92-070 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

· '' 427 RESOLUTION NO. 92- 070 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA, RULING ON WRITTEN AND ORAL OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING WRITTEN FINDINGS IN RESPONSE TO WRITTEN OBJECTIONS RECEIVED FROM AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS AND TAXING ENTITIES AND RULING ON SUCH WRITTEN OBJECTIONS TO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SOUTH HARBOR BOULEVARD/FAIRVIEW STREET REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA. WHEREAS, an Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the South Harbor Boulevard/Fairview Street Redevelopment Project Area ("Amendment") has been prepared by the Community Redevelopment Commission of the City of Santa Ana; and WHEREAS, on June 16, 1992, a duly noticed joint public hearing on the proposed Amendment was conducted by the City Council and the Community Redevelopment Commission ("Commission") of the city of Santa Ana; and WHEREAS, any and all persons having any objections to the proposed Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan or the regularity of the prior proceedings, were given an opportunity to submit written comments, or to give oral testimony at the joint public hearing, and show cause why the proposed Amendment should not be adopted; and WHEREAS, the city Council has directed Agency staff to prepare written responses to written objections received from affected property owners and taxing entities in detail, giving reasons for not accepting specified objections and suggestions and has reviewed such responses; and WHEREAS, the City Council has heard and considered all evidence, both written and oral, presented in support of and in opposition to the adoption of the proposed Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council finds, on the basis of the substantial evidence contained within the 'Report to the city Council submitted by the Community Redevelopment Commission of the City of Santa Ana and other substantial evidence in the record, that written evidence received before or at the joint public hearing and oral evidence in opposition received at the joint public hearing is not persuasive to the contrary.