PC 1962-1963-541_
~ ___ . ..r e
-'~ -. '--------° _ ....._ , . . .. _ _.: ._. _~
, ~ ~ ..
t
~.: # ,
~
,. .. , . . ~
~
Y,. , .
%:i •'+~
. . . . i ;
~ ~
~'' .•
VY
S
RESOLU'i'ION N0. 541, SERIES 1962-63 , ~: ~
~ :` ' t, • .
, j
~
. . .
, -
`'
~ A RE90LU1TON OF TIiE CITY PLANNING COMMiSSiON OF 9'HE Ci'i'Y OF ANAHEAt ~ •
• ~ ~
•
~
~
~ .
~ RECO:iKENDING'TO Z'HE CTCY COUNCiL OF TFiE CiTY OF ANAHSFt'PIiA1' •
~ a
I
~•- PETIZTON FOR RECLASSIFICATION NOe ~ '6~~29 ' ~' AFPROVED + ' '
•-..._._.__ . . .. • . . • -- . j '~
i
_+ ; . . , . •
~
~, ,
;
_ . . ~
~ ;
~ ,,
'~
~ .i
~
~
;
'
VfrtEREAS, the City. Alanning Commission oF the City of ~1-naheim did ~initiate a petition
•:or rZeclassification of Lot~Nos. 95, 96, 97, 9A~ 94~ 100~ 101 and 102 in 7ract No. 1565~ ~ ,
~
~'
~y;, ! ; . . situa~ed in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California
and further de- • '
~'~'
~ I
~ ; .
' ~
~ scribed as 217, 223~ 227, 305, 311, 315~ 321, and 327 South State College Boulevard, ~ '
'
. Anaheim, California, also Parcel Nos. 9 and 10, as descrfbed fn Exhibit "A" attaChad hereto ~
' and referred to herein as
though set foxth in full •; i
~
~ _
,
'
'
' ~ i
;
~r ;~
; ,
.
. ,
. . _.._.. _ . _._. .... ..
.. . _.... . _ , .. . ... . . . _ '
.. . 2
~~ ;
~
# .
~ ~ and ' i
.;~ ,
~' ~
~ WHERF..1S, the Ciry Plcianin¢ Commiasion did hold a public heorin¢ ~t the Ciqr HeU ln tha CitybE Anuheim on . :~ ~
j ;~ Novemb2z' 2b~ 1962~ at 2:00 o'clock P.rt. notiee of soid public hsodn¢ w~~ing bMn duly Qlven oa required •by. ~
~ " c law and ia nccordanoe with eho proviatonc oE the MoLdm Munlcip~l Code, Ch~ptar 18.72, to hear and eonatdcr evidance ~
;~
G !I for ond ngainst soid ptopooaf roclm~itcotion and to lav~stlaata ond make tiAdlnaa ~nd rooorom~nd~tlone 3n conneetioa ,
~ l ;
t}ieeowith; acd '
• ~
t~ .. . ~ '
~ •. .
1 !
~~ WHEREAS, soid Commiseion, aEter due inepectlon, invoatiQotion, ~nd study m~de by Its~lf ond ln ite behoiE~ ond ':i
p • oftor due considetation of oll evidenee ond repode oEtered ot ~aid headng, does ftnd ~nd deteenlrte th~ tollow(na loeta: ~
1. That the Planning Commiesion proposes a reclassification~of the above doscribed ~
~ j; p'roparty :rorn the R-/t, ResidenL•ial'Agricultural~ and the R-1~ One,Fsr~i3ly Rosi~ential~ ~~nes .~-~E
: , to the'G-1, Neig,nborhood Comrnercial, Zone. , . . ;~ ;'.
_
; ~•
i' • , . •, • ' , ' '
. • . , • ;~ ;
z :i
f i,
i; • .
. ' .
2. That the propoecd reclesei~cetion oE•subject propedy is neceaeory and/or deelreble, (or tho ordeely ond pro- . ~? ~
~
`: t
~ '' por development oE tha communiry. f %
x ~; , • • 3. 'I'hat the proposed reclaesi6cation of subjeet property doas properly celate to the zonee end thelr pormitted ~'+ ~;~ ?
~r ;~ uses locally estobltshod in close proximity to aubject property ond to the sones ~nd thelr permittod uoai Beneraliy ~atoi;i• ;y j
V j; ~ lishod throughout tho communiry. ,, • T;1~ , ~;~ , ~
+
~~ ' 4. 7hat the »r~~osed reclassification of subject property does require dedication .~ ~
~~
~ ~:or and standard improvement of abutting streets because said property does relate to and' ; ;
~ ~ abut upon straets.and highways which are proposed to carry the type and quantity of traffic~ ~ ~
s; 'which will be gertarated by the permitted uses, in accordance with,the CirCU~ation elempnt t ,
i:
f of the General Plan. ' ' . . .
e
~
' ~ `~ ?
~ ''
5. That no or~
appeared in c
pposition to.aub~ect
petition.
~ r
~; It ,
• I ~ ,~.` } ~
~ i : . . : t ',I ' ~ p
~'
i!
I, . . ~ ~ i. r .
'' ' ? ~~'
i
l: ~'
' `
. ~ ~ ~ ~' ~`
' ? !
~, ~ , • • .. r.
.'~ ~ .. .
'
' ~ a
t ~ .. , .
~ ;( ', !
• ,~ ~
~
~ ~
I ' ~
~
i i~ , . ;
. ~ , ~ •
'
~ ~' ' i
.
. .. . ,.
,.
~
, ~ • ~+
.
,
•
'
I 1
r
. .
. i:9 . ~
.. .. . . .
1
Rl'A
._ i ~ ~
~.
ki f '
.
. _
..~ . . ..
_.
~~ REVTSION 12~18~62 ;~ +
~ ~ t
~
) f'r ~ a
~
~, 4
''ry
' ~`
, ',
~ ; _ ` t ~ ~ 1. . `. ti.. .' • ~.,
{-'^-- + ~ ' ; t.
~
~ ~ ; .'~
~ 7
-
- '~ '
~,~....s...,:~.......
~... .. J.
l~~ ~
. :
~~
'
.
~. _ . ,,.,_,,.:.._~ , ~
_ . ~
\
----- =- -` ~ --_-~------- _ .--.----- ~ ------ ':.-, ~_1. l .~,.~.I~~ <~`
'°2EGAL DESCRTPTION 0~ TH06~ARCIIS OF LAND TO BE RFa."LASSIF~,;,~~ DESCRTBID AS FOLLUWSc ~`i'
Those portions of Lot 11 of Anaheim Extension~ as shown on a Map of Survey made by William
Hamel in 1868 on file in the office of the County Recorder of Los Angeles County,
California~ described a follows:
,;. s ;~~1 ~, ~•t~~y ~ ; .~ ~rCn~
j~~.~ PARCEL Oi~'~ ~eginning at the intersection of the center line of Santa Ana Street~ with
the Southerly prolongation of the Easterly line of i.ot 103 of Tract No. 1565, as shown
on a Map thereof recorded in Book 49~ pages 20 to 24~ inclusive~ of Miscellaneous Maps~
records of Orange County~ California; thence North 15° 23' 45" West along said Southerly
prolongation, and along.the Easterly line of Lots 103 and 117 of said Tract No. 1565~ a
distance of 222.58 feet; thence North 74° 31' 15" East parallel with the center line of
said Santa Ana Stxeet~ 162.08 feet to a point i,n the center•line of State College
Boulevard (formerly Placentia Avenue), as shown on sa3d Map of 'Tract No. 1565; thence
South 0° 10' 55" West along said eenter line 231.16 feet to the center line of said Santa
Ana Street; thence South 74° 31* 15" Nlest along the center line of said Santa A~Ya Street
a distance of 100.00 feet to the point of beginning. ~
~''-r-~`!i;"ll~d ~=
~,~~PARCEL ~f0~°~Beginning at the Northwest corner of that parcel of land conveyed to Willis
.'~LE. Ford, a married man, by deed No. 19386, recorded February 14~ 1958 in Book 4196, page
c S•,"1..524 of Official Records of Orange Gounty~ California; thence North 74° 31' 15" East 162.08
~~:~~~~5`feat along the Northexly line of said parcel of land to an 3ntersectfon with the center
line of State College Boulevard (formerly Placeni;ia Avenue) as said State College Boulevard
is shown on the Map of Tract No. 1565~ recorded 3n ~ook 49~ pages 20 through 24~ inclsive,
of Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange County~ California; thence North 0° 10~ 55" East
190 feet, more or less, along the center line of said State Coilege Boulevaxd to an
intersection with the Easterly prolongation of the Southerly line of Lot 102 of said
Tract No. 1565; thence South 74° 31' 15" Wes•t ~16.99 feet~ more or less~ along the said
Easterly prolongation and Southerly line of said Lot 102 to the Southweat corner of said
Lot 102; thence South 0° lOt 55" West 131.83 feet along the Easterly lines of Lots 120~
119 and a portion of the East line of Lot 118~ to an angle point in the East line of said
Lot 118~ all of said Tract No. 1565; thence South 15° 23',45" West 50.48 feat along a
portion of the East iine of said Lot 118 and a portion of the East line of Lot 117 of
said Tract No. 1565~ to the point of beginning.
~
,.. _ -~_._~__.._
,~ :. _ _ ~ ~
r r
_ ~ _ ~_ ~ .~--.____~-_~~----~
~~ '~ '' RESOLU~ON NO. 541, SERIES 1962-63 ~'~
~
A RE90LUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING CON~IISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
RECO)[IdENDING T0 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APIAH~FA[ TNAT
PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NO. 62•~b3-29 ~ pppgOVED
WHBBtEAS, the Ctty Plennfag Comofisioa of tle~ City of Aaaheim did . initiate a petition for Reclass-
ification of Lot Nos. 96, 97, 98, 100, 101 and 102 in Tract No. 1565, sfl:uGte~ zn •i:fie City,
of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, and further c;escr~:bec: as ~23, ~27, 305,
315, 32: and 327 South State College Boulevard, Anaheim, California , also Parcel N~s. 9
and 10, as described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and referred to herein as though set
forth in full
~
V . t ~
f' ~ V~ .
V
; ~ad
WFlEREAS, the City Plamaing Commioelon d!d hold. a public headng ~t the Citp H~11 in the City of Aneheim on
November 26, 1962~ et 2:00 o'clock P.M..notice of seid public hearin~ laviag bavn dnly given a~ reqnired •by
law and in ~ccocdn~ce wlth We p~ovisions of the Mel~~im Municip~l Code, ChRptet 18.72, to heai Qnd conelder evidence
for aed a~doat eaid ptoposed ncla~~ification end to inveetlpte acid make fladin~a end ~ecommend~Hone in cwanectioa
theeewiW; end ' .
WHEREAS, eaid Commisalon, a@er due inepECtlon, invettigation, md atudy m~de by itaolf aad in its behelt, aad
cRet due considaation of ell evidence and reports offered et seid heaeing, does find end detetmine the tolloaina.facts:
1. That the Planning Commission proposes a reclassification of the above described
properi:y :rom th~e R-P,, R~sideni:ial P.gz•iculi:ural, and the R-lt One.Farnily Reside~~tial., "I.ones
to i:he C-1, Neighborhood Commercial, Zone.
2. That the proposed reclasaificetion of subject property ie neceasery azid/or deslreble for the o:derly ead pm-
per development of the community.
3. That the p~oposed reclasaification of subject property does pmperly relete to the zones ond their petmitted
uees locelly esteblished in close proximity to subject property an~ ;o the zones and their permitted ue~e ~enerally ~stab-
liehed throughout the commanity.
4. That the p.rehosed reclassification of subject property does require dedication
for and standard improvement of abutting stree±s because said property does relate to and
abut upon streets and highways which are proposed to carry the type and quantity of traffic,
which will be generated by the permitted uses, in accordance with the circulation element
of the General Plan.~
5. That no one.appear~ad in opposition to subject petition.
. ~ ~~
.:.~:.
Rl-A
, . . . -. , - !iB~2.7
~~ ~
a
;,
.1_ ~
:~
~ j
;;,
%
_,;
:A^ I
' ~ X
~
~
,
_~.__. .--- '-~--
----__.
.__ __.,.._._----- -------- - ~ 5
~
~ . b1
. '. . .Wr--
-
~ .~
~
,. ~ ti ~~
. •r ~' r ~'
NOW, THPREFORE, BE IT RE:pLVID that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
rec~mmend to the City Council of the ~ity of Anaheim that subject Petition for Reclassifi-
cation be approved and, by so doing, that Title 18-Zoning of the Anaheim Municipal Code
be amended ta exclude the. above described property from the R-1, One Family Residiential,
Zone and to incorporate said described property in the C-1, Neighborhood Commercial, Zone
upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the
proposed use of the subject property in osder to preserve the safety and general welfare
of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim.
1. Dedication of fifty-three (53) feet from the monumented centerline of State College
Boulevard within one hundred eighty (180) days .(50 feet exi.sting for Parcel Nos. 2, 3, 4,
5, 6, 7, 8, ~nd 10; 30 feet existing for Parcel No. 9s,determined b the De artment of
2. Provision of standard trash storage areas, Y p
Public Works, Sanitation Division, prior to Final Building Inspection of any proposed
alteration of existing residences and~or any new construction for Parcel Nos. 2 through 10,
and within one hundred eighty (180) days.
3- Payment of $2.00 per front foot for st*eet lighting purposes on State for1Parcel No. L
Boul2vard, Broadway, and Santa Ana Street within one hundred eighty (180) days
4. That the owners of Parcel Nos. 1 through 8 shall place of record City of Anaheim
C-1 Deed Restriction, within one hundred eighty (180) days, approved by the City Attorney,
which restrictions shall limit the use of the existing residential structures to business
and profes~ional office use only, that the front yards of said Parcel Nos. 1 through 8
shal.l be fully landscaped and maintained as a condition of use, and shall not be blacktopped
o: iased for parking purposes, nor shall the existing front yard setback be substantially
ra~?uced, that all signs and advertisements visible from State College Boulevard and Broadway
shall be limited to one free standing unlighted sign per parcel, with a maximum area of
8 square feet, said signs to be of a uniform appearance and subject to the approval of
development review, that no flags, banners, lighi;ed signs, billboards, or rotati.ng devices
shall be established in conjunction with the use of any existing residential structure,
and further provided that said deed restrictions, upon the certification of the Cheif
Building Inspector of the removal of any existing residential structure, shall be removed
on the respective parcel by the City Attorney, :znd thereafter, said deed restrictions on
the respective parcel shall be of no further force or effect.
5. Installation of a six (6) foot masonry wall, where said walls do not exist, along
the westerly boundary of the alley opposii:e Parcel Nos. 1 through 8, respectively, except
for the provision of heavy duty gates to provide for pedestrian aforVSaiduwallaconstruction
said alley from lots abutting the west side of said alley, plans
to be subject to the approval of Development Review, and said walls opposite each parcel
to be constructed prior to the reclassification of each respective parcel, unless within
that time the respective abutting property owner signs a written walver of the installation
of the required wall construction.
6. Installation of a six (6) foot masonry wall along the west side of Parcel No. 9,
prior to Final Building Inspection of any construction of Parcel No. 9.
7. Dedication and improvement within one hundred eighty (one hundred eighty) days
of a twenty (20) foot alley between Parcel Nos. 8 and 9, sub3ect to the approval of the
City Engineer in accordance with the adopted standard plans on file in the off ice of the City
Engineer, to provide peripherial circulation to Parcel Nos. S and 9 and eliminate the existing
stub alley westerly of Parcel Nos. 4 through 8.
8. Outdoor storage of any materials shall be prohibited unless contained within an
enclosed trash storage area.
9. Prior to reclassif3cation of any one of Parcel Nos. 2 through 8, the owner or
owners of each respective parcel shall submit to the City Council a plan of development
incorporating the proposed structural and archi.'cectural revisions to the existing residential
structures, together with proposed landscaping, proposed garage and wall removal or real
yard clearance, and proposed parking lot layout which shall be limited to ihe rear yard of
subject parcels and in accordance with,Code parking requirements. Upon completion~~of all
applicable conditions contained herein, and an approval by the City Counci'1 of the proposed
use of development foi each respective Parcel Nos. 2 through 8, the City Attorney shall pre-
pare an ordinance amending Title 18 in accordance with the Resolution approved by the
City Council as to the respective parcel. ,
10. Following removal of the required restrictions on Parcel Nos. 1 through 8 and
prior to Final Building Inspection af any new construction thereon, provision shall be made
for concrete paving and installation o: 5 by 5 foot tree wells spaced at forty (40) foot
RESOLUTION NU. 541 -2-
R2-A
4
~u.
1 ~ , ~ ~ .~ ~,.
'; --~, . .. ~ ~~
ir.tervals in the parkway portion of the State College Boulevard and Broadway rights-of-way
abutting subject parcels, and said landscaping shall be installed and be subject to the
approval of .the Supexintendent of Parkway Nfaintenance. Provision shall also be made for
the installation of a minimum six (6) foot wide strip of landscaping parallel to the State
College.Boulevard and Broadway rights-of-way abutting Parcel Nos. 1 through 8 prior to
Final Building Inspection of any new construction on said parcels.
11. Prior to reclassification of Parcel No. 9, a plan of development sh211 be
approved by the City Council, said plan to incorporate the removal of all existing structures
on said Parcel No. 9 and to incorporate tree wells spaced at forty (40) foot intervals
in the parkway portion of the State College Boulevard right-of-way abutting said parcel;
and a six (6) foot strip of landscaping abutting the State College Boulevard right-of-way
said tree wells and landcsaping to be installed prior to Final Bui.lding Inspection.
12. Compliance by the.om~er or owners of Parcel No. 1 with all applicable conditions
~contained herein specified, and~or with all applicable conditions of Title 18-Zoning of
the Anaheim Municipal Code, within one hundred eighty (180) days. If such compliance is
not accomplished within the tirae limit specified, Ordinance No. 1572, which reclassified
Parcel No. 1 to the C-1 Zone, shall be rescinded on the grounds that all applicable
conditions of Title 18 - Zoning have not been complied with, thereby reverting the
classification of Parcel No. 1 to the R-1, Zone and applying to said parcel the Resolution
of Intent approved by the City Council under petition for Reclassif:cation No. 62-63-29.
13. Resolution No. 62R-882 approved under Reclassification No. 61-62-120 on Parcel
No. 5 shall be rescinded and replaced with subject resolution.
TFIE FORL~OING RF.SOLUTIOH is signed and approvsd by me this 26th day of November, 1962.
~n~~~~ ~.
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING ODMMIS .
ATTESTs
~~/rz~'~//
SECREfARY ANAHEIM CITY PL~1NNING OOMMISSION
STATE OF CALIE~RNIA )
QOUNTY AF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Ann Krebs, Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the Cii;y of Anaheim, do
hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the
City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on November 26, 1962, at 2:00 o'clock
P.M., by the following vote of.the.members thereofi
AYES: OOMMISSIONERSs Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall, Pebley, Perry.
NOESt COMMISSIONERSe None.
ASSENTs OOMMISSIONERS: Hapgood.
IN WITNESS WHERH~F, I have hereunto set my hand this 26th day of November, 1962.
'SECREI'ARY ANAHEIM CIT PLANNING QOMN!ISSION
RESOLUTION N0. 541
R3-A
-3-
.,.:~:
~:
G:
,;
i',
7:: _.__.,_~..~-._' _""__'"'""
.
~"'' ...~ ..~'-~.'. ~Y~~~ 11
~
~ ~ ~~ ~
~ ~ ;: I ~~ ~ ~
~
. ,
-~
RESOLU~~ NO. 541, SERIES 1962-63 ~;~~
A RE90LUTION OF THE CITY PLANNIIVG COMMISSION OF THE CITY Ok' ANAHEIM
RECOMMEHI?iDiG T0 THE CITY COUNCIL OF TF1E CITY OF ANAH~A Tl9AT
PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NO. 62-63-29 ~ qppg~OVED
WHBREAS, ffie Clty P1enn3M Commtaaioa of the Ciry of Mshotm did initiate a petition for Reclass-
ification of Lot Nos. 96, 97, 98, 100, 101 and 102 in Tract No. 1565, siiiuatec in che City
of Anaheim, County of Orange, 5tate of California, and further cescribec: as ~23, 227, 305,
315, 321 and 327 5outh State College Boulevard, Anahe3m, California , also Parcel N.~s. 9
and 10, as described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and referred to herein as though set
forth in full
; oad
WNEREAS, the Ctty Plansing Commlasioa dld hold a public headag ~4 tbe C±ty l~dl ia ti~~ City oE Aaeheim on
November 26, 1962, et 2:00 o'clock P.M. .notice of said public heatie~ korln` moen dyly ~iven ns eeqni~ed ,bp
law a~ad io accoedaece wit6 tho provisAons of tke Me~lm hfinicipd Code, Ch~phr 15.72, to heai ead coaelder evid~ace
6or ~ ee~iest e~id ptopoemd recla~~iQcetion and to iaveeti~te and make $adln`e aad racommwdatlone in connection
thm~ewlth; eod
WHERE/1S, eaid Commisaion, eftee dae iaepaction, investi~ation, ~nd ~tady ~~de by Itoelf ~ud in its trehelf, aad
d~er due coasider~tion of all evidence end reporta offeted et said hearing, doea find end detoemyne the Ea1loAin~.facts:
1. That the Planning Commission proposes a reclassification of ttie above described
property.:rorn the R-P,, Residential P.griculi:ural, and the R-1~ One Faraily Residential, ~ones
to the C-1, Neighborhood Comrnercial, Zone.
2. Thet the propoeed recleseificetion of aubject property is neceseary end/or desirable foe the ordarly end pm-
p~r development of the community.
3. Thet the propoaed reclassi~ication of subject property doea properly celate to the zones and theit permitted
uees locally eatebliahed ia cloae proximity to subject prope=ty and to the zoaes and their permitted uew generally sateb-
lished throughout the community.
4. 7hat the n.r%.hosed reclassification of subject property does require dedication
for and standard improvement of abutting sireets because said property does relate to and
abut upon streets and highways which are proposed to carry the type and quantity of traffic,
wtiich wil~ be generated by the permitted uses, in accordance with the circulation element
of the General Plan.~
5. That no one appeared in opposition to subject petition.
t
~21-A
• r~
/ ~
~ `
,
~ '1`
~~ ~ ~~ ~
~;! .
~` ' NOW~ THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVID that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
};~; recommend.to the City Council of the City of Anaheim that subject Petition for Reclassifi-
cation be approved and, by so doing, that Title 18-Zoning of the Anah~im Municipal Code
;rv; be amended to exclude the above described property from the R-1, One Family Residiential,
~• . Zone and to incorpoxate said described property in the C-1, Neighborhood Cotmnercial, Zone
upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary pres.equisite to the
proposed use of the subject property in or.der to preserve the safety and general welfare
of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim.
1. Dedication of fifty-three (53) feet from the monumented centerline of State College
Boulevard within one hundred eighty (180) days .(50 feet exis•cing for Parcel Nos. 2, 3, 4,
~;; 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10; 30 feet exist3.~~g for Parcel No. 9. )
~ 2. Provision of standard trash storage areas, as determined by the Department of
~'~ Public Works, Sanitation Division, prior to Final Building Inspection of any proposed
alteration of existing residenr.es and~or any new construction for Parcel Nos.. 2 through 10,
~,; and within one hundred eighty (180) days.
~~ 3. Payment of $2.00 per front foot for street lighting purp~ses on State College
~ Boulevard, Broadway, and Santa..M a Stxeet within one hundred eighty (180) days for ParcelNo.
;~.: 4. That the owners of Parcel Nos~ l through 8 shall place of record City of Anaheim
'"~ G1 Deed Restriction within one.hundrecl.ei ht (180) da s a roved b the Cit Attorne
. 9 Y Y+ PP Y Y Y.
~ which restrictions shall limit the use uf the existing residen•tial structures to business
~~ and professional office use only, that the front yards of said Parcel Nos. 1 through 8
~ shall be fully landscaped and maintained as a condition of use, and shall not be blacktopped
~ or used for parking purposes, nor shall the existing front yard setback be substantially
; reduced,.that all signs and advertisements visible from State College Boulevard and Broadway
~ shall be limited to one free standing.unlighted sign per parcel, with a maximum area of
S 8 square feet, said signs to be of a nsniform appearance and subject to the approval of
t~ development review, that no flags, banners, lighted signs, billboards, or rotati.ng devices
s shall be established in conjunction with the use of any existing residential structure,
' and further provided that said deed restrictions, upon the certification of the Cheif
~ Building Inspector of the removal of any,existing residential structure, shall be removed
'F on the respective parcel by the City Attorney, and thereafter, said deed restrictions on
= the respective parcel shall be of no further force or effect.
`s 5. Installation of a six (6) foo•t masonry wall, where said walls do not exist, along
the westerly boundary of the alley opposite Parcel Nos. 1 through 8, respectively, except
for the provision of heavy duty gates to provide for pedestrian and vehicular access to
' said alley from lots abutting the west side of said alley, plans for said wall construction
to be subject to the approval of Development Reviews and said walls opposite each parcel
to be constructed prior ~o the reclassification of each respective parcel, unless within
that time the respective abutting property ownsr signs a written waiver of the installation
of the required wall constructione
~ 6, Installation of a six (6) foot masonry wall along the wESt side of Parcel No. 9,
< prior to Final Building Inspection of any construction of Parcel No. 9.
~, 7. Dedication and improvement within one hundred eighty (one hundred eighty) days
of a twenty (20) foot alley between Parcel Nos. 8 and 9, subject to the approval of the
` City Engineer in accordance with the adopted standard plans on fils in the office of the City
~
~i Engineer, to provide peripherial circulation to Parcel Nos. 8 and 9 and eliminate the existing
%~~ stub alley westerly of Parcel Nos. 4 through S.
~~'. 8. Outdoor storage of any materiala shall be prohibiied unless contained within an
M1?; enclosed trash storage area.
;~ 9. Prior to reclassification of any one of Parcel Nos. 2 through S, the ownc-:r or
~ owners of each respective pascel shall submit to the City Council a plan of development
H:9 incorporating the proposed structural and architectural revisions to the existing residential
y~ structures, together with proposed landscaping, proposed garage and wall removal or real
E,;~ yard clearance, and proposed parking lot layout which shall be limited to the rear yard of
{!, ' sub~ect parcels and in accordance with Code paxking requirements. Upon completion'of all ~
~~ applicable conditions contained herein, and an a~proval by the City Council of the proposed
~ use of development for each respective Parcel Nos. 2 through 8, the City Attorney shall pre-
f pare an ordinance amending Titla 18 in accordance with the Resolution approved by the
~; City Council as to the respective~parcel.
{: 10. Following removal of the required restrictions on Parcel Nos. 1 through 8 and
prior to Final Building Inspection of any new construction thereon, provision shall be made
~ for concrete paving and installation of 5 by 5 foot tree wells spaced at forty (40) foot
RESOLUTION N0. 541 _2_
R2-A
~
~.*,.
::
'7
`s
,t
V
a
L'
1
~.
J
~
;i
~i
;.
- ---• -----------_._._-----.. __.. _---- ___._~.---
;;. __. : ~ ---:--------- -~ .
.;.v.: ,
_...__.. . ..... ~ ~ . ~..._.. _ .. -
, , ~,,~ ',~''
, ~~
intervals in the parkway portion of the State College Boulevard and Broadway rights-of-way
abutting subject parcels, and said lanclscaping shall be.ins.talled and be subject to the
approval o£.the.Super3ntendent of .Parkway ldaintenance,... Pro~ision shall also be made for
the installation.of a minimum six (6) foot.wide strip of landscaping parallel to the State
College.Boulevard and.Bxoadway.rights-of-way abutting Parcel Nos. 1 thruugh 8 prior to
Final Building Inspection of any new construction on said parcels.
11. Prior to reclassification of Parcel No. 9, a plan of development shall be
approved by the City Council, said plan to .incorporate the removal of all existing structures
on said Parcel No. 9 znd to incorporate tree.wells spaced at forty (40) foot intervals
in the parkway portion of the 5tate College.Beulevar.d.right-of-wa~~ abutting said parcel;
and a six (6) foot strip of.landscaping abutting the State College Boulevard riqht-of-way
said tree wells and landcsaping to be installed prior to Final Build9ng Inspection.
12. Compliattce by the_oNmer or owners of Parcel No. 1 with all applicable conditions
contained herein specified, and~or with all applicable conditions of Title 18-Zoning of
the Anaheim Municipal Code, within one hundred eighty (180) days. If such compliance is
not accomplished within.the tim~_limit specified, Ordinance No. 1572, which reclassified
Parcel No. 1 to the G1 Zone, shall be rescinded on the grounds that all applicable
conditions of Title 18 - Zoning have not..been complied with, thereby reverting the
classification of Parcel No. 1 to the R-1, Zone and applying to said parcel the Resolution
of Intent approved by the City Colncil under petition for Reclassification No. 62-63-29.
13. Resolution No. 62R-882 approved under Reclassification No. 61-62-120 on Parcel
No. 5 shall be rescinded and replaced with sub3ect resolution.
THE FOR~OING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 26th day of November, 1962.
ATTESTi
~~/rz~~.~/
SECREfARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING C70MMISSION
STATE OF GALIFORNIA )
OOUNTY OF ORANGE ) 'ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING OOMNIIS
I, Ann Krebs, Secretary of ~he City Planning Commission of the City of Anahefm, do
hereby certify that the foregoing sesolut3on was passed and adopted at a meeting of the
City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on November 26, 1962, at 2e00 o'clock
P.M., by the following uote of.:the.~nembers~.thereofs
AYESs DOMMISSIONERSe Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Marcoux, Mungail, Pebley, Perry.
NOES~ OOMMISSIONERSt None.
ABSENTe OOMMISSIONERSs Hapgood.
IN WITNESS WHERBDF, I have hereunto set my hand this 26th day of November, 1962.
RESOLUTION N0. 541
R3-A
-3-
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CIT PLANNING OOMMISSION
, j, .
, . ~
;~
'~ i
~
_._.
..
--,._..___.___..~__.__
_ -~----------...-.. ;~ ~
. '
..,,. .
~.
~;
•----- __. _ _ _,~
~ nri9 ~ .
~ -'_.`._..-~.
.
. , . - . .
. . .
.
. ~ ~ . .
.
~ :
~ ~ -.~
~
.... .. . . ,~