PC 88-174RESOLUTIpN N0~ P(,~'85-174
A FESOLUTTON OF THE ANAHETM CITY PLANNINCi COMMZSSTON ;
THAT PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION N0. 88-89-01 BE DENIED ,~
t~he Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verif,ied
WHEREAS 4":
~:
,
pPtition far Rectassification from CHARLES D. BOLERJACK and D0~2~THY A.
nd
o
owners
t (;
;f::
,
,
y
BOLERJACI~, 3625 Savanna Street, Anaheim, CA 92804, proper
Yorha Linda, CA
201 '.~~~
,
No.
MTCHA~L K. FRAZIER, 18200 Yorba Linda Boulevard,
the City nL- Anaheim,
i
~
n
92686, agent, for cer~ain real prc~p~rty' situated
County of Orange, State of California, described as :CoZic~ws: ;~
TFIE WEST O1QE-HALF~ MEASUfiED ALONG T.HE SOLTTH LINE OF r:
LOT 21, OF TRACT 743, xN THE CTTY ~F ANAHEIM. COLTNTY
OF ORANIiE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A M~1P
RECORD~D IN Ei00K 22, PAG~ 10 OF MYSCFLLANEOUS MAPS,
RECORDS OF OItANGr~ COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
E}:CEPTINC~ THEREFROM TF1AT POiZTION LY.TNG NORTHWESTERLY
OF THE 50UTIiEAS7:ERLY I~INE OF THE LAND DESCR:[BCD IN A
DEED TO ~JRANGE COUNTY FLOOA CONTROL DISTRICT, ~
R~CORDED MAY. 5, 1p60, IN IIOOK 52Z7. PACE 182 OF ;:~
'
OFFICTAL RECORDS. `
'~~
'~
WFiEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearinq at
ti !,~
t
ae
the Civic Center in the City o£ Anareim on July 6, 1988, at 1:30 p.m., no
en as required by law and in
i ~
r`
v
of said public heax'ir.g having been duly g
heim Municiz~al Code, Cha~ter 18.03,
A
h ;~
na
e
accordan~e wxth rtie provisior_s of t
for and against said proposed reclassification ~z
to rear and cousider evid~nce
£indings and recommendations in connection
k
e
and to investigate ~nd ma
ther~iwittl; and
;~;r
said Commissioxi, after due inspec~ion, investigation and
WHEREAS ; ~:z:
~t
,
study made by itself and in its behalf, and after duo con.sideration of a7.1
ne the
rm5
t
d r'
.
e
e
evi.dence and reparts o•f.L•ered at said hoaring, does find and ,'r~
fcllowing facts:
Thac ~he p~titi~ner proposes reclassification of subject
] ';;,1~.
..
000 (Resiclential/Agricultural) Zone to the RM-~.200
R~-A--93
th ;~ ?
,
e
propert~y fr.om ~
e-Family) Zone.
tial/Multip]
id ,,U
.
en
(Ros
?.. That the Analieim Gener~l Plan designates subject property for ;~y
medium density resid~ntial land uses. ;;r~
4" .
T~at tne proposed reclassif•icatiun of subject property is not
3 ~~1i ~
.
desirable tor the orderly and proper developmenL of the ~
,
necessary nor ;~
community. '_~!
0372r
; ~;.
:~
;~:';
;~~
Pcss-i~~ _ '~
~
;,~
,,,~,~~,
!:,;,~.~
;'r.;
r",
~
. . . . ' ~ S~'r'n
, . ' -~~;~'T~
..,: }<i,~.,.~.., ... ~. ., v!, ul!J~ ,' 1, ,.~ ~t+.~,f7:..S~~, +.~.,,r!JaT1:~~v0.i~n~J6:~' ~
, ...~r----
, A
~
~
) i I~.'~ r 7~
.~ ~ ~~~ i~iq~yFZ~1~`
r r
r +~~ ` 4t
~rt~,i ~ y .~
{'' ~N
- ~ ,~
~
„~:
.~~
_ ';::;;;~;
~~.
.i,
' ~.
4. That the proposed reclassification af subjoct property does no~
properly xelate to the zones and their permit~ed uses locally ostablished in ,
close proximity to subjec.t proper~~ and to the zones and their permitted uses ~`,
gener.ally established throughout the communi.ty.
;~~~
5. That twenty persons indicated their presance at said public
hearing in opposition; and that no ca.rrespondence was raceived in oppositi.on '':~;~
to subj~ct petition.
CALTFaRNIA ENVIRONMc,NTAI, QUAT~TTY A~T F7NDIr : That the Anaheim City
Planning Ccmmission has reviewed the pro~,~osa7. tco realassifl subject property ~~'~~i
from the RS-A-43,OQ0 (Fesidential/Agricultur.al) Zone to the RM-1i00
(Reszdential/Multiple-Family) Zone and to construct a 3-story, 16-unit,
"affordable" apartment complex with s~raivers of mininium buildang si~e area per
dwe].ling unit, maximum structural heic~ht, maximum site covezage, minimum floor '
area of dwelling unit and pQrmitted encroachment into Pront yard on an !
irregularly-shaped •~arcel of land consisL-ing of approx;.mately 0.35 acre having ..:i
a frontagP of approacim~tely 65 feot an tho north side of Savanna 5treet, beinq ~,:"';
located approximdt~ly 115 feet west of the centerline of Marian Wa~ and `'
Eurthc~r described as 3625 Wes~ Savanna Street; and does hereby deny the
Negative Declarat•ion upon findzng that i~ has considered the Negati~~e ""
Decl~ration together with dny commQnts received during the publia roview ':;.
~rocess ar.d further finding on ~he basis of tne in~.tia2 studp and any cumments ~
received that there is substantial ev.idence that the project will have a ";;
>s
significant etEect on the environrnent.
NOWP ZHEREFORE, B~ IT RESOLVL'D that the Anaheim City Planning
Cncr~nission does hereby deny Petition i-or. Reclassiiicarion on the basis of the
aforementioned findings.
THF FUREGOTNG R~;SOLUTION is sigr.~d and approved by mz this 6th da}~
of July, 1.98b ~
~%!~- r~r `~...c~: (' ~~ ~~~.t., t~ L.~
CHAIRMAN, ANAFi~lM CI'~Y PLANNING COMMIS~IQN
c
ATTEST. ; ~ , ~
~ `~ -
`~z ~
_ ,,; ~ L~
SECRE~~ , 7~NAHETM CI4Y F'L, PI NG COMMISSION
~ y ~
P:;b8-174
~ ~`..
~
: ~ a ~~ ~~~
7 I r~~. ~~' ~
t ~
';~~
~ S:J
<`i
` ~~
~!
STATE OF CALIEORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAH~IM )
o~a
~
~
;F~
;';'~,
~;§
I, Ec]ith L.
Aarris, S~acrc3t~ry of the Anal~eim City Planninq ~~
'y
Commission, do heraby certify that the [orogoing resolution was passed and ~'~
.
adopted at a meo~ing of the Anah~im Ciky Flnnniny Commission held ~n ,Tuly 6, !~v
;
1988 by th~ following voLe of the members therc~of: '.^.
;;
AYES:
CObII~SISSSOr]ERS:
BOUAS, BUYUSTUN,
F'ELDHAUS, HERc~S^_', Mf:SSE, MC SURNEX :~
!
.
NQES: COMMISSIONBI~S: NON~ '
~,
ABSENT: COI~fI5SI0N~RS: CAP.USILLLO
;.s IN WITNESS Wt~IEltEOF, I have hereunto set m~ hand this 6th day o£
July, 1988.
•~i; ...L~,=-.,' / ~- ~
' L ~L, ~ G- , ~ 't~,~,~//_.! ..
~~= _ .~ / ~/ , ~~ /~ ~ ~? .
,~' SECRETARY, ANAFIEIM CITY YLAtiNING CUM?r1ISSI0N
~~,
;
~~~~ . _
f'
,, ~~',,:
X„ • ,
~
, t`~ ~ ~ s..:... _: : ~." .
--3 -
PC8t3-174
;i~
t~
r ~r ~~