PC 77-38RESOL'JTtON M0, ?C77-32
A RESOIL'TIOH OF Ti1E ANA}iEt~' CITY PLANNING CON,".I~StON
RECOMHENDING TO TNE CiTY COU'~CIL Ur ~HE CI~Y Of ANAHEi~
THAT PEifTION FOR RECLASSiFtCATIOH N0. ib-77-36 9E DfSnPPP.GVED
NHEREAS, thc: Ar~hei:~ Ci[•~ ~i~nrinn, C;~rmTission did reccivc a ver;`icd
Petition for Reclassiiication f;om C: L":i~ /;1JD ~,.~fLNcL`"!NA MEE~:}iGF, 9731 South '»aiker,
Cypress, Ca!ifornia °,0630 {Owners) a;,d EiLL PH~LF'S, ?0~~5 Morth Main Strert, Sui::e 5,
Orange, Californie 926E,7 (Agent) or ccrtai:~ real ~;roperey .ituated in iiie City of
Anaheim, County of Orange, S*_ate of Cai i•`orr.iH, ~_i+;;~ribcd t:~:
THE $OUTH 42i,00 FcET OF THE En5T H;I_~ OF T~i_ ~OUTHEAS' QUAE7EP, UF i'::_ SOliT:~dEST
QUA.R7~.R OF SEC7f0~7 14, T041NSHIP 4 SOU'fN, RANGE i? 11~5T, Iti TH~ CITY Oi= ,~ti';F+.FIH,
C~,,',~l' Or ORRNGE, 5Tl1TE CF CALIFGk~7tA.
EXCEPT TNE WEST 2G4 FEET OF TNE SOU1'H 360 FE[T.
ALSO EXCcPT THAT POP,TION OF TfiE SOUTN 32j.0! FEET LYIIrG EASTERLY 0~ TH; 'NEST 2u4
FEE7.
WHEREAS, the C![y Piannfng Com^~issior, did hoid a p~.i~:ic hearing ai the CiCy
Hell in [he City of Anaheim on February 1~~, 1?]7~ a; 1:30 p.m „ ~otice o` said public
hearing having been duly giver, a; reGuireri by IaN and i^ accordance witn Che
provls(ons of thc Ana;~cin Municipa! Codc, Ch~:ptor '~?,03, to henr a~d consider
evidence for and agalns: said proposed reciassification and [o investigate ar~d make
flndtnqs end recommendatlons in connection iherewlth; and
uHEREAS, sala Commis,ion, afcer 6ue inspcc*_ion, investlgzt~on and stud}• made
by (tself and in its behalf, and <~sfter due consideratio~ of al) evidence and reports
offared at said heari~g, dces finJ ard de[crmine Chc fcllowing facis:
1. That [he petitioner propnses a reciass(ficati~n of zoniny on Che above-
descrlbed property~ from Chr_ RS-A-43,000 (RESiDEkTIAL/AGRICULTURAL) ZQNE to the RN-
1200 (RESIDE~ITIAL, MULTIPLE-FAMILY) ZONE.
2. Thet thc Anahelm Generai Plan designates sut~Ject property for me.dlum-
denslty resldentlai land uses.
3. Thet thc recommendetlon of the Plannfng Commleslon for denlal of the
EIR Negetive Declnration Is not [o be con~idered the basls `or tho didapproval of
thls reclesslficatl~n,
4. That tho propose~l zoning of [hr, subJect nro~arty would normit ~
ratidgntlal clensity wttich would bo dncrlmnn[nl to tha p~nco, heelth, ~rfety and
general well'are of tho Cititen• o{ the C(ty of Annhelm, duo to chc Impact on trefPlc
In the nroa; ond~ fur[hermore, tho praparal would over-bulid tno proporty to the
dotrime,n[ of ;he ~urrounding low-dnnsity ra~idenclal land u~ea,
5. 7het the proposed reclasslfica:fon of subJec' property Is not nece5sary
and/or desirable tor the orderly nnd prooer development of the cammtinity.
RESOLUTION N0. PC77-38
r
' 6, That the proposed reclassi=ication ef su6Jecc proper~y does no;
properly retate to the zones and tneir ~ermitted uses local',y estabii::neu in close
proximity to s~bject properCy and to the zones and their pcrmitte~ uses ~;eneraily
estabtished [hroughout [he community,
?, That two (2) p~rsons appea red, represen[ing approxir,ace~y eieti~en (11)
persons present at said public heartng !n apposi[ion; snd that three ~3; ceiegrams,
four (4) le:tters, and a petition sioned by ~pproximately thirty-s;x (;6; area
residents and property owners, all in opposltion to the subJect proposai, were
rece(ved,
Et~VIRONMEN7AL IMPACT R"cPOh; FINDING: That thc Anaheim Ci~y Pi~nnir9
Cortrnission does he~eby recommerd *_o the Ci~y Counc'1 of 'he Ci*yo uf Anaheir tna: tne
requcst for a Ncgstive Declaratlar be denl~d for ,.he s~bi~ct ~reoosal~ on thc basis
that the proposa) would have .:e~inite and sieniricant ~,~d~vid~.:ai ar.d cumulaCive
adverse environmental IL^,pBfLs on tne subject property anC surroundin~ iar~; u,es, rnost
specifically with respect to traffir. and the inCru;ion of an extreriely dense prejer_t
adJace~~* :- single-family residentia! zenes and land u:es.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE 17 itESCLVED that thc Ana~,~;m Cit•~ Plannirn Cc~rr,ission
does hercby recommend co Che CEty Council of ;he Clty o` Anahelm that subject
Petltion for Reciasslfication be disapproved on the dasis of the aforementioned
findirgs.
THE FOREGOItIG RESOLUTI0~1
February, 1~77.
ATTEST:
r
GZ~tt~1-~~~~FTE I M G 1 ~~~
, E~~1 ~ +
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUIITY OF ORANGE )ss.
CITY OF At~AHEIM )
1, Patricif~ B. Scanlan, Secretary of che Anahelm Clty Planning Commission,
do hereby certify th~et the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting
of tht Anahelm City 1'ianntng Commission held on February 14, 1977, at 1:30 p.m., by
the follawing vote o~f the members tfiereof:
AYES; COMMISSIONI:RS: BARt~ES, DAVID, HEREi57, K.ING, MORLEY~ TOLAR, JOHNSON
NOES: COMMISSIQNrRS: NONE
ABSc11Ti CQMHIS510}iERSi NONE
ly W17NE55 W11ERE6F, l heva hnreunto set my hand Yhls 14th dey nf Februery,
,9~~. O . .
SECT~E7ARY, NANEIM CIT PLANNIN CQNiHISSION
Is sianAd and approvc by me this i~ith day of
H 1., N H 1 N N NHI 5 N
-2- RESOLUTION N0. PL77-38