Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/02/2006

Home

December 24, 2005 -- Page 5 on three documents that were not attached to the June 7, 2001, denial letter, and that ~ontained more than 112 conunentS without clarification as to which condi- tions Lease had already been remedied. Thus, the denial letter was overly broad and insufficient to meet the specificity requirements of the law. It was not enough that Lease had copies of the various letters at the time of their drafting. The township's failure to attach the letters to the denial letter did not serve to advise Lease of the plan's deficiencies. The law clearty required that the decision of the governing body had to disclose the defects of the plan and provide supporting authority. Mere knowl- edge of the board's reasons for denial was insufficient. 'The court determined that the test was not whether the applicant had knowl- ed,e of the plan s defic~enctes, but, rather, whether the reasons for den/al were contained within the four comers of the final written decision. Additionally, from a practical standpoint, incorporation by reference and attachment of such documentation was not in any way burdensome to the governing body and served to protect it from claims that a developer did not receive a list of a plan's deficiencies. see also: Advantage Development Inc. v. Board of Supervisors of Jackson Township, 743 A.2d 1008 (2000). see also: Dobrinoff v. Board of Supervisors of Franklin Township, 582 A.2d 1156 (1990). Adult Entertainment-- Business owner seeks exception to ordinance City shows other sites are reasonably available Citation: Dino's Victory Road House Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, Court of Appeal of California, 2nd App. Dist. Div. 1, No. B176576 (2005) CALIFOR_N-IA (11/8/05) -- Dino's Victory Road House Inc. operated a bar, which offered entertainment by bikini-clad dancers. The bar was located in an industrial zone and was within 500 feet of a residential neighborhood. The bar had seating for 80 patrons and 12 on-site parkSng spaces with additional street parking. Dino's wanted to offer topless and nude dancing, which would con- vert the bar into an adult entertainment business as defined by Los Angeles' municipal code. Under the code, adult businesses could not be located within 500 feet of' any lot in a residential zone. A property owner could apply for an exception ~nd operate an adult business within 500 feet if no other site was "reasonably available elsewhere in the City of the establishment." According to the code, a site was "reasonably available" if it was available for use, purchase, or rental as an adult entertainment business. If the city disapproved an application, it had to provide "substantial evidence" that another site was reasonably available. Dino's filed an application for an e.~ception under the code. which was de- © 2005 Quinta. n Publisnin§ Group. Any reproduction is prohibited. For more information please call (617) 542-0048. 135