HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RESO 96-10RESOLUTION NO. 9 6 —10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY,
DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
FOR A CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY
WITH A 65 FOOT HIGH MONOPOLE
AT 12 N. EUCLID AVENUE.
APPLICANT: AIRTOUCH CELLULAR
CASE FILE NO.: CUP-1995-4
WHEREAS, the appeal of the City Council of the Planning Commission's approval of a
Conditional Use Permit application (CUP-1995-4) was considered by the City Council of the
City of National City at public hearings held on November 28, 1995, and January 9, 1996, at
which time oral and documentary evidence was presented; and,
WHEREAS, at said public hearings the City Council considered the staff report contained
in Case File No. CUP-1995-4, which is maintained by the City, and incorporated herein by
reference; and,
WHEREAS, this action is taken pursuant to all applicable procedures required by State
and City law; and,
WHEREAS, the action recited herein is found to be essential for the preservation of
public health, safety and general welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of National
City, California, that the testimony and evidence presented to the City Council at the public
hearings held on November 28, 1995, and January 9, 1996, fail to support findings, required by
the Municipal Code for granting any conditional use permit, that the proposed use will not have
an adverse effect on adjacent or abutting properties, and that the proposed use is deemed
essential and desirable to the public convenience or welfare.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of National City,
California, that the testimony and evidence presented to City Council at the public hearings held
on November 28, 1995, and January 9, 1996, support the following fmdings:
1. That the proposed use will have an adverse effect on adjacent or abutting properties,
since the monopole will be visible from the adjacent, single-family residential
neighborhood, and the effects of continous exposure to electromagnetic fields on
residents in the area is presently unknown.
CONTINUED ON PAGE 2
Resolution No. 96 —10
Page 2 of 2
2. That the proposed use is not deemed essential and desirable to the public
convenience or welfare, since the use will be adjacent to single-family residences
and will have a negative visual effect on those residences.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby denies Conditional Use
Permit application no. CUP-1995-4.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall become effective and final on
the day following the City Council meeting where the resolution is adopted. The time within
which judicial review of this decision may be sought is governed by the provisions of Code of
Civil Procedure Section 1094.6.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 16th day of January, 1996.
GEORGE H. WATERS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
LO*I ANNE PEOPLES, CI'IVY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
7;
GEORGE H. EISER, III -CITY ATTORNEY