Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 89-014 N.C.S. 01/17/1989 JAN 1."1 ~i~~ 3 Resolution No. 89-14 N ~.s. of the City of Petaluma, California DENYING APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ON BOULEVARD BOWL ANNUAL REVIEW (AP NO. 008-471-18) WHEREAS, on April 15, 1985 a use permit was granted by the City Council (Resolution 85-109 N.C.S.) to allow an expansion of the Boulevard Bowl, .located at 1100 Petaluma Boulevard, subject to twenty-five conditions of approval, one of which required Planning Commission review of the use permit one year from date of occupancy of the expanded facility; and, WHEREAS, on September 22, 1987, the Planning Commission reviewed said use permit approximately one year from date of occupancy of the expanded facility; and WHEREAS, at that time the Planning Commission and, upon appeal, the City Council added more conditions and required one more annual review; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission again reviewed said use permit on November 8, 1988, for which time and date all persons previously expressing an .interest in this matter were notified; and WHEREAS, all testimony both written and verbal were considered by the Planning Commission prior to rendering a decision on this matter; and WHEREAS, on November 8, 1988, the Planning Commission decided that no further revisions to the previously imposed conditions of approval were necessary and that no further annual reviews were warranted; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's action was appealed on November 21, 1988 by Valentina Garzoli Magers; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing to consider this appeal on January 9, 1989, at which time all previously submitted information as well as a noise study commissioned by the appellant, was reviewed and considered by the Council; and, 89-14 Rcs. Nn . .............................. N.C.S. WHEREAS, a previous appeal based on noise levels of the Boulevard Bowl use permit was denied by the City Council (Resolution 87-131 N.C.S.) ; and WHEREAS, separate noise studies commissioned by the applicant and appellant, as well as observations made by staff, indicates that ambient noise level s are generally higher than those eminating from the Boulevard Bowl and that all noises are generally below City Standards established in the Zoning Ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council finds that the overall operation of the Boulevard Bowl has improved in terms of noise, surveillance, and aesthetics since its expansion and that the Planning Commission acted properly in its decision of November 8, 1988; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby denies that appeal of Valentina Garzoli Magers, thereby leaving all conditions adopted and actions taken by the Planning Commission in full effect. reso.blvd.bowl/resol0 Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City. REFERENCE: I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the Approved as to Council of the City of Petaluma at a (Regular) (~~at>~~OSaial) meeting on the ....---....1.7.ih.... day of .....................lanuary....................., 19..$.9., by the following vote.: 'ty Attorney AYES:. Cavanagh, Tencer, Woolsey, Balshaw, Vice Mayor Davis, Mayor Hilligr~ss NOES: ~ ABSENT: Sobel ATTEST : ...... ..... .... ....... .. ....... ........--•-•---..........---........,. ..........- :. City Clerk Mayor (buncil File .................................... CA 10-85 Res. No. ..~.7.-.14,,,,,,,,,,,, N.C.S. (/ r r