Resolution-PC 2006-2~ ~
RESOLUTION NO. PC2006-2
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
DENYING RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2005-00168
(1731 WEST MEDICAL CENTER DRIVE)
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified petition for
Reclassification of certain real property located in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
legally described as follows
PARCEC 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO 85-229, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM,
COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CAL.IFORNIA, FILED IN BOOK 215,
PAGES 1Q AND 11 OF PARCEL MAPS, lN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
` RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; and :
WHEREAS, concurrently with the petition for Reclassification, the Planning Commission did
receive verified petitions for an amendment to the Land Use Element of the`General Plan, designated as
General Plan Amendment No. 20Q5-00439, to re-designate the subjectproperty from the Publio-lnstitutional
land use designation to the Low-Medium Density Residentia( land use designation; Conditional Use Permit Na
2005-05046; and Tentative Tract Map No. 16932; and - :
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of
Anaheim on January 9, 2006, at 2:30 p.m., notices of which public hearing were duly given as required byJaw
and in accordance with the provisions of Title 18, Chapter 18.60 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, to hear and
consider evidence for and againsf said proposed reclassification and to investigate and make findings and
recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, at the time and place fixed for said public hearing, the Planning Commission did
give all persons interested in the matter an opportunity to be heard and did receive evidence and reports, and
did consider same; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and
in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports oifered at said hearing, does find and
determine the following facts:
1. That the petitioner proposes reclassification of the subject property from the GG (General
Commercial) zone to the RM-3 (Multipie-Family Residential) zone or less intense zone.
2. That the property is currently vacant and the Land Use Element of the Anaheim General Plan
designates the subject property for Public-Institutional land uses.
3. That the Public-Institutional land use designation includes a wide range of public and quasi-
public uses, including government offices, transportation facifities, public or private colleges and universities,
public utilities, hospitals, large assisted living facilities, community centers, museums, public libraries and other
like uses.
4. That the proposed reclassification of the subject property is not in compliance with the existing
Anaheim Generaf Plan, and the request to amend the Anaheim General Plan has been denied.
5. That the proposed reclassification of subject property does not properly relate to the zones and
their permitted uses locally established in close proximity to the subject property and to the zones and their
permitted uses generally established throughout the community.
6. That 13 people spoke at said public hearing in opposition to the proposed project. Additionally,
numerous individuals indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition. The Planning Commission
also received a petition signed by 229 individuals indicating opposition to the project.
Cr~PC2006-2 -1- . PC2006-2
~ ~
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposal to reclassify the subject property from the C-G (Generai Commercial)
zone to the RM-3 (Residential, Multiple-Family) zone or less intense zone; and based upon the opposition to the
proposed project presented at said public hearing, does hereby deny the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Anaheim Planning Commission that the request
to reclassify the subject property from the C-G (General Commercial) zone to the RM-3 (Residential, Multiple-
Family) zone or less intense zone be, and the same is hereby, denied.,
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
_
January 9, 2006. Said resolution is subjectto the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a Cit Council Resolution in the event
of an appeaL
CHAIRMAN, ANAH PLANNING COMMISSION -
ATTEST:
/T /`~~"~'
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
!, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on
January 9, 2006, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BUFFA, EASTMAN, FLORES, KARAKI, PEREZ, ROMERO, VELASQUEZ
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this /~ day of C~rv~-r ,
2006.
~J~~ ~~~~ .,.
SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION