Loading...
PC 81-116RESOLUTIOM td0. PC31-11~ !1 RESOLUTIO?J ('~ THE /1~AHEIH CITY PL/1^l~dl~•IG f0!411SSI~F! THAT PETITIOt! FOR RECLASSlFICATIOtJ ~IO. pn-:~it-37 RE G4APITFD. WHE4[AS, the Anaheim City Planning Commissfon did receive a verPfied pet i t i on for Rec l ass i f i cat ion from JAPIES R, ~IEEDFIAI~ A~lD SH I RLEY A, tIEFDIIA"1, 9~E92 Sandra Circle, Villa Park, California ~2Fh7, owners of certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County ot Orange, State of Csllfornia, describer as: Beginnirg at a point in the Dlorth line of Vin~~~ar•d Lot A-1, as shown on a P1ap recorded in bool: 1F, paces !7.9 and ~~3~ of Deeds, records of Los Angetes County, Calirornia, sald point beinn 161+ feet Westerly of the Northeast c~rner thereof; r~~nnina thence Southerly parallel to the Easterly line of said Lot, 225 feet; thence Westerly paralle] to the ~Jortherly line of said Lot 75 feet; thence Northerly parallel to said Easterly line, 1_7_5 feet to a point in the said Northerly line; tF.ence Easterly along said Northerly line 75 feet to the point of beginnin4, WHEREAS, the City P;anning Commission did hold a public hearing at thP Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 1, 1~181, at 1:3~ p.m „ notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required hy la~~~ and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim hlunicipal Code, Chapter 1n.~3, to hear ar.ri consider evidence for and against said proposed rerlassiffcation and to investigate and mal:e findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due insnection, investiyation and study made by itself and fn its behalf, and after due c~nsideration ~f a!1 evidence a~d reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the f~llo4~in~ facts: 1. That the petitioner pro~oses reclasslfication of suhject property from .-i__ n~_-r~nn fo., s~,. ,~ c; ,.1~-r.,...i~..\ o.. o-~, n~.~_~I.nn (o.. i-I..nt7~1 M~~t~in~~- ~.. .. ~~ ..., ~ ..~~ ~.. ~ ~~ ...., ~ ~~... ,._ . ,.. ,_... ,.. . -' , - - family) Zone to construct a 6-unit apartment complex. 2. That the Anaheim General Plan designates suf~ject property for medtum- density residentlal land uses. 3. That the propo;ed reclassificatfon of subject property is necessary and/or desirable for the orderly and proper development of tyP community. ~+. That the proposed reclassification of subject property does properly relate to the zones and their permitted uses locally established in close praxim'ty to subject property and to the zones and their permitted uses generally established throughout the community. 5. That the ~roposed reciasslfication of sub.Ject property requires the dedication and improvement of af~utting streets in accordance a~(th the Cfrculation Elemen*_ of the (;eneral Plan, duA to the anticipated increase in traffic ~ohich will 6e 9eneratec: by the intensification of Yand use. PC81-11G G. That !+ persons indic~ted their presence at said ~ublic hearinq in oPPosition; and tiiat no correspordenc~ iias received in opnosition ta the subjeci petition. E~lUIROf~14E~1Tl1L 1~1Pl1CT FIi~1DIFIG: That the Anaheim C~t~~ Planni~g Commission has reviewed the proposal ro reciassify suhject ~roperty from the RS-j7_On (Residential, Singl~-Family) 7.one to the RH-24n0 (Residential, ~1ultipie-Family) %one to construet a 6-unit a~artment complex on a rectangularly-shaned narcel of land consisting of approximately 0,;9 acre, havin~ a frontag~ of approximately 7!" feet on the south side of North Street, havin~ a maximum deoth of anproximately 27_5 feet and heing located approximately 200 feet ~•~est of the centerline ~f [ast Street (1~28 Fast ~lorth Street}; and does he reby approve ti~e ~degative Declaration from the r~quirement to prepare an environm~ntal impact report on the basis that ther~ would be no significant individual or cumulative adverse envi mnmental impact due to the approval of this P~egative Declaration since tiie Anaheim General Plan designates the subject property for medium-density residAntial land uses commer.surate ~•~ith the proposal; that no sensitive environmenta~ im~acts are involved in the proposal; that the InitTal Study submitted Fy the petitioner indicates no significant individual or cumulatfve adverse environmental impacts, and that th~ Plegativ~ 'leelaration suhstantiatirq the foregoing findings is on file in the City of dlnaheim Planning Department. PJOId, THEREFORE, BE IT P,ESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Reclassific~tion and, hy so doina, that Title 18-Zoni~a of Che Anaheim 1lunicipal Code he amended to exclude the above-described proPerty from the "5-7200 (RESIDFtITfAL, Slt1GLE-FAMILY) ZO~IF and to incerporate said descrihed property into the Rlq-2~+Q0 (RESIDENTIFII_, MULTIPLF-FAMILY) 7ptJE upon the following conditions t~~hich are her~hy found to be a necessary ~rerequisite to the proposed use of suhject preoerty in order to preserve the safety and cieneral ~delfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: 1. That side~iall;s shall he installed along North Street as required by the City Engineer and in accorda~ce with standard plans and specifications on file in the Gf f i eP of the ~ i r" F~., i ~r+r.r 2, That the o~:!ner(s) of suhject p mnerty ,hall pay to the City of Anaheim a fee, in an amoimt as determin~d hy the C?ty Council, fc,r street liphting alono North Street. 3. That the a~m er(s) of suhject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim a fee, in an amount as determined by the City Council, for tree plantinq purposes alona Worth Street. 4• That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance ~~ith approved plans on file ~•~ith t;~e Office of the Executive Direetor of Puhlic blorKS. 5. That suhject property sha)1 be served ~,y underground utilittes. G. That drainage of suhject nroperty shall he di~oosed of in a manner satisfactory to tfie City En9ine~r, 7. That ~he oamcr of suhject ~rnperty sh,~~ p~,; to the City of Anaheim the approoriate park and recreation in-lieu fecs as detc~rmined to !~.r, ~ppropriate ~y the City Council, sa)d fec. to he paid at th~ time the buildinq perm?t is 'ssuad, -?- PC81-716 ~• That the otvner(s) of su!~ject prnperty shall pav thP traffic signal assessment `ee (Ordinance rdo, 33~G) in an amount as determineci hy tf,e City Council, for each r.ew d~~ielling unit pri~r t~ the issuance of a huildPn~ permit, °. That suhjeet y pro~,ert shall he ~ieveloped substantially tn accordance with plans and specifications on file ti~~th the City of ~nahein markerl Exhihit Plos. 1 and 2; provideci, however, that thc 42 inch high masonry ~•~all on the north property llne along Plorth Street sha11 he constructed of a decorative masonry mate~ial. ~~• Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, Condition Nos. 7_ and 3, above-mentioned, shall be coripleted, 7hP provisions or rights granted by this resolution sha)1 become null ~nd void hy action of the Planning Commission unless said cc~nditions ar, cornplied 1•~ith ~rithin one year from the date hereof, or suc!i further time as the Planning Comm(sston may grant. >>. That Condition Nos. 1 t, r complied ~vitli prior to finat building and zoning inspec~ttons~hove-mentioned, shall be DE IT FURTHER RFSOLVED that thc Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoptton of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon apPlicant's comp)iance with each and all of the cnnditions hereinabove set forth. Should any s~ch condition, or any par~ tnereofr he declared invalid or unenforr_eable by the final judgnent of any court of cor,~petent jurtsdictton, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void, TNE FCREr,pIiJG RESbLUT10!! is siqne~i and anpr~veri hy n~ t5is Ist ~ay of Ju~~~ 1981. ATTEST: [~ ~/ f ~ .C ~El, l.~t.c_.. SECRETARY, ANAHEIM C-IT`y p~qNpolNr, C.OMMISg~O~~ '.~ ~ ~'~?~ CNAIRNAM, Ap7AHEl~1 C!TY Lnr:M1ii~!c r- n~~~~~, STATE OF CALIFORFlIA ) CQUhJTY OF ORA~~GE ) ss. CITY OF ~~JAHEIM ) ~, Edith L. Flarris, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commisslon, do P~reby certify that the fore3oing resolution was passed and adopted at a me.eting ~Q the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on •'une 1, 1~~1, by the follo~•,inq vote of the members thereor': AYES: COMMISSIONERS: 6~1RNES, FRY, HERP,ST, IUrar, WOES: COMMISSIOiJCiS: 30Ul~S, t3USfipRE~ Tn~,q(?. ABSENT: C0~IPIIS5IU"JEP,S: t,lOtlF IN lJI7~IF.SS WFIEREOF~ I have ~iereunto set my han~ this Ist day of June, 1Q31, ~ ~~X C-~.~~ ~ ~^ SECRETARY, ANAHE ~'~ C I TY PLAtJt) I NG CO!1M I SS I ON --- -3- PC8t-11(