PC 1962-1963-644C
r , i ^~ ~' ~
~' , RESOLUTION NO. 644~ SERIES 1962-63
A RC50LUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMiYISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
RECOhiMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THF, CIT'I OF ANAHEIM THAT
PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NO. 62-63-~2 BE APPROVED
~; WHEREAS, the City Plenning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive a vezified Petition for Reclessifica-
tion from ~RIDRICKS DEVELOPMENT ~RPORATION, 524 West Coimnonvraalth Avenu?, Fullerton, Cal-
ifornia, Owners; LBJN.4RD.SMITH~ 125 South Claudina,.Anaheim, California, Agent ~f certain
~~ real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described
in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and referred to herein as though set forth in full
; end
WHEREAS, the City Plan~~ing Commission did hold a public hearing at 4he City Hall in the City of Anaheim on
February 18~ 1963~ at 2:00 o'clack P.M. notice of said public hearing heving been duly given as cequired by
law aad in accordeace with the provisions of the Maheim Municipel Code, Chapter 18.72, to hear and consider evidence
for and against said pioposed reclassification and to investigate and malce findings end recommendetions in connection
therewith; and
NHEREAS, said Commission, eEter due inspection, investigetion, end study made by itself and in its behalf, and
efter due considecation of ell evidence and reports offexed at seid hearing, does find and determine the following fects:
1. That the petitioner proposes a reclessific¢tion of the above described property from !he R-A~ Residential
Agricultural, Zone, to the C-1, Neighborhood Commercial, Zone for Parcel No. 1, R-3, Multiple
Family Residential, Zone for Parcel No. 2, and R-1, One Family Residential, Zone for Parcel
Noa 3, to establish a neighborhood shopping center on Parcel Noe 1, multiple family residential
davelopment on Parcel No, 2, and 16 R-1, One Family Residential, Zoned lots on Parcel Noe 3.
2. That the proposed reclessiScation of subject prope~ty is necessary end/or desicable for the orderly and pro-
per development of the community.
3. That the proposed ceclassification of subject property does properly relate to the zones end their permitted
uses locally established in close proximity to subject property and to the zones end their permitted uses generally estab-
lished thxoughout the community.
4. That the proposed reclassification of subject property does require dedication for
and standard improvement of abutting streets 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 Plana
5o That two persons representing a number of persons in the Council Chamber, appezred
in opposition to subject petition, and one person favored subject petition.
Rl-A -1-
~:
4
{
i
..._.. ._..._.._.-...'""'.'.._... . 3
_ _._. . . . . . . .~ ~
~ :rhe estate or interest in the land describe~ or referred to in,~chedule'C covered by this polic~, is
alee.
SCHEDULE B
This policy does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the following:.
PART I
1. Texes or aMe~ments which are not shown as existing li?~., by the records of any laxing authority th,t
- levies tmxes or esses~nents on real property or by the public recor~
2, Any' facts, rishts, .~.t~_. 'or, cl.a~n, ,s which,are np.t sh.o~..by .the public. ;'ecords.but.,winc,h could I;e
a~ce~e~ lr~ a~ inspectmn o~ sam tuna or Dy w~n.u~ mqutry ot per,one m pOM4~SIO~I mer~ot. · .
3.. Easements, c~m;mt Of eesement or encumbrances which are not shown by the' public recordL .
4. Dborepencle~ conflicts in boundary lines, shor~se in eret, e~mn~...clunen~%r any other fscts which a
S. UnPetented m~,~.;~.$ .cl~s. $ re~_._.et~m or exceptions in pete~t~ or in: Acts authorizlniq the:issuance
'ICI 101~C OG-,1054C OC C
· ' ' SCHEDU'LE C
The land referred to i.n *hi~ policy is described a'~ follows:
'The 8~lth~es~ qua~ce
I~elng a portion of Lot 21 in Township ,ii. 3outh, Range 10 l~eat,
in the Blanche San Juan, CaJon de Santa Aha, in the city' of
Anaheim,-ooungy of O~$~;e; state of C~llfornta, aa per map
:recor~led In book ~. pagea ~:'56 and 2~? of Patent~ of Lo8 Ane;e:l. eB "
County,
EXCEPT therefro~ the North ~ ac~es.
ALSO EXCEPT the 3outh 203.00' feet of the Wear '203.00 feet.
'"":"~'~ · !i :' ~"~ 'I' ,,:" "~ , . -. .":'::".?'.::
· ,. },', :,
,'-
'?d~la~, aml llr~ ~ .'.~, iI~.~ a _~xnla corporation, .. .'
·
Au I~-~nt, ~ to l~-ce:~ 2. '" .. ' .,.
. . . ~-~ . .:'~-.' ..
}.[. "~.:..' ~ :.',..~..,,.~:..
i 't ~j
;
NOW9 THEREFOREy BE IT RE,9pLVID ±hat the Maheim City Planning Commission does hereby
reconunend to the City Councii of the City of Anaheim that subject Petition for Reclassification '
be approved and, by so doing, that Title 18-Zoning of the Anaheim Municipal Code be amended to
exclude the above described property from the R-A, Residential Agricultural, Zone and to
incoxporate said described property in the R-3, Multiple Family Residential, Zone for Parcel
Noo 2y R-'Sg One Family Residential~ Zone for Parcel No. 3, and C-1, Neighborhood Commercial,
~ene for Parcel No, 1 uYon the following canditions which are hereby found to be a necessary
p-erequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and
~;c;~eral welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
le Recordation of a Final Tract Map of subject propertye
2e Payment of a Park and Recreation Fee of $25.00 per dwelling unit to be collected as part
~of the Building Permito
3., Provision of standard trash storage areas as determined by the Departmeni of Public
Works~ Sanitation Division, prior to Final Building Inspectione
4o Recordation of R-39 INultiple Family Residential, Zone deed restrictions limiting the
structural height of the proposed R-3 development •to one story.
5~ Constr~ction of a six (6) foot masonry wall along the north boundary of Parcel Noo 2,
unless said walls are specifically waived in writing by the abutting property owners, prior
to Final Building Inspectiono
6o Construction of a six (6) foot masonry wall on the east boundary of Parcel Noo 2
separating the proposed single family development from the proposed multiple family development,
prior to Final Building Inspection.
7a Construotion of a six (6) foot masonry wall on the south side of "A" Street along the '
north and east boundary of Parcel No, 1, prior to Final Building Inspectiono
8o Installatio!i of landscaping on that portion of the parkway between the curb and sidewalks
along the south side of "A" Street, the full distance of the masonry wall separating Parcel
Noo 1 from "A" Street, plans for said landscaping to be submitted to and subject to the approval
of the Super.:intendent of Parkway Maintenance, and said landscaping to be installed prior to
Final Building Inspectiono
9e Provision of a minimum six (6) foot wide strip of landscaping ahutting the State College
Boulevard and Ball Road rights-of-way of Parcel No. 1, znd the installation of tree wells at
forty (40) foot intervals in the parkway portion of Parcel Noo 1, plans for said landscaping to
be submitted to and subject to the approval of ~`he Superintendent of Parkway }laintenance, and
said landscaping to be installed prior to Final Building Inspection of any structure of Parcel
Noo la
l0o Development substantially in accordance with Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, and 3e
llo Subject to Development Review approval of all commercial buildings established on Parcel I
Noo 1, particularly the north and east elevations, for compatibility with the proposed multiple
family resident:ial development.
.12o Provision that the R-3, Multiple Family Residential development shall be developed in
con3unctiott with or subsequent •to the single family development, and that the G1, Neighborhood
Commercial Zoned development shall be developed concurrently or sL~sequent to the R-3, l6ultiple
Family Developmenta
Tt-~ FOR~OING RFSOLUTION is signed and approve
ATTESTs
/d,r~c~ ..~~
SECHETARY ANAHEIM GITY PLANNING OOMMISSION
d by m this 18th day of February, 1963.
CHAI N ANAIiEIM CITY PLAAINING ODMMIS
STATE 0?~ CALIFr1f2NIA
WUMY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHF.IM }
I, Ann Kreb;;, oecretary of the City Plat~ning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do herehy certify ~
that the fe~~gcing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the City Planning Commission :
of th~ Ci~•k oi tinaheim, held on February 18, 1963, at 2s00 o'clock P,b1e, by th~ following vote
of the rnem-aers thereofs ~
AYESa OQMMISSIONERSs A1Tred, Camp, Chavos~ Gauer, Marcoux, Mungall~ Pebley, Perry.
NOESs OOMMISSIONERSs I3one,
ABSENTs CJ'4MZSSTONERSs Hapgoud.
IN WITNESS WHERBJF9 I have hereunto set my hand
R2-A
RE9DT.UT?ON NOo 644 -2-
tt;is 18th day of February, 19 3.
~/J~t.~ y~.
'TIY"PrANNI'NC ~OA~rt155In!Q-