Loading...
Resolution-PC 89-84f~n' 11 f - 7.~. ~ Y'„ '~.~~f~ ` , " I r,; ~ , . . , . . ~ . ! l i~l~ T ~ ~{' '~~~ ~r ~ ~. rik ,} `;;; ' ~,` ~~4tL~T rr N ~.~as_~ A RESOLUTxON OF THE ANAHETM CTTX FvANNING COMMISSION THAT PETTTIQN FOR RF~CLASSXFICA~rTQN N0. Sf3-89-25 F3E DE1xIF.D WFiEREAS, Lhe Anahe.im City Planning Commission did raceiye a veritied petiL•ior~ Cor Reclas~ification from JASON C. WU AND J~At7 G. WU, 7342 Oranqathorpe, Suite C-103, 9uena Park, CA 90621, owners, and KU ~ ASSOCIATES, 1NC. , 2?.632 Gul~len Springs Dr. , Suite 29p, Diamonc~ klar, CA 91765, agPnt for cortain raal property situated sn the rity of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, de~crik~ed as follows: THE WEST 66 FEF.T OF 'rHE EAST 132 FEET OF THE WEST 26~: f EET OF THE SOUTH pNE-IiALF Or '~xIE SOUT'IiEA.ST OriF-•QUARTER UF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-~UART.ER OF THF SOUTHEAST UN~-QUARTI'R OF SF:CTION 14, T0VIPISFITP 4 SOTJTII, P,AhGE 11 WEST, S. H. B. & FI WHEREAS, the Ciky Flanning Commission c~i.d .hold a public liearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on M~rch 13, 1989 at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing havinq been duly gi~~on as requix•od by law and in accordance wit}i the provisions of tho Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hoar and considQ: evidonce for and against s~id proposed rQC].assifiaation and to investigate and make findings nnd recommendations in COriri@CtSGri therewith; and saic] public hearing was c~ntinuQd to the meeting of March 27, 1989; and WhEREAS, sazd Cormnission, aftQr due a.napection, investigation and s~udy made by itsQlf and in iks behalf, and after dua considerat.ton of all evidenca and reporCs ofFered ~t said hearing, doos find ~nd determine the following facts: 1. That the potitioner proposes reclassificarion oF subject property from Che RS-7--43,000 (Resident.ial/Agcicultural) 7o:ie to the RM-1200 (Residantial, Multipla-Family) i.nne. 2. That ttie Anaheim Goneral F'lan desiqn3te3 subjeat property For Medi.um Density Rosidential lanr~ uses; althaugh the Planning Corrunission direc~ed s~aff in conjunction with this action ~o aeny s~je~;~ reclassification L-o prepare a General Plan Amendment For tho area to co.asider rQdQSignatiny it fpr Low Madium Density Res.idential land uses. 3. That the propo:~ea reclass.ifica~ion is denied on Che basis that i~ would bQ cnnsidered "spot zon.iaq" in an arRa surrounded b,y single-.Eamily rosid~r~cQS. 4. That t~he proposed recYassiFication of sub;ject pronerty is not necessory nor desirab.le fo: the orderly and proper dRV~±lopment of tho communiCy. 5, That the propased reclas~i~ict~tion of subject praperty doe4 nut properly ro2ato to the zonc~s and their permitted us~s locally establ3shed in close proxfmity to ~ub;ject property and to the zones and thair permftted uses gvnor~lly esCab.lished thrauc~hout tho community. 0741r --1- PC89-84 _ --__- ____ _ _ ~ ' ~ ..:.J lJi r~ r'`~"1 i. ' ;~ + ~,`~~M~t `'r=~'i ~ 5. That twonry (20j poopla indicate~~ their pr•esence a~ said public hoaring in ~~,~position; ~nd t'ha~ letters and a petition ~ontz~ining approximately 44 sxgnatures were receivaa in opposition to sub~ect petition. 5~.~~Q~~Is'~ ~~~~_~~~~L. ~.~~___.A.~.~_~.~.N~.~~ TY.at khe AnaY~eim Cit;y Planninc~ Cnmmission has r~viewed tho proposal to reclassi~y subject property from t;he RS-A-43,000 (Residen~ia.l/Agrir.ultural) 2one to tlae RM-1200 (Rc~si~tential, Mult;lplF-Family) Zone and to r_onstruct an ~.l-unit, 2 and 3 story apurh.mont campl~x with wai.v~rs of m~rximum structural lxeic~ht, maximum site coverage and m3nimum setback adjacant to inter.ior progert;~ line on a recrangul~rly shapeci parcel oF land consi~ting of approximately 0.45 acra, havinq a frontage oE approxi.mately 66 Eeet on the north side af Eiall Road, being located appror_imately 760 Eeet east oE tho c~nte~rline of Western A~~enae and furtlior d~scribed as 3121 Wast Bal]. Road; and does he°eby approve the Negative Declarat.ion upon findiny that it sias considerod tkze Ne~ative Declaration together wi~h any c~mments received ~uri.ng th~ public ~eview process and further finding on the basi.s ot the initial study ~,nd any commen~s received that r,here is nn substantial ev~id~nce that th.e projoct wi11 have a si~~nificant effect on the env~ironment, NOW, THF.~EFURE, HE T'P RFSOI,VFD that the Anahe=m ~.ity Plar~ning CorimS.ss,ion d~es hereby deny PeL•.it.ion for Roclassiticat3on an the basis oE the aPorem~ntioned :Eindznqs. THG FOREGOTi1C R~SQ~,UTTON is signad and approved by mQ this 27th day of March, 1588. -----•Y--~ =~_~.'~-.~!~~«~~:;~_ CIiAIRWO~fAtr,/~NAHL''IM CITY PLANNIN'G COhII~SISSION ATTEST; `~ --- --'""=__1~f~`~GL.= _,._~ _ SECRETA , ANAT3EIM CtTY. P~,ANNING COMMISSI023 STAT.E pF CALIFQRNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANC+E ) ~~, CITY OF I~I~TI~HEIM ) I, Edith L. Harris, Secretary of tFe Anaheim City Pl~nn,iny Corrunission, do heroby cc~rCify that L•he foregoi.n~ reso.l.ution was passed and adopted at a meQtinq of thQ Anaheim City Planning Commissi.or. held on March 27, 1989 by the Follow.inq vot~ of tha members thoreoE: AYES: COhLtiiTSSIONI:RS: BOUAa, BGYUSTUN, CARUSILL'L0, FELllH~tJC, H~RBST, M~SSE, MC BURNEY NOE~: CUA4fISSIONERS: NONE AB~ENTs COh4rtISSIONERS: NOT~F ~; IN WITNESS WFtEREO[', I have horeunr,o ~at my hand this 27th day ~ f~ of March, 29gg, ~,' ... __..~~%~--'s-'Lt.J ~ ~-/~i1/~.a~ ~: SECRETARY, ANAHEIM ITY PLANNTNG COhA~lISSION ~ -2- PC89-84 7 Y 1.,1 ,r4 , y;, ~ _ . . , . , ' -- - ,. .. '~