Resolution-PC 95-130,~
pF~~L~TIC~N NQ~' 1~~~~~
A R~SOLU'ffON ON TME ANAHEIIN CIT'Y PLANi;~NG C~MMISSIC~N
THAY PETITION F4H RECIASSIFICATION N0. 44-95-09 BE Gi~~4NT~t'.- UNCUNDITIGNALLY
WHEpF.AS, tha Anali~lm C~ty Pl~e~nlnp Conimission d2d reGOive a var~flAd petitlon far
Recla.-stficaticn for rHai property ~ituatod in tti~ Ciry o~ Anaheim, County aF ~~~an~o, ~t~tA of CaiHorr~la,
described ~3 follow~:
PAi~CEL 1: LOT 50 OF ORIGIN~IL 7u1NN LATS, IN 7HE GlTY 'Jf= ANAHEIM,
COUNTY OF ORANG~, 5TATE 0~ CAUf ~O~Nl~1, AS DESCRIBEt'~ Ar~ID SHOWN
ON TFIE MA ~H~ ~~ C~WOP THE COU~fVTY RECORDE GOF ` LU~ N~ IGELES
DE~~S, IN
CQUNTY', CALlFORNIA.
EXCEPT THE WESTEHLY 6U.00 FEET THEFiEOF.
Pi+qCE~. 2: LOr 5a OF ORIG1iVAl. TOWN LO'~5, IN THE ~I'I'Y OF ANAFIEIM,
C4UilTY QF ORAN~E, STA7E AF CAIJFORNIA, AS p~p aG S 629 ~1N~ C30 OF
ON 7HE MAP OF 7FiE TOWN 4F ANAHEIM,IN BOOK a,
UEEDS, IN THF OFFICE QF TWE COUNTY RECORD':R Of 1_4S ANGELES
COUNTY, CAl.iFORNiA.
EXCEPT THE SOUTHC'F~LY t 50.OA FEEY THEREOF.
PARC;EL 3: T~7W« LOY 49, i~V 1'HE CI'rY OF IINAHF.IM, CUUNT! OF ORANGE,
STATF UF Q5~ N THt OFFICE OF THE C~U~N1Y P cG'UR~E OF LOS ANGE~ ED
830 OF DEE ,
COUNTY, CA~IFORPIIA.
WHERFAS, the City Planniny Commission di 1 hold a public hearing at tt~~ Cfvic CAnter In
the CEty nE Anaheim on Ju1y 10, 1995 ~t 1:3n p•m., noticn of ~~ald publlc hearing having ba~en duly ~iven as
rQyuirad by law and in ~ccordance wlth th~ provisions of th3 Anuheim Mu~ictpai Cale~ Cheptor 18.03, eo
hQar aixi consider Avidence for and~ ae~i`on rFierewithQa~ul that sa d publ~c he ring nwastcrme ued othe
findings and recamrnendat(oris in c~
August 21, Octobar 2, and October 16, 19~15 f~lanning C~~mm(ssion meeting; and
WHFREAS, aaW ~ommission, atter du2 inspection, irnesti~ation anc' 3tucfy made by tts~lf
and in its behalf, and nfter c~ue consider~tion uf All evluence artd reports o~fored at sa`~J hearing, does finci
and determine the foll~wing facts:
1. That the petittoner proposes reclassfEi...stion of subJect property frUm the CG "Comm~rcial,
General" to CL "Commercial, l.imlted".
2. That thd An~heim General Pian dosignates sub~ect property for General C~rnmercia! land
use.
3. That ths propossd reclaasificntlon of ~ubject prope~'ty Is necessary E nd/or desir~blo for ihe
orderty and ~raper develupment of the communfty and th~t ss3id proposal is c~nslstQ~rt with the Cfry's pol~cY
to elirninate CG Zoning.
q. ?hat the proposad redassifi~,~tion of subject property daea prop~rty relate to the zones and
their permittc~d usos Ic~-Ily estabifshedrin ~hout the commi nity. j~t property end to the zor~es and the~r
psrmitted uses genorally establisheci th oug
-1- PC95-130
CR2a08DM.WF
•.~e
tW1q~1
g. That no oriQ indlcated th~ir presence at a~ld ptil~lic heoring in o~~positlon; and that na
correspondonce was raceiveti in opposftian ta subj~ct patltiAn,
CA~~N~~~~~~y~~~yT/~~, Q~IA _~nr _CTf INDIN(~; That the An~hoim Ciry Planning
.~
Commission has reviewed thv proposal to reclasslfy ~ubJ~~t proporty from the CG (Commerolal, (3~neral
Zr~ne to the CL (Commae~cial, L.Imited) lone on a rectangularty-shaped parce! o! le~nd aonsisting of
approxlmately ~.87 acre located at the southwest corn~r of Artiahelm Bou~ev~rd anc! Brc~dw~y, havinp
frontA~~s of approximately 211 feet ~n tho south side ~i Broa~lway and 'I'1:i feot on the west~vi~tho Ne ative
Boulevard and furt{ier describeci as~ 309 5outh Anaheirn Boulevard; eixi does horeby app 9
peclaratian upon find(ng that the declaration refldcts the Indenendent juagamAnt of the lead agency and that
it hs~s considorool the Negative Daclaratlon top~thar with any commenta recbh~~d rlurinA the pubHc reviow
procoss and further findin{~ ~n th~ ~ ill have a t~i~r8(icant pffAG on the Wnvi o ment iv~ that th~re is no
substantial evidence that th~ pr~,Jac
NOW, TH~REFOHE, EE ~'Y RCSOLV~D that the Aneheim Ciry F'lanning Commissfon does
horeby apnrove the subject Petltion for Reclass~ic~tion, Uncondftionallv, to authoriza an amen Ome tho CG
Zoning Nlap of the anah~ee ~~ t iincorpo~a e said dea~C ib~d p op~vrty ! tp he CL (Com~nercfal~ Umited)
~Comcnercial, Goner~l) Zo
Zone.
g~ lT FURTHEH RESOLVED THAT, approval of thls appUcatiQn canstftutes approval of the
proposed rQquest only to the extAnt thst tt compli~s with the Anahefm Municipal Zoning Code and any other
~pplic.abte Cfry St~te and Fedor~l regulations. Approval does not fncl~sde any actlon or ~indings as to
comWi~ince or app~oval of the reqia~st regardiny ~ny other applicable or~lir~ance, regulatlon or requfremont.
7HE FOREGOIN~ FiESOLUTION w~s adapted at th~ Planning Commisslon moetina of
OCtober 16, 1995. ~ ~ ~ / (,~ ~%?~~
.IaWOMAN, ANAH~IM CI PL'•1NNi~ ~G COMMEBSION
~
A7'TEST: , ,
`~ ~..~o~~~ ~ .
SECFtETAFtY, NAHEIM CIiY PLANNING Ct~MMISSION
SYAI'E OF CALIF~JRNiA )
COUIVTY OF ORANGE ) ss•
t;ITY OF /1NAHEIM )
I. Margarita Solorio, S9cretary of ths A~aheim City Plannln4 Commissfan, do hereb~y~c n~in~
that the fAre~ofn~ ~esolutlon wa1~ ssed ~a al~ina~ 0t of the~members t,iereo ~im Clty 9
Commission h~ld Qn Qctober tf, ~ Y
AYE~: COMMISSIONERS: BOS~WiCK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, FIENNINGER, MAYER, MFSSE, PERAZA
(~lOE:S: COMMISSIANERS: NONE
A8S~N7: COMMISSIONERS:
,
IN WITNESS WHE~iEOF, I have herew~to set my hand this ~~{~'day o'~ ~~ ~'
1~.
~~~~~uoV._..._-
g~Cq~T`~~ AHEI CIYY FtANNING COMMIS510N
.2.
PC95•13d