HomeMy WebLinkAboutS03-City Attorney
.CIT(JoF SAN BERNARDI I() - REQUI!()I' FOR COUNCIL AC'OoN
From:
RALPH H. PRINCE
So~~: Revocation of Conditional Use Permit
Dept: Ci ty Attorney
Da~: January 31, 1985
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
Hearing on appeal of revocation of Conditional Use Permit No. 671
was held on January 21, 1985.
Recommended motion:
Adopt the Statement of Decision; Notice of Time Limits for Filing
Petition for Writ of Mandate, and authorize and direct the City
Clerk to serve a copy of such Statement and Notice to Robert
Sullivan and his attorney, Toby Bowler.
JUSTIFICATION FOR PLACEMENT ON SUPPLEMENT
On January 21, 1985, the Mayor and Common Council heard the appeal of
Robert Sullivan in the revocation of Conditional Use Permit 671 (Rumours).
Code of Civil Procedure 51094.6 sets forth that a petition for writ of
mandate shall be filed not later than the 90th day following the date the
decision becomes final. To start this period runnin~, we e~end that
the Statement of Decision be adopted ~
as soon as possible. ~
Signature
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
n Ir.
Phone: 5162
Ward: A/a
Source: A/a
Finance: A/a
Contact person:
John F _ Wi 1 Rnn
Supporting data attached:
Staff M..mo
Council Notes:
75-0262
Agenda Item No
51'.3
JI._.I....1
,CITOOF SAN BERNARDIO - REQUIOT FOR COUNCIL ACCaON
STAFF REPORT
The attached is a Statement of Decision which should be adopted
by the Mayor and Common Council pursuant to their decision made
on January 21, 1985, to affirm the decision of the Planning
Commission to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 671.
75-0264
0'
13
o
o
o
1
2
BEFORE THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
3
4
IN TilE MATTER OF TilE APPEAL OF
ROBERT SULLIVAN, REVOCATION OF
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 671.
)
)
)
)
)
STATEMENT OF DECISION;
NOTICE OF TIME LIMITS
FOR FILING PETITION FOR
WRIT OF MANDATE
5
6
7
8
9
Pursuant to San Bernardino Municipal Code Section 19.78.070,
the above-captioned matter pertaining to Revocation of
Conditional Use Permit No. 671 came on for hearing on appeal on
January 21, 1985, at 7:00 p.m. before the Mayor and Common
Council of the City of San Bernardino, sitting as a board of
10
11
12
administrative review.
An original hearing was conducted in this matter before the
14 Planning Commission on December 4, 1985. The hearing was
15 conducted pursuant to San Bernardino Municipal Code Section
16 19.78.ll0(A) to consider the revocation of Conditional Use Permit
17 No. 671, a dance and live entertainment permit issued to Rumours
18 Nightclub. Robert Sullivan, the appellant, was present at that
19 hearing, and gave testimony. Mr. Sullivan was represented at
20 that hearing by Toby Bowler, attorney at law. After review of
21 the record, the taking of testimony, and the examination of all
22 evidence submitted in the matter, the Planning Commission
23 determined at that time that: (1) full compliance with the
24 previously imposed conditions of the Conditional Use Permit had
25 not been achieved; (2) that based on numerous complaints from
26 surrounding residents, and from the amount of Police activity at
27 the location, the operations of Rumours Nightclub is determined
28 to be creating a public nuisance; and (3) Conditional Use Permit
O'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-
o
o
o
No. 671 is being, and has been, exercised so as to be detrimental
to the public health and safety of the citizens of the City of
San Bernardino. Based on the grounds as set forth above, on
December 4, 1984, the Planning Commission adopted a motion,
pursuant to San Bernardino Municipal Code Section 19.78.0l0(A)(2-
3) revoking Conditional Use Permit No. 671.
At the appeal hearing of January 21, 1985, Robert Sullivan,
the appellant, was present and was represented by Toby Bowler,
attorney at law. The Planning Commission of the City of San
Bernardino was represented by Frank Schuma, Planning Director,
and John F. Wilson, Deputy City Attorney. Pursuant to San
Bernardino Municipal Code Section 2.64.080, the appellant was
afforded the opportunity to present new and additional evidence
and to present argument. Pursuant to San Bernardino Municipal
Code Section 2.64.080, the Mayor and Common Council heard the
arguments made by the appellant and examined the staff report and
minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of December 4, 1984.
The appellant presented no new evidence.
The Mayor and Common Council, being fully advised, make the
following findings and decision.
FINDINGS
1. The use for which the permit approval was granted is
being exercised so as to constitute a nuisance.
2. The permit is being exercised contrary to the conditions
of such permit.
3. The use for which the permit approval was granted is
being exercised so as to be detrimental to the public health and
safety.
2
',"0'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
~
o
o
STATEMENT OF DECISION
1. The Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
Bernardino hereby affirm the decision of the Planning Commission
to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 671.
DATED:
AYES: Council Members
NAYS:
ABSENT:
* * *
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the time within which judicial
review of the decision in this matter must be sought is governed
by the provisions of Section 1094.6 of the California Code of
Civil Procedure which provides, in part, as follows:
"(a) Judicial review of any decision of a local agency,
other than school district, as the term local agency is defined
in Section 54951 of the Government Code, or of any commission,
board, officer or agent thereof, may be had pursuant to Section
1094.5 of this code only if the petition for writ of mandate
pursuant to such section is filed within the time limits
specified in this section.
(b) Any such petition shall be filed not later than the
90th day following the date on which the decision becomes
final. . . .
* * *
(d) If the petitioner files a request for the record as
specified in subdivision (c) within 10 days after the date the
decision becomes final as provided in subdivision (b), the time
3
--0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
n
23
24
25
26
27
28
o
o
o
within which a petition pursuant to Section 1094.5 may be filed
shall be- extended to not later than the 30th day following the
date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed
to the petitioner or his attorney of record, if he has one."
PLEASE ALSO TAKE NOTICE that Section 1.26.030 of the San
Bernardino Municipal Code provides as follows:
"1.26.030 Preparation and payment for record and reporter's
transcript.
Upon the filing of a written request for the record of the
proceedings or any portion thereof, an, amount estimated to cover
the actual cost of preparing the record shall be deposited in
advance with the City official preparing the record. The record
prepared by the City official shall include the transcript of the
proceedings, other than a reporter's transcript; all pleadings,
notices, orders, final decision, exhibits admitted or rejected,
all written evidence, and any other papers in the case. When a
hearing has been reported by a court reporter and the petitioner
desires a reporter's transcript, the petitioner shall arrange
directly with the court reporter for the transcript, pay the
reporter directly, and lodge the transcript with the court,
serving notice of the lodging to the City Attorney."
4