Lo, Angeles, Cahforma, and Phoemx, Anzona Sl'clion 4 WhIle the Planning COmnll~,lOn ot the City of Seal Beach de~lres to protect the nghts conferred by the United State, ConstItutIon to Adult-Onented Busll1es,e" It does so m a manner that en~ures the continued and ordcrly development of property WIthin the CIty and dlllllm~hc~, to the greate,t extent fea~lble, tho,e undemable ,econdary effects whIch the aforementIoned ~tudle~ have ~hown to be related With the development and operatIOn of Adult-Onented Busme,~e, Section 5 It IS not the Intent of the City In adopting thiS Ordinance to suppre~s any aCtIVItIeS protected by the FIrst Amendment, but rather to enact a content neutral Ordmance whIch addresses the ~ewndary cffect, Adult-Onented BU,lne"es have on the CIty Section 6 City ~tatf ha, preparcd an InltIal envlronmentdl asse"ment and proposed NegatIve Declaration a~ reqUIred by the CalIforma Environmental QualIty Act (CEQA) Staff ha~ lecelvcd eumment~ back from the Southern CahfornIa As~ocIatIon of Government" mdlcatmg the proJcct IS not regIOnally 'lgnIficant, and not comment1l1g on the envllonmentaI a,ses,ment or the propo~cd NegatIve DeclaratIOn J) \WI)'iI\Rl...C,O\NU94-'i 1'( R\L\\'\07.)1.94 ! NegatIve Dec.lmatlOn 94-5 Planmng Qmmln,uon ResolutIOn 94-32 July 20, 1994 Section 7 No new mformatlon was brought forward at the publIc heanng wIth regard to potentIal envIronmental Impacts from the proJect that was not addre,sed m the InItIal environmental assessment, and ,taff recommends that the Planning CommlsMon recommend that the City CouncIl determme that the propo~ed Ordmance and ZOnIng Text Amendment wIll not have any adverse Impact on the envIronment, and adopt a negative declaration Section 8 The PlannIng Comml~,lon conducted a duly notIced publIc heanng on July 20, 1994, at whIch the Plannmg Comml,slon entertained teMIITIony from City staff and members of the public NOW THEREFORE, the Planning COlmm,slon of the CIty of Seal Beach hereby resolves as follows (a) The PlannIng Commls~lon affirms that It mdependently revIewed and analyzed propo~ed NegatIve Declaration No 94-5 pnor to aetmg on the applIcatIon, and the PlannIng Comnm,lOn has reviewed and conSidered the informatIon con tamed m the NegatIve DeclaratIOn and the mltIal ~tudy, and has a!,o reviewed and con'ldered the eomment~ received dunng the publIc revIew penod pnor to the approval of thl, ProJect and hereby find, a~ follows (b) NegatIVe DeclaratIon 94-5 was prepared by City Staffand therefore reflects the mdependent Judgment of the City of Seal Beach, and (c) There I, no substantIal eVidence m the record which would ,upport a faIr argument that approval of the proposed adult-onented bu,me~s ordinance and Zone Text Amendment 94-1, with the reqUlred 11lItlgatlOn mea~ure~, 11lIght have a slgmflcant cnvlronmental Impact, and (d) PUr>lmnt to Title XIV, Callforma Code of RegulatIons, SectIon 753.5(c)(1), the PlannIng Commls~lon has determined that, after consldenng the record a~ a whole, there IS no eVidence that the proposed proJect WIll have the potentIal for any adverse effect on WildlIfe resources or the habItat upon which the WIldlIfe depends Furthermore, on the basIs of substantIal eVIdence, the Plannmg Comlllls,lOn hereby recommends that the CIty CouncIl find that any pre,umptlOn of adver~e Impact ha~ been adequately rebutted and that pur,uant to FIsh and Game Code Section 711 2 and Title XIV, CalifornIa Code of RegulatIons, Section 753 5(a)(3), that the payment of FI,h and Game Department fIlIng fees IS not required m conJunctIon with thiS proJect The Planning Connm,Mon hereby recommend, that the City Council dIrect the Director of Development Servlce~ to fIle the appropnate De Mmllnus Impact Fmdmg for the CalifornIa Department of FIsh and Game CertifIcate of Fee ExemptIon (e) The Secretary of the Planning COlnml~~lon I~ hereby dIrected to forward thIS resolutIon to the CIty Council PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Comnm,lon of the City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the 20th day of July, 1994 by the follOWing vote AYES Comml,sloner~ ShaS\.PJ Ln. ., I &0..'.....) Qar.np\"l J.. NOES COI11ml~~IOners Comml~~loners D~ \ ......... 0..-... ABSENT. - ABSTAIN Comml"loner~ D \WP'H\RL~O\NIlQ4-" P< R\LW\lI7-1 \-9~ 2 Nl!gatrvt" Dt'dlllatrCJn 94-5 Planmng Ctmu1Uu/CJn Re~CJlufJC}n 94-32 July 20, 1994 Y!rr~~ell~ Planning CommIssIon 1) \WI"mRl '()\NU94-'j 1><. R\I W\lr1 n lJ4 3