PC 86-295w~sa~r^~,--.~Ii
,., . ,.. ., ~~..ra,•,.,~~,• .
RESOLUTION tdJ. PC136-295
A R~50LtJTTU[3 ~)G' THn ANI~HF:;i ~I`PY PLANNIt~G COi,~MISSTON
THAT PETITION FO12 RECLASSIFICATION Nc). 86-8i-1L` BE DENIED
WI•IrREAS, the Anaheim Ci~~• Pl.anning Commi;~sion did Ceceive a verifiE~
~etition for R~classiii~ati^n fr~~m FATRMGNT LIMITLD, 7.3532 EIazel Avenu~,
Gar.der- Gr.ove, California 97.G44 RivD LLBERT F. GHRTSTGNSEN & MARIE CHRISTyt~,SEN,
2U0 South I'ai.rr~ont, AnahPim, C~lifornia 92807, o~~iler~, and DEF'T DESTGN, INC.,
185U e;ast 17th, ~ 11.3, 5anta pna. Ca].iLornia 92701, agent for. certain real
property situated in the City of Anaiieim; CounL•y o~ Qrange, Statc of
Cal.iforna.a, described as ir,~ 1ows:
WHERLAB, tt;a City Planni~-q Ccmmiss;~n did hold a public hearing at
the Civic Center iii ti~e City of Anaheim on Sc~tem:oer 29, 1986, at 1c30 p.m.,
not;ice of said pubZi:; heacii~g havi.~ig be:en duly yiven as rnoi~i4ed by law and in
accordance with th~ provisio:~s oE the Anaheim Muni.ci~~a1 Code, Chapter 18.03,
to h~ar and conGider evidence for and ~gainst said proposed r.ec:.assi£ication
and to invest.iga;.e an~~ :nake fir.ding~ and cecommendation~ in connectiorz
therewxth;. Gaid public hearing having bE;en ~~nL•~nued to the nlanning
Commission r;~eel:ing of November 7.4 r 1986; and
WHEREAS, said Commzssion; after due i.nspection, inv~sti.gatian and
stu~y made by iLself ar.d in ~~:~ behalf, and after due considerat~on of a:ll
evi.~aence: and repor ts of f.~-~ed at said hearing, uoes f~ nc3 and determine the
following Pact.s:
1.. That t=l~e pe~itionec prapases reclass~fication o£ subj~ct
pr;,perty from the RS-EiS-22,L'00 (SC) (RF~sidc~ztial, Sir~gJ.e-Fami:l.y, Sc~nic
Corr.i~.~or Ov~rlay) 7,onc ko ~M-3000(5C) (Residential, Multiple-Fan~ily, Scenic
Corri.dor Ov~arlay l~~ne.
2. That the Anaheim Gencral Pl.an designates subject property for
hi1lUi,d.e estate density residenLia.l ]and u,es and G~n~ral Plan Amendment No.
221 was denied hy the Planriiny Commission on Noven;bec 24, 1986,
~. That the propo~ec3 r~classificatzan of subject prop:~rty is not
r.ecessur.y nor desirable for L•he arderly, and ptopar development u[ the
comrr~.:n9.t:y.
4. ~Ph~t kh~ proposed reciassiEication o.f subject proper.ty do~s not
properly r.ela~e t•~ the zo-~es and L•heir permitted u~es loc~.lly establisYied in
close ~r.oxi~nit}~ to su4ject ~roperty an~ to L•he zone, and tneir permitted uses
gener3:l.ly es~abli.sh~d throughout the commur~ity.
5. That 22 pers4n:~ indi.cat~d their prese~ice at the September 29,
I.y86 meeLi.ng asid 39 peopl~ indicated theic presence ar said public hParir.g in
c~ppasitic~~; and that r~::iL•i.ons ;;onr..aining approximat4ly 91 S~~gnar.ures and
apr~rt,x:.ma~ely 20 lettets were received in oppusition to subiect petition.
ENVtROyM~;N~?'AL Ii~tPAC~' h1NRT_NG: That tt~e AnahFi.m Gitiy Planning
Commis~ion ha~ rev:,awed the ~roposa~. to reclassify subject oroper~y Fr^m
RS-HS-22,C00(SC) (Hesidential, single-iamily, Scenic ror.ridor Overlay) zune tc
RM-3Q00(SC) (Ttesidential, Mu.ltiple-Family, S.;enic Corridor Overlay) 7,~ne on an
ir.regularly-shaped parcel oP 2and cunsisting of approximately 6.2 acre~,
0989r PC86-295
;;;~
, .. ~;';'
"`.
~ .~;~
,,
,~
:~r<.i~
r'
having a frontage ot ~pproximately 8A3 ~e~t on ~he eask side of. Fairmonk
Boulevacd; and does heret~y app~:ove Ehe Negative Declaration upon Eind~ng that
i~ has cansidered ~he Negative Declarat~on together with a:-y comments receia~ed
during r.he public review proc~ss and iurth~r finding on the basis af ~he
initial stuc~y and any comm~nts received that there is no substantial evidence
that the nroject• will have a~ignificant effect on L-he envirc~nment. ;I
~ ~'
NOW, THLREEOFtE, BG IT R6S~JLVEP tk~at the Rnaheim Cit;~ Planning
C~:nmi:sian does hereby de~~y Pei:ition for Reclassi~:ication on the basis of. th,e
afor.ementioned findinys.
THE FOR~GOIt~G R~SOLU'i'ION is si.gried anc3 ap~roved by me this 24th day
of NoveR~ber, ].ya6.
.~=' f
~~~ ~~, . , ; f
s
CHAIRM~ANAH M CIT~~Y NG l".OMMISSSOI~
/
ATTFST:
• ~ ~~~ ~ ._ ;:
ti~r~dQ.1
SFCF?~TA Y, ANAkI~IM C:I`.PY PI,ATINING COMf]ISSICP?
STATE UF CALTF'ORNIA )
CUIIN'PY OF URANGL ) ss, ,
CITY OI` 11NAfiEIM )
;
I, Edith L. Harris, Secre~ary of thz Anaheim CiL-y Plann~ng ~'~'
Comtnission, do hereby certify that the foregoing Lesolution was passed and
a:iopted at ~.: meeting of khe Anaheim City Planning Commission Y:eld on November
24, 1986, by the Foilowing vote of. the membet:s ther~ot:
AYES: CUMt9I5570Nk:R5: HOUAS, F.KY, HERCiST, I~F~WICKI, MG BURNLY, MESSL
NUCS: COMMISSIONERS: ^lONE
ABSENT: COldf+IISSIONERS: LA CLAIR~ :;
IN W7TlJESS 4iY.EREOF, I tiaVe tcereunto set my ha[~d this 24th day of !;;'
~~c>vember, 1986. "~
;~:
_.~._'`-~`-"~ ~ F-~t-it.~o -..~_ ~?,~
SECR3TARY~ ANAIiEIM CI'1'Y PLANNING COMMISSIUI~ ,:;;,~
c':,
~.,~ ~
r:.;
;.;,~
`~~
,,.
' ~~sf,
;'r
_. ..,. ...~':~
~2-- PC86-295 ~>'~
;.~.~.
~a1; i
~ ~:~
~:+
J
. . ~ ~ . . . . . , ~ ...~'_~Y