Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 16-93, CUP-1993-8, CDP-1993-2RESOLUTION NO. 16-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA, DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FOR A CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY WITH A 60-FOOT HIGH MONOPOLE AT 2150 MCKINLEY AVENUE. APPLICANT: PACTEL CELLULAR CASE FILE NOS. CUP-1993-8/CDP-1993-2 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of National City, California, considered Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit applications and a proposed Negative Declaration for a cellular communications facility with a 60 foot high monopole at 2150 McKinley Avenue at the public hearings held on November 1, and November 15, 1993, at which time oral and documentary evidence was presented; and, WHEREAS, at said public hearings the Planning Commission considered the staff report contained in Case File Nos. CUP-1993-8, CDP-1993-2 and IS-1993-19, which are 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 Planning Commission of the City of National City, California, that the testimony and evidence presented to the Planning Commission at the public hearings held on November 1 and November 15, 1993, fail to support findings, required by the Municipal Code for granting any conditional use permit and coastal development 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 Planning Commission of the City of National City, California, that the testimony and evidence presented to the Planning Commission at the public hearings held on November 1 and November 15, 1993, support the following findings: 1. That the proposed use will have an adverse effect upon adjacent or abutting properties, since it will have visual impacts on surrounding residences and there are other sites not adjacent to residences where this facility could be located. 2. That the proposed use is not deemed essential and desirable to the public convenience or welfare, since there are residences adjacent to the site, and there are other locations with existing, tall power poles in which this facility could locate to lessen visual impacts. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby denies Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit application nos. CUP- 1993-8/CDP- 1993-2. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that copies of this Resolution be transmitted forthwith to the applicant and to the City Council; and, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that this Resolution shall become effective and final on the day following the City Council meeting where the Planning Commission resolution is set for review, unless an appeal in writing is filed with the City Clerk prior to 5:00 p.m. on the day of that City Council meeting. The City Council may, at that meeting, appeal the decision of the Planning Commission and set the matter for public hearing. The time within which judicial review of this decision may be sought is governed by the provisions of Code of Civil Procedures Section 1094.6. CERTIFICATION: This certifies that the Resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission at their meeting of December 6, 1993 by the following vote: AYES: MARTINELLI, KNUTSON, LARGE, BACA, FLORES, DETZER NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: GODSHALK s V4 I