PC 1961-1962-85
't !~~ ~
~
~
~ -
~ ;
r ~
~ I ~ ~
;~.
~~:
~
~.
RBSOLUTIOId N0. 85, SERIES 1961-62
A ItBSOLUTI~i 0? Tf~ CITY PIANNING C~O~lFSSION OP 1~i$ CIT'Y OP ANAI~IbI
RHCQMMffiVDING TO Tf~ CITY CWNCIL OF Ti~ CITY OP ANAFiBIM TH1iT
PHTITZON POR RBCIA33IPICATIQN N0. 61-62-26 SB APPROVED.
1Vl~tHAB, the City Pianning Commisaion of the Ci4y of Aaaheia di.d r~ceive a oerified
Petition for Reclassification from LLO"iD R. PETTSNGILL, 1564 Tonia T_.ane, Anaheim,
California, Owner; Rothman-Steen & Associates, 223 South Claudina Street, Anaheim,
California, Agents; proposing reclassification of the following described property:
The north 100.00 feet of the west 253.60 feet of the north 10 acres of the south 20 acres
of the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 21, in Township 4 South,
Range 10 West, in the Rancho•Las Bolsas, city of Anaheim, as shown on a map thereof re-
carded in book 51, page 10, Miscellaneous Maps, records of said Qrange County
i 8IId
WHHRBA;i, t*~ City Pianning Commvission did hoYd a pubiic hearing at the ~ity Hali in
the City of Anaheim on September 18, 1~61 at 2:00 o'cloct P.M., no4ice of said
public hearing having been duly given~s required by]ax and in accor~utace rith the provi-
sions of the Anaheim Muni:ipai Gode, Chapter 18.72~ to hear and conrt3der evidence for and
against said proposed reciassification and to investiga4e and mate find3nga snd reconnen-
dations in connectioa therewith; and
WHHRBAS, said Commieaion, af4er due iaspectioa,inveatigation, and atqdy made by it-
self and in its behalf, and after due conaideration of all evidence aad Feporta oi°.c:red
at said hearing, doea find and determine the followiag ~facts:
1. That the petitionex proposea, a reclassification of the above deacribed pro-
perty from the R-A, RESIDHNTI4L AGRICULT[TRAL, ZONE to the C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD Ca'~AlHRCIAL,
ZONB, limited to business or professional offices only,
2. That the proposed reciassif3catioa of sub3ect property #a necessar~ or
deairable for the oxderly aad proper deveiopmPat of the comauaity.
3. That the proposed reclassification of aub,~ect propert7- does properly
relate to the zonea and theix permitted uses localiy establiahcd ~'[n cloae prox~i.t~ to
sutsject property and 4o the zonea and their permit4ed uses geaerally eatabii8hed through-
out the coimnunity.
4. That the proposed reclassifica4ion of aub,~ect property doea require
dedication for and a4andard improvement. of abutting streeta becnuae said property
doea relate to und abut upon atreets aad high~nays v~hich are proposed to carr~ the
type and quantity of tra€fic~ xhich wili be generated by the peraitted ~uaea, in •occord-
aace with the cir;:ulation element of the General Plan.
5. That verbal opposition by one owner of property in the subject area was recorded
against subject petition.
R-1
s:
` .._ _ __ -._.._._
_~_.'_ . - . .. _... .. =%~Y
~1-
: : --.......- --- -- -.._ . . .__ _ _ ' ~
G' ~
~. ..._ . . . _. . . ._ _.._..._ .
i ,~ ~~
1 _ _
.
3,~
,,~; '
' NfJW, 11~BRHFORB, BB IT RB50LVBD that the Anaheim City Planning Commission hereby
;~ secommends to the City Council of the City of Anahe?m that Petition for Reciassification
No. 61-62-26 be approved and, by so doing, ichat Title 18-Zoning of the Anaheim
Municipal Code be amer,ded to exclude ttie above described property from the R-A,RESIDBNTIA'L
AGRICULTURAL zone and to incorporate said described property in tk:e C-1,NBIGHBORHOOD
;~, COrAfffitCIAL zone, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a neces-
sary prerequisite to the pr~posed use of the subject property in order to preserve the
safefy and general welfare of the Citizens of Anaheim:
1. Development substantially in accordance with Bxhibit No. 1, with the exception that in-
gress and egress be eliminated from Buena Vista Avende.
2. Construction of a six (6) f'~ot masonry wall along the east and north boundaries of
subject property prior to Final Building Inspection.
3. Recordation of deed restrictions limiting use of subject property to business and
professional offices only.
4. Dedication of 53 feet from ~e monumented centeriine of Bucl±d Avenue (30 feet existing)
5. Preparation of street improvement plans and installation of all improvements for
Huclid pvenue, in accordance with the approved standard plans on file in the Office
of the City Bngineer.
6. Provision of utility easements along exterior boundaries as determined to be necessary
by the Director of Public Utilities to adequately serve the subject property and other
property.
7, Recordation of a Record of Survey of subject property.
8. Pay~ent of $2.00 per front foot for stxeet lighting purposes on Huclid Avenue. -..
9. Time 2?.mitation of one handred and eighty (180) days for the accomplishment of Item
Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. '~
THB POREGOING RBSOLUTIOId is signed and approved by me th~s 18th day of September,1961.
ATTEST:
SHC AHBIM CITY Y~ ING CQW~lI3SION
STATB OP CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OP ORANGB ) ss.
CITY OP ANAHBIM )
~~w. •
CHAI ANA}~IM C~ IAIV)iING COk4dISS '
I, JBAN PAGE ~ Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the Citq of
Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution'was passed ~ttd adopted at a
meetiag of the City Planuiag Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on September 18, 1961
at 2:00 a~clock P.M „ by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYBS: CO~AtISSIONHRS: Allred, Gauer, Hapgood, Marcoux, Mungall, Pebley, Perry,
Summers.
NQHS: CQ~4~SI3SIONB4tS: None.
ABSHNT: CU~AII3SIOHBR3: Morris.
IN WITNBS9 WHBRHOP, I have hereunto set my hand this 18th day of September, 1961.
R2-A
RBSOLUTION N0. 85
_._ .---
_. ___ ~ _ ~;j •
~ _..._ __.._ - ---
i
~,
BBCRSTAR IM CITY Y CQAASISSION
-2--
------_.___._ ._ . ___._ ._. ._.---._. ~., , ~
;~ ___-- -- _:
--.... .
~ ~ _