PC 1962-1963-753~~ ~
RESaLUTION N0. ~53, SERIt~a i9o~ 03
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ~DF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
REi.^v'n^m1E+:~.T.'.G TQ THE C?T'! CQUNC~L. OF TFIE CITY OF ANAHEIM THA'1'
PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION N0. 62-63-109 gE APPROVED
WHEREAS. the City Placudng Lommisaion o. :;~e ~::~ c. N< i~ini uid teceive e verl2ted !'etition ior tZeciessi::ca-
tinn from PETFR and ANNE DE ldANN, 5825. Myrtle, S,ong -Beach, California, Owners; LYNN 'E• ?1-AM5EN,
520 Dwyer..Dr.ive, Anaheim, Califoxn'_s, Agent of certain real propert•y situated in the City
of Anahe3m,.County of Oxange, State of California, described as the South 132.00 feet of
the North 396.00 feet of the Yiest.330.00 feet of. the. northwest qua.iter of the northwest
quarter of the nor.theast quarter of Sectio.n 23, Township 4 South, Range ~.1 West, in the
Rancho Los Cayotes, as ~~r map recorded in book 51, page 11 of Nliscellaneous Maps, in
the office of the oounty rec~sdar uf said ~ounty
, ; end
WHEREAS, the Ctty }'l.enning Commissioe did hold e public hearing at ihe City Hell in the City of Mehtim on
May 13, 1963, pt :2:00 o'clock P,M..notlce of said public hxeriug heving been duly given es required by
law end in accordance yvith tha piovlslone of the Anaheim iVlunicipal Code, Chapter 7.8.%2, to hear end conaides evidence
for, and egeinst seid ptaposed neclassiEication and to investigate end makv, findings and cecommendetions in connectic+n
therewith; and ,
WHEREAS, said Commiasion, after duc inspection, inveatigatian, end study made by itself and in its behal:, end
after due consideretion of ell Qvidence ozt~ re,po~ts oFfered et seid hearing, does find and determine the following fects:
1. That 4ke petitioner p:oposes a reelasaification of the above described propecty from the R-A, Residential
Agricultvral, 2ans tu the R-3, Multiple Family kesidential, Zcne ia establish an 18 unit
single story apartment b~;ilding.
2. Thet the proposed reclessification of subject propedy is necese~ry nnd/or desirable for the ordecly and pro-
per development of the community.
3. Thet the proposed ceclessi~icetion of anbject property does propexly :elete to the zones end theirpecmitted
uses locally establiah~d in aloae proximity to subjeM propedy and to the zones and it+eir pecmitted usea generally eateb-
lished throughoui the community. ~
4. That the proposed reclassificetion of subject oroperty does require dedication for
and standard improvement of abutting s±rects because said property does relate to and abuts
upon streets and highways which are propcis~d to carry the type and quar.tity of traffic,
which will be generated by the permitted uses, in accordan~e with the circulation element
of the General Plan.
5. That one person appeared in opposition, and 5 persons appeaxed in favor of subject
petition:
P.1-A
f~.~_._~_' , . _'i"_
. - , . -.-- '_ . . ~ . ~ . 1
-1-
} ~~
K. ~
~
~
---~-~~. . . _.-.__.....__.. .. .. ._.~.~._'3 ~jl
--"~:
~;
, .
~z _ ~„~., , _.,_,..,a.~,.T.,~.,~.____-~ ~.... ~,..~:........ : __ _ _- , ----___--- -_ _._
~;' ~ ~~ . ~~
~,~
;; . '
~°` NOW, THEREFOR~, BE IT RESOLVED tkat the AnaneIm City P'lanning Commission does Lereby :ecommend
i~; to 'the: City Couacil of the Citty of Aaaheim that subject Petition for Rec',assiHcation be epproved and, by so doing,
~`
~; that TItle 1&Zoning of the Aneheim Municipai Codr bP `em~ttded to exclude the ehove describec~ property from the
°' R-A,, Residential Agr.icul~.ural,,Zone, and to incorporate szid described property in the R-3,
~: Multiple Family..Residential,. _Zc~ne .upon thE .followinq .conciry±~QT~ i~~h~(~'r ~Tp -,~,~~y ; ~vr.d io
~ ioe•a necessary prerequisi`te to the proposed use of subjec•t property in order to pr~serve
the safety and K%elfare of the citizens of the City of Ananeim.
~` lo Dedication of forty-five (45) feet from .the monumented centerline of YYes+,nT„ ayonue
~ (2U ; ~e; exS.s-'r.inn),
• ;¢~ 2. Preparation of etreet improvement plans and.installation of all improvements for Western
i~., Avenue, subject to the appro~al of the City Engineer and in accordance with ttie adopted standard
~ plans on f ila in the office of the City Engineer.
i~~ 3. Payment of $2.00 per front foot for street.li htin
g g purposes on Western Avenue.
4. Payment of a Park and Aecreatioa Fee of $25000 per. dwelling unit to be collected as
~~ part of the Building Permit~
~ 5. Provision of stardard trash storage areas as 8etermined by the Department of Public Works,
,~ ~~?,; S~nitation Division, pri~r to Final Building Inspect~on. ,
~L oo Time limitation o.f one h~ndred and eiahty (180) days for the accompli~hment of ?tem
~.,~'~~ s:' Nos.. 1, 2, and 3.
~~• ~. 7. DevelopmEnt substantially in accordance with Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2, except that the
~ Y; proposed twenty-five (25) foot two-way access drive sha11 be reduced to twenty-one (21} feet and
k` a fu•~r (4).foot wide strip of landscaping shall be installed a•long the building side of the
~ access arive.
,~; , Y~
r f, 8. Installation of a six (6) foot masonry wall along the north, east, and south boundaries
;; of subject property, prior to Final Building Inspection.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 13th day of May~ 1963.
e i
. CHAIItMAN AN 4HEIM Cl[TX. PLAi G COMMISSION
ATTEST: ~
~
SECRE'T:~,RY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNINGCQ':4IMISSION •
STATE OF CALIFGRNIA )
CQUNTY CF OR(~IQGE ) ss,
CITY OF ANAHELV! j
I~ Ann Krebs ~ Sebretery of the City Planning Commission of the City of Aneheim, do herehy certify thet the fore-
going resolution was pessed and a~apted at a meeting of the Citp PIanning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on
May 13~ 1963~ at 2:00 o'clack P.M., by the following vote of the mem6ers thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allrnd, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Munga.ll, Pebley, Perry, Sides.
NOES: ~COMMiSSIONERS: Noneo
AHSENT: COMMISSIONGRS: ~Ione~
III WITTESS WHEREOF, I have hareunto set my hand thIs 13th d~y of May~ 19630
RESOLUTICIN NO. 7~~
R3-A
(/~~' i t-! /~~~'C.~/'~/~/
SECRETARY .4NAHEIi:! CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
_2_
. . y . . . - . . . .
' ~ -- ~ . -- °i, . : _' . - - - -~ - . .. .. ' . . ~cT~
A