Resolution-PC 90-122, ~,.,
ttES,QL Ji TTON Nsi• pC9 -122
w~~.`:~
A REuQI~UTIO?J OF TH~ ANAF~EIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITIUN FOR REC'LASSTFTCATI02~T N0. $9-90-5•'1 kiE GRANTED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Piannang Commissiori air~ initiate
Reclassif•icatiox~ proceedings for certain real proPerty situated i~a the City o£
Anaheim, County of Orange, S~ate of ~a].if~rnia, described as follows:
AI'PROXIDIATELY 4.4 ACRES LOCATEA 02d THE EAST SIDE OF
L•OARA STREET APPRQXTMi~TELY 5$5 E'EET NORT?i ~~F TriE
CENT~RLINE OF NORTH STREEZ AND kiiR7'HER nESCfiIB~D AS
730-d10 NORTH LOARA STREET.
WfiEREAS, the City PlanYiing Commission did hold a public hearincJ
at thQ Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on May 7, 1Q90 at 1:30 p.m., notico
o£ ~aid public hearing havin.g been duly given as required by law and in
accurdancF wirh the provisions of the ,~naheim Muxii.cipal Coele, Chapter 18.03,
tn hear and consider ~videnc~ for and again~t said proposPd reclassification
and to investigate and make firidings and r•ecommendations in coiineatian
therewi~h; Lhat said p~iblic hearing was cpntinue~3 Y.o ~he May 21, 1990 Planning
Commissian maQl:ing; ancl
WHCRLAS, s~id Corimissipn, af•ter di~e inspection, inves~igation
and study male by itself an~ iri its beha:lf, and a~toz• due corisideration of. a11
avidence and reports oFfered at said hearing, does find and det•ermine the
fnllowing fac~:s;
7.. That the Plaiini:iq Corranission pro~osed rQClassi£ic:ati.on o£
subject properties fr~m the RM-•1200 (Residei~tial, Multiple-Family) 2one to khe
RM-24(iQ (Residantial, Multiple-Family) or a lc3ss intense zono.
2. That ~kie i~naheim Genaral Plar. dosignates subject property
for Lo~v DonsiL-y Residential lar.d u~es.
3. 'rtiat Ger.~•ral Plan Amendment No. 3Q5 redesignates subjc~ct
property for Low-Medium Density Residentinl 1an~l usos.
4, That the r~roposed reclassification of subjec~ propert;y is
ne~c~ssary and/or des.irable for the order].y And proper dc~vr~lopment of the
r,ommunity.
5. That ttie proposed reclassification ot subjQCt property does
propPrly relai.e to tk;e zones and their permitl•.od uses lac~lty established in
close proximzty to subject property and to th~ zones and their permiL-ted usgs
geixerally estabJ.ishecl throughout the conununity.
6. That nu one i~idicated their pr~~ence aL said public
hear.ing in opposi4:ion; and that no correspondenc~ was Yeceivecl ir. opposition
to su2;ject petition.
I441r -1- PC90-:L22
,.1: ~'~
C~lI~FARN'T.\ ENVTRANMk:NTAL OUAL~ITX~_'r_ FINDTN~('; That the Anaheim
City Planni:ig Conunission has reviewed t:~ic: proposal to reclassi~cy subj~c~t
propertY from th~ RM-120U (ResidQntiaZ, Multiple~-Famil}~) Zon~ ~o the RM-2~Q0
(Rosidential, ?~ultiple-ram:ily) or a lESS inte.nse aone on propQ~-ty whiclY
c.onsists of apprr~xamately 4.4 acres lc~cated on the+ ea~t side of Loara Street
approxima~ely 585 fe~t norkPi of. the r.er.terizne oF Noz•th St.ree~ ar,d Eurther
descriU~d as 730•-510 Diorth Loara Str.ea~; and dnQS 1?ereby ~~prove the Neyati.ve
Declnration upon T:indi.ng that it has considered tha Nec~ative Der.laratian
together with an~ cormnents recei.v~d during the ptxk~lic review proce;zs and
£ur.th~r i•iz~diiig on the basis of th,: initial study ar.d any comment~ recei~r4d
that there ys no subs~a:~t3.a1 eviclence khat the ,pr~jec:~ will havti ~
siyniticant effect ou tiie 3izvironmout.
NO'r„ ~FIEREFORE, FiE IT RE50L~ED that h.he Anaheim City P1anr~inq
Commi;,sion dae~ nereby grant aubject Pehition for Reclassificatiori and, by go
doing, L•ha'~ Title 18-7,onzng of the Anah~3.m Mun.icipal Codn b~ amended t~
exclude thE above-descrihed proper*y from •khe Rtd-120Q (Residential,
Mu'_t~ip].e-Faraily) 7.one ~nd to inr.orpoc•ato said doscribed ~,roperty inL•o the
12M•-2~100 (ztesidontial, Multip~e-Fam,ily) Zone upo~ the £o1l~win5 condition
;~hich is hereby found L•o he a necessar.y p•rerequisztQ to the proposed use of
subject r,:ope•rty :n order t. presorve ths saf.e~.y anfl gener2~l welfa:e of the
CitizQns of the C~.ty o£ AnGtiieim:
1. Trac. :.ntroduction uF an ardinance rezoning subject propsrty shall be
contingent upon City Cniiz~cil approval o~ G~neral Plan AmPndment No, 3U5,
nor~ pencling.
BR IT FURTF3ER RFSULVED that thQ Anahei.rn City Planning Cor.unis;;ion does
h~relay find ancl determi.ne that a3o~~ian of this Resolut-.zan i~ exprQSSly
predicated tipon applicant's complfanee with each and al.l of t,lxe conditicns
heroinabove set forth. S2sould any such conditioxis, or any part thereoi, b~
declaxQ~1 ix~valicl ar v.nenForcoable by the fiual judgmeni: of any court a~
competen~ juxi,diction, t;izen this Reso.lution, anu any a~provals hc~rein
con~ained, shall bP deemed null and vo.id.
TIiI~ FURF.GOING RESOLU'~ION was aclo}:t~d a~ the Planning C~mmission
i~estin~ of MaX 22, ].990, ~~ ,
~~e' v'"""f' 1 V I .;~---
ACTING CHATRMANl~ Y ~~
ANAFTBItyS CI'.~X FL~ANI,dING CUMMTSSIODT
~
~r~1~rsT: ~ .
,~ ~I'
~ ~~.•,...: ' _~~J.'~•i . , _~ ,,,
SFCRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIIQG COMMISaT027
-2-
1
PC90~~.22 ~
i
i
~ ~
STAT~ 0~ CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OR~NGE ) ss.
CITY' 0 ,~IAHEIM )
I, Edlth ~.. Harris, Secretury of the Anaheim City Plt~nning
Commission, i1o horeby .:ertify tha~t tho L•~re~aing resolution was passed and
~-doptod at a rnoc~ting ~E L•Y~e Analieim City Planning Commission he1c1 on May 21,
; 1990, by tho following vote uf the memb~rs thereof:
,~
AXG5: COMMIS5TONERS: BCUAS, FEf,DE{AUS, H~LLYk.R, MC BURNF.Y, MESSE
ilOESs COMMISSi:ANERS: NONG
ABSENTs l'.ODfMISSI~NERS: BOYDSTUN, FiET2EiST
IN WI'TtIE~S WHF.REOF, I tiav~ horeunCo sot my hand this ,~~~ ~ay
of .,~,_ ~ k,.~~___• 1990.
( ' ~`~-'~
,~ ''
! . .i ~' ~ ~ l i
S ------- {~ ~~L,1 i:,t,_~ ,•~/~f _ ~t'~~i,~., ._._...r
SECRETARY., AtIAfIF.IM CITY P[,APiNING COMhSISSION
-3- PCsu-122