Long Beach, CA
File #: 06-0482    Version: 1 Name: Commissions - check cashing/payday
Type: Agenda Item Status: Approved
File created: 5/18/2006 In control: City Council
On agenda: 5/23/2006 Final action: 5/23/2006
Title: Recommendation to adopt revised findings to deny a Conditional Use Permit for a check cashing/payday advance business at 2201 Lakewood Boulevard, Suite B (Case No. 0510-12). (District 5)
Sponsors: Planning Commission, Planning and Building
Attachments: 1. C-3sr, 2. C-3att
Related files: 06-0412
TITLE
Recommendation to adopt revised findings to deny a Conditional Use Permit for a check cashing/payday advance business at 2201 Lakewood Boulevard, Suite B (Case No. 0510-12).  (District 5)
 
DISCUSSION
On May 16, 2006 , the City Council conducted a public hearing on an appeal of the Planning Commission s approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a Check Cashing use at 2201 Lakewood Boulevard , Ste , B. After considering testimony from the applicants and appellant, the City Council received the supporting documentation into the record , concluded the hearing and voted 0 to overturn the Planning Commission s decision and grant the appeal , thereby denying the application for a Conditional Use Permit.
 
As a part of the motion , the City Council directed staff to return with revised findings supporting the action to deny the Conditional Use Permit. Staff has prepared revised findings (see attachment 1) that determine that the approval wil cause a detrimental impact to the surrounding community including public health , safety and the general welfare, and the quality of life. This position is supported by written evidence from the City of long Beach Police Department (see attachment 2).  Based on the public testimony provided and other evidence in the record , it has been shown that the Conditional Use Permit for a payday advance/check cashing use is not in the best interest of the community and would cause a detrimental impact to the surrounding neighborhood.
 
In accordance with the Guideline for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act a Categorical Exemption (CE 05- 192) has been prepared for this project.
 
Assistant City Attorney Michael Mais reviewed this Council letter on May 17, 2006.
 
TIMING CONSIDERATIONS
None
 
FISCAL IMPACT
None
 
SUGGESTED ACTION
Approve recommendation.
 
Respectfully Submitted,