Resolution-PC 89-37«h..., ~~
~+ ~ ~ , E'
'r ,;~ _
r „~
~;,~~ , f, ii ~,~FI'.
t t'~i;
,.;
~~
R~QLj1TI0N N LAC8g=~7_
~
'a. RE50LUT]:ON QF '1HE N.NAFiL''IM CITY PLANN.LNG COh1MISSION
THAT PETI'~ION FUR R~CLASSI'r^ICAT.ION N0. 8A-89-38 HE DENIED
WH~REAS, the Anah~im City Planning Cummission did i•~ceive a
verified petition for Recla~sification from JAFAR JAHANPANAH AND XOUSSTE;PI
TAVAKULI, 520 N. Rex:ord llrive, BeverJy Hi11s, CA 90210, ownc~rs, and RON'ALD
J. CROWLEY, 1'100 Raintree Ro~d, Fu'llerton, CA 92635, agent, for nortain zeal
properL-y sittiatoc~ in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State oF
California, described as :OZ~.OWS:
A PORTTON OF' I,pT 7 IN IIi,OCK 17 OF A SUBDIV~:SION OF
TFiE SOUTH HALF OF' SLCTION 27., IN T~WNSHIP 4 SOTJTH,
RANGr 10 WEST, IN iH~ RANCHO LAS BOLSAS, IN THE CI'rY
OE' ANA'HEictii, Cl7UNTY OI' ORANGE, STATE OF CALII'ORNIA, AS
Pr~R MA? R~CQRUEA iN BUOK 1, pAGE 33 OF MISC~I,LAN~OLIS
NIAPS, IN TFiE OFFICE OF THE f;OUNTY RECORDER QE' SAIA
COUNTY, DESCRIF3ED AS FO'LLOWS:
BEGINNING AT. THE SOUTFIWCST CORNER OF SAID LOT 7;
THEN(:E NORTH 0 nEG. 40' 20" FAST 669.60 FEE'.C ALONG
THE WEST LZNE OI' SAIU LOT TO THE NORTHW~ST c:ORNER
THEREOF; THENCF SOUTIi 89 PEG. 43' S0" ~AST 339.0~
PEE'~ ALONG THE N~~TH LINE OF SAID I,UT; THENCE: SdUTH 0
DEG. ~3' 10" WEST 6f~8.87 FEE~' r0 THE SOUTH LINE 0~'
SAID LOT 7; T~IENCE NORTH $9 D~G. 51' lU" WES'r 3A0.40
FEFT ALANG 5AIA SOUTH L'INL TO THE POTNT UF BGGINNIt7G.
a ~.
y,
.(
r, ~
- ^i
,~
.f
'~
WHEF,EAS, the City Planni.ng Commi3sion did hold a public hearing
at the Civi~ Center in Ch.e Ci*y or Analieim an January 30, 1989 at 1:30 p.m.,
n~tice of said public heari.ng having been duly given as roquireci by 1aw and 1n
accurclance with the ~~rovisians of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chaptex 18.03,
to hear and consider evidence for and agaiz~st suid proposed reclassification
and L•o investigato and make findings anrl recommendations in connecrion
ttierewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after duQ inspection, inves~3gaCion
and study made by itse'lf and in its behalt, and after due consideration oE all
evidence and repdrts ofEered at said hearinc~, d~es find ar~d detc~rm3.no the
fol3.owin.g facls:
1. That the petitianer pronoses reclassificatiox~ of subject
praperty f rom the R~-10,000 (Residential, Single-Family) Zone to the CO
(Commarcial, Otfico ancl YrofQSSional) 'L~~ne.
2. That the Anaheim c?Qneral P].an ctesignat~s subject property for
Cvmmer.cial Prof~ssional land uses.
0652r _1_ PC89-37
~' ~i
~<
.,..,.....»;;.J
~~~
~ ~~~ 4. ~ t i r i.`t ~~r o y,~ itt~ P
~ ';~`~`j~
~"~ ~ _ ~~;
3. That the prnposed reclar.sifir.ation of sub;;cact p:operty ia
not necesaary nor desirable for the ordarly and proper development aE Che
commixnity.
4. Th~t tha proposed i~~classificatfox, oE subjoct praperty dues
not properly ralate to the zones and thsir permitted usas ].~cally ostablished
in close proximity to subject praperty and to the zonos ancl their permitted
uses genorally established throughuut the communiry.
6. 7haC six (6) peopl.e persons indic~ted their pxc~aence a~
said publ5.c hearing :in opp~sition; aixd tk:at a~patition containing signatixres
in opposition was rece.iveci.
~i,IEORNIA ENVIR~NMENTAL Q[,J~.LTTY ACT E'INDINC~: That the Anaheim
Cii:,y Planning Carnmis~ion has reviewed tha proposal 'co reclassify subject
property Erom the RS-10,000 (Fesi3ential, Single-Family) Znne to the CO
(Conuneraial~ Of~ice and Px•ofessi.unal) 2one and to constr.ucr a 47-room matel
com~lex witY, ~raivc~r o~[ mi.nimum numbcar oi' parking spaces on a
rectangularly-shaped parc;el of land consisting of apprnxS.mately ]..3 acres
having ~ Eronta~e of approximaCe:ly 1?0 L•eet on the north side of Katella
Avenue, bein~ located approximah.g'ly 320 feot east on the center].ine of
Carn~lian Street and furl:her 3escribed as 1585 West Kate~la Avonue; and does
herebx approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered
tlie NogativQ Uoclaration together with any comments receivesi during the
public review pcocess and further finding on t:~e basis of the ir.iti.al stv.dy
and any cumments receivad that thare is no substantial evidence *.hat the
projocC wi11 have a signifi~ant eEfect on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning
Commission does horeby deny Fetirxon For Reclass.if•ic~tion ou the ba~is of the
4farem~nLionea Lindings.
THE FOREGQTNG FE50Li1TI0N as signed and approved by me this 30th
d~y of January, 1909.
..--%,, , ' / I
'~~:'~, ,~/f ~~ (..Gi ~ ~^~1~ ~rt:.~1.~a!
CHAIRWOMAN, ~ IiEIM CITY PLANNING ~OI~SMISSION
ATTEST:
. '
.~'~'~-~ . `-~
SECRETA Y, bNAHF.IM CiTY P~l~iNIZIG COMMISSION
~~ .
-z-
PC89-37
,:.
,,;;
4, .,:
i~:,',~i~.'n~:.Y.G1::YL~,~L ~
~~~
~
S1'AT~ OF CAl~IFORPIIA )
COUNTY AF ORANGE ) ss.
CTTY OF ANAH~TiQ )
~
.~..~.
~
...~.
. . . ~ ~ ~pi• ~~~~ phki2',I ~;~~
~ , ' ~I~:~{ X:i~;
. , ~:~~, ~ ~ a ~~ r~~
, ~ , ~ . . ~ ;~;~
. , . . '~,''~
. ~,~,
4r'~
_ ;")
. . ~ -,;'~~.~
. ,'.1
s`;~
~
I, F~a~tr~ L. Harri.s, Secretni~y of` the Anr~lzeim City PlanxA3.ng ';~
Commiss:ion, do hereby cerL-ify that the fo~~agoing resolut3or~ was passed and ;,,,
~idoptod at a mo~ting of the Anatieim City P].anning Commissi.on held on Janunr~
a0, 19~9 by the~ following vote oF the membsr~ the~^eof:
` ,°i
AYES: COD2hSIS'~SJONERS: BOLTAS, ~UYDSTUN, CARUSILLLO, 1:'EI~DHI~US,, Hr.RBST,
MF5SE;, M~ BURNEY
NOES: COMMIS~~'IONERS:
AEiuFNT.: COMD4ISSI:ONER5:
IN 1RITNESS W1irRE0F, I hav~ t~ereunta set my h~-nd t.tYas 3Qth day
of January, 1989.
C~.y ' /~ , ^
.~--~.~.~_~ 9 _._._
SECRE'PF.RY, ANAHFTM CITY PLANNING COMM];S~SION -
!1
(,
r.7'
Ir
;'.1'
:,11
~!,/
'.Y
;,Ii
<ii:
`'?;
~' ~~
1~~~}
1
i'~i
':;S
~~
,
~~ ~
';,:~c
,~~
~g~
' Y:7
;~"1
31~
f~n:
'~F~i
-3- PC89-37 "*'~
. ' ~ . , ~.;'N1
n~ 1~
r, ~
/
~~
~ . .. ... . .. ~ . . . ' ' . ~ , . . .. ' . , .. . .~.~ ~S'~~