PC 70-188RL-SOLUTIUPJ N0. R;70-I88
1
A RESOLUIION OF THE CITY PLANNING COIdIMISSION OF THE CITY 0'r APdANEIPA RECOMNiENDIPJG
TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF APPP,OVAL OF REVIS°_D Pii+iv~ FOR 'J,IRIAI~":E N0. 2100
~,
f'1
1
:y
VJHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission on July 14, ,9(~~ in F.?sc,^+.ion No.
PC64-1~5 granted in part Variance Noo 2100; and
UJHEREAS, the City Council on Augast 19, 1969 in Resolution No. 69R-'k~~i 9ranted in
part Variance No. 210~; and
l"JHE:~EAS, a condition of approval required development substantially in accordance
with plans on file in i:he Development Services Department; and
t'd=1EREAS, revise~l plans submitted were not substantially in accordance with original
plans, therefore, the Planning Commission dPtermined that the revised plans should be
considered at an advertised public hearing in order that adjoining property ovmers primarily
affected by the proposed dev?lopment could voice their opinions; and
l'JFIEREAS, the City Planning Commissicn did hold a public hearing at the City Hall in
the City of Anaheim on Octeber 19, 1970, at 2:00 0'clock P.M., notice of szid public hearing
having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the
Anaheim Pdunicipal Code, Chapter 18.68, to hear and consider ev?dence for and a9ainst said
revised plans and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection there-
with; and
VJHEREAS, said Commission, aft::r dce inspection, investigation, and study made by itself
and in its behalf, and after due conside:~tion of all evidence and reports ofiered at said
hearing, does find and determine the folloviir~~ facts:
1. That the revised plans were de~>rr.ed to be an improvement over the origfn;it
plans from the standpoint that greater amenities would be provi:l?d witi~in
the interior of the development; hoviever, the revised plans provided less
protection to the R-0 properties to i:he nortti, since the majority of the
parking spaces for the apartment devel~pment are propo~:;ed along the north
k;oundary of tl~e property.
2. 'that the original plans approved b; the Commission incorporated architectural
designs that screened the ma.7oiity of the development from view of the R-0
property to the nerth, and provided only a small percentage of the parking
along the north boundary.
3. That the proposed development p:oposes ali ~,:~rking immediately adjacent to
the R-0 proper*ies creating undesirable odnr e mission and noises from
veh.icles startiny anc+ st~~ppin~ whic!~ would be detrimental to the general
hea'_th and welfare of th~ adjoining propert~y owners to t:ie north.
4. That although approval had been yiv~n fa~ .-~- and f2~ stories by both the
Planning Commission and Ci~y Council, ~onsYderatfon shoi!ld have been
given to the poii.cy maintained in !he >'~st which requireti all properties
adjoining tiiese R-0 properties to mair,tain one story bo;.h for commercial
and apartment developmer.t, and that tr~e revised plans have not taken into
consideration the welrar~_ of th~e adjoini~g property owners.
5. That two persons ap{~eared, representing nine persor~s present in the Council
Chamber, and that seven ]etters and ~etiFiom;; w~-_° received all in oppositzon
to the revised plans.
;~ ;~,
~~~ ,
`~ ~
~}~
~~ .~~ ~ ~
NOW, T}iEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Counci.l of the City of Anaheim disapproval of the revised plans
submitted under Variance No. 2100 cn the basis of the fore9oing findings.
THE ~'OREGOIN,; RL-SOLUIIGV is signed and approved by me ±his 29th day of October, !970.
i' j -
~~~~~~
i
- ~;~c. ~ ~ ,%'/~! ..-~L_:
`~CH RMAN ANANEIM`CITY PLqt1NItJG COMMIS5ION
ATTEST:
/ /
-~ = t '~~2c.L~:~,
SECRETqP.Y ANAH M CITY P1AtdPJIt.'G COPdh1ISSI0tu
STATE OF CALIFORIvIA )
COUIJTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF A.`dAHEIM )
I, A~n Krebs, Sncretary of t}~e City Planning Comnission of the City of Hnaheim, do hereby
certify t:iat the foregoing resolution was pass_d and adopted ai: a meeting of the City Planning
Con~mission of the City of AnaF~eim held on October 19, 1970, at 2:00 0'clock P.M., by the
following vot~ of the members thereof:
AYES: COP~:d1SSI0PlER5: Farano, Gauer, P.owland, Seymour.
IJOES: CONJ~IISSI014ERS: Kaywood, Herkst.
ABSENT: CUhM~IISSIOPJERS: Allred.
IN l'JITNL-SS V~HEREOF, I have herr.unto sct my hand this 29th day of October, ii70.
~'
. ~-i-z ~ c ''~2,' ~~'
SECRETARY ANAIiEIM CITY PLANNING COMR1ISSION
Res. No. 188
.. , ,