Resolution-PC 92-79,8.~50LlJ~TION NO. PC92-79
/~ R~SOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM C:ITY PIANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR RECLASSI~ICATIQN NO. 91-92-19 BE GRANTEu
WHEREAS, thd Anaheim Ciry Planning Commission did rec~ivo a vorified
petitia~~ 1or F7eclassincation for resi proporty situated in the City of Anahe!m. rounty of
Orange, State of California, doscribed as follows:
PARCEL A: F'ARCELS 1 AND 2 IN ThIF CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUPfTY OF
OAANGE, STATE OF CAUFORNIA, AS PER iNAP FILED IN BOOK 187, PAGES 20
TO 24, INCLUSIVE, OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OF'FICE OF TH[ COUNTY
RECORDER OF SAID COUMY.
PARCEL B: TtiAT PORYION OF PARCEL MAP NO. d3•25t IN THE CITY OF
ANAHF.ItiS, COUNTY OF ORANGE, ~3TATE OF CAIJFORNIA, FILF_D I~! BOOK t87,
PAGES 2~ TO 7.4, SHOWN AS SANDERSQN AVENUE.
WHEAEAS, the City Planning Cammission dici hold a public hearing ~2 the
~ivic Center in the City of Anaheim on '!ay 4, 1992 bt 1:30 p.m., notice of said public
he~rin~ having been duly given as required by law and in ar,cordance with the provisions
of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and consider evidenae for and
against 3aid propt,sed reclassiiication and to investigate and make ~indings and
recommendations in connection therowith; and that seid public hearing was contin~ed
~o the t~Aray 18, June 15 and June 29, 1992 Planning ~ornmission meotings; and
WHEREAS, safd Commission, atter due inspection, investigatian and study
made by itselt and in its behaH, ~nd aftAr due consider~tion of al! evidence and reports
offered at said hearing, does find snd determino the following facts:
1. That iho petitioner prop~ses reclas3ihcation of sub~ect property trom
the Ml. (lJmiteci Industrial) ta the CL (Commorcial, Limited) Zone in order to const:uct ~
2-story, 50,000-square foot, medical of~ce building.
2. That the Anaheim Genoral F~ian dosignat~s subjoct praperty for
3eneral Commerciel land uses.
3. That the proposed reclassiiication of the subJec~ property to CI_
(Comniercial, Limited) is in confcrmance wit?z the Anah~im General Plan.
4. That the proposed recl~ssificcation of subject property is necessary
and/or desirabM tor tho orde~iy and proper development cN tho comrnuniry.
5. That the proposed reclassifi~:2tion of ;ubj~ct property does proporly
retate to the z~ones And their perm'~tec! uses locally established in closo proximiry to
subjtsct property and to the zones and tl~eir permitted ~ses generapy established
throughout the oommunity
CR1535MS.M~p -1- PC92•79
6. That the prop~sed reclassification of subject property roquires the
d~dication of abuttin~ streets in accordance with the Circuiatipn Element of 3he General
Plan, due ta the anticipated increase in tra~ic which will b~ goneratod by the i-itensificatior~
of land use.
7. That six (8) peopla fndicatad their precence at said public haarinp in
opposi~ion; and that no corrospondence was raceived in opposition to subject patitior.
~IF~NIA ENVIRO~MCNTAI. ~UA~ITY ACT FINDING: That the Anaheim ~ity
Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to reclassify subject property from the
ML (Limitsd Indust~ ial) to the CL (Commercial, Limited} Zone in ordor ta construct a 2-
story, 50,000-square foot, modic~l office builcfing on an i~ reqularly-shapc~i parcel a~ Is~nd
consisting of approximately 7.98 acres tocated at tha southwest corner cf Auto Center
Qrh~3 and Sanderson Avenua, having a appruximata trontages of 900 feet on th~ sauth
sidA of Auto Center Orive and 278 foet on the west side of Sanderson Avenu~, end iurther
described as 1320 - 1382 Auto Center Dri ~e; and doos horeby approve a mitipated
Negative Declaration and adopt th~ Mitigation Monitoring Pragram No. 54 pu~suant to
Sec:ion 71081.6 of the Public Res~urcos Code on the basis 2hat tha declaratian reReGts
tho independent judgement of the tea~ agency and that the ~Ianning Commfssion has
considsred the pr~posal with the mftigated NE~ative Declaration and Monitorin~ Program,
together with any comme~~g received during the ~~ublic roview proce33 and further lindin~,
on the basis ^f the Initial Study, that there is no substantial evidence that the pmJeci will
h~+ve a s~gnificaM ~Nect on th~ environment.
NOW, 7HER~FORE, BE R RESOLVED that the Anaheirn City Planning Comrttission
does hareby approve the subJect Petition far Rsclassitication to authArize an amsndment
to the Zonin~ ~Aap of the P.naheim Mu~icipal Code to exclude the above•desc~bed
pro~orty from the ML (Umked Indu~trial) Zone and to inc:orporate said dosr..iibed property
irito the CL (Commercial, Umited) Zona upon the tollowing c~nditions wt~ich are her6by
bund tr~ be a neces~ary prorequisite to the proposed use of subject property In orJer
to presArve tt~e safety and general welfare of the Citizens af the C:ty nf Anaheim:
1. 't'hat the d~veioper shall compfy with Chapter 14.60 "Transportation Demand' oi
the Maheim Municipal Code rAlatinfl to transporta'Jon demand manegement
(TDM).
2. That prior to introducti~n ol an ordmancc rQZOning subject property, the logal
pro;~erty ovmer shell irrevccably offer to dedicate to the Ciry of nnaheSm an
easament thirt~~ two (32) feet in width from the centerlir,e ot the street elong
Sand~rson A~~enue (as shuwn on the realianrnent sketchos aRproved by the Publi~
Works DeoaRmerrti for street widening purpases.
3. That the developer sh~ll be res}xmsi~le for campl'sance with all mitiqation me~sures
vvithin the asaigned time frames and any direct casts associated with th~ attached
Mitigation Monitorin~ ~rogram No. Q5~1 as ~established by the City of A.n~heim and
as required by ~cticn 2108~.6 of the Public Resources Co~e to insure
implem~ntati~r. M those identified miugation measures.
•2- PC92-79
4. That prior to placement of an ordinance rezoninfl subJecc praperty on an ~genda
far City Council considerati~n, Condition No. ?., Rbove-mentioned, 5hall be
complet~~. 'r".e City C~uncil may approve ar disapprave a zoning ordinence at
its discrPt;,~r,. i` the ordinance is disapproved, the pror,edure set iArth in Anaheim
Muric~p~~ ~c~':: ~ection ~18.03.085 shali apply. The provisions or rights granted by
ttiis re• ~lutRon shall become nuil and void by ac~tion nf the Planning ~Commission
unisss 3ai~ ;;onditions are c+~mplied with within one (1) year from the date of this
resolutio ~ or such further tirrse as the Planning Commission ma~- grant.
5. 'That approval of this application constitutes approval ot the proposed request only
to the er.tent that it complies with the Anaiieim Municipal Zoninfl Coda end any
other applicable City, Stata and Fed9ra! regulations. Approval does not include
any action or findiiigs as to compiiance or app~oval af the request regarding any
other applicable ordinance, reg~lation or requirement.
gE !T FURTHER RESOW~D that !he AnaheEm City Planning Commission
does hereby flnd and determfne that aduption of this Rosolution is expressly predicated
up~n applicanYs compliance with each and all of tho conditions horeinabove set forth.
Should any such conditions, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by
the flnai Judgment of any aourt of competent Jurisdiction, then this Fiesolutian, and any
approvals herein contained, shall ba deemsd null and void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this rosolution shall not constitute a
rezoning of, or a commitment by the C~ry to rezone, the subJect praRerty; any 3uch
rezoning shall require an ordinance of Lhe City C~u~cil which shall be a leflislative act
which may be approved or danied by the ~iry Council at its sole discretion.
THE FOREGOINC f~ESOLUT1aN was adoptad at tho Planning
Commission meeting of June 29, t992.
~•
• % /'
".{ v~. ~~ i / ,~ ,-.
AIRMAN, ANRHEIM IT PLA I G COMMISSION
ATT~ST:
.c% : ,~ - ' , 'uCc.s~
SECREI' Y, Aa~FIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
~. PC92-78
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
C~OUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY C~F ANAHEIAA )
I, Margarita Solorio, Secretary of the tinahsim City Planning Commissir~n,
do hereby certii~r th~t the foregoing rasolutio~ was pessed and adopted at a maeting
of the Anaheim City Planning Commissian held on June 29, 1992, by tha followinq
vote of the mombers thereof:
A~ES: CdMMISSIONERS: ~OUAS, BRISTOL, HtLLYER, HEMNINGER, AlIESSE,
NOES: COMMISSlONERS: PERA7J1, ZEMEL
AB~ENT: COM~'VIIS~IONERS: NON~
IN WITNE~S WHEAEOF, I have horeuMo set my hand this ~ dey
of , 1992.
~ ~~h~f"~,L~/ria~
SCCRETARY A EIM CITY PLANNING COMMRSSIOU
.,~ PC82-79