PC 1963-1964-858. .
,.~. ~.~,.--
. _ ,:~.. .~ _._._ ~ - W--- ----__.__.....~_......,.,.~~..._...~:,......_._~_-_._.-------------._.. __
~ ~~_~ ~~
.~.~
RESOLUTION NO. 858+ SERIES 1963-64
A RESOLUTION DF THE CITY PLANDIING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
RFCOMMENDLVG TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THF~ CITH OF ANAHEIM THAT
PETITION F~R RECLASSIFICATION N0. 62-b3-131 gE APPROVED
WH~REAS, the Ciry Planning Commission of the City of Aneheim did receive a verified Petition for Reclessifica- ;
tionfcom ETHII. M. REID, ~t al, c/o Myron Wd Reed, Jr., 2045 West Washington Boulevard, Los j
Angeles 18, California, Owners; SANTA FE SPRINGS IAIDUSTRIAL PARK, c~o John B. Kilroy
Company, 613 South Spring Street, Los Angeles 14, California9 Agents of certain real property
situated in the'i.ity of Anaheirn, County of Orange, State of California described as; PARCII. ;;
As The westerly 285 feet of thQ North half of the Northwest quarter of the Southeast quarter
of Section 27, To~;mship 4 South, Range 10 West, partly in the Rancho Las Bolsas and partl,y ~
in the Rancha San Juan Cajon de Santa Ana, as per map recorded in Book 51, Page 10 of
Miscelianeous li7aps, records of Orange County, Californiae PARCEL B: The easterly 1,035.74
feet of the Plorth half of the Northwest quarter of the S.outheast yuarter of Section 27, ~?
Township 4 South, Range 10 West, partly in the Rancho Las Bolsas and partly in the Rancho ;;
San Juan Cajon de Santa Ana, as per map recorded in Book 519 Page 10 of ~iiscellaneous Maps, -
records of Orarnge County, California .
end ~
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commissioe did hold a pubiic hearing at the City Hell in the.City of Meheim on
August 5~ 1963 at 2:00 o'clock P.M..notica of said public hearing having been duly given as requiced by
law and in accocdance with the pmvisioas of the Aneheim Municipal Code, Chepter 18.72, to hear and consider evidence
for and against said pPoposed reclessification end to investigate and make findings and :ecommendations in connection
therewith; and
WHEREAS, seid Commission, efter due inspection, investigation, end study made by itself end in its behaif, and
efter due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following fects:
1. That the petitioner proposes a reclessificetion of the above described p:operty fcom the R-A, Residerii;ial
Ayricultural, Zone to the C-1, Neighborhood Commercial, Zone for Portion "A" and R-3,
Multiple Family Residential, Zone for Portion "B" to establish a one and two story multiple
family residential development, a two-story motel, and two-story ofFice buildingo •
2. That £h~ proposed ceclessificetion of subject propecty is necessary and/or desirable foc the ocderly and pro-
per development of the community.
3. Thet the proposed reclessification of subject property does properly relete to the zones and their permitted
uses locally established in close proximity to subject p:operty and to the zones and their permitted uses genecally estab-
lished throughout the community. . •
4. That the proposed reclassification of subject property does requi:e 8edication for
and standard improvement of abutting streets because said property does relate to`and abut
upon streets and highways wh'ich 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 ~he
General Plano '
5. That recommendation for the approval of reclassification of subject property was made
based on the facts that subject property was bounded on the north by residential agricultural
zoned property, which was proposed on the General Plan for multiple family development, that
the proposed development represented a density slighty above the low-medium proposed Planned
Residential Development Standards, that the recreational areas being provided on subject de-.
velopment were considerably larger than have been pr~posed in previous petitions, that four
sixty-foot wide streets where being proposed which would act as periphery drives and would
have no ingress or egress to the single family residential development to the south and east
of subject property.
6. That sixteen (16) persons appeared, one of whom presented a petition signed by
one hundred thirty-two (132) persons in oppo~ition to subject petitiono •
Rl-A
-1-
., --- ,~,,~ ~-- -- - _ --'_ --- -~-,.... .
. _ . ,......_ ..~7 . .. . ~ . . . , . ~ . .. .~ .-"--~ . . .
~~
~._l
;
z~
~
`A ~
' X'iOW, TfiEREFORE, BE IT R~SOLVED that the Aneheim City PlmninS C.omm'sssion does he:eby rec~o doind ''
to the City Council of the City of Aneheim that subject Petitioa for Reclassification be-epproved and, by B~ ~
4het Title 1&Zoning of the Anaheim Municipal Code be emende3 to exclude the above described p~operty from the
R-A, Residential Agricultural, Zone and to incorporate said described property in the C-1, ';
Neighbornood Commercial, Zone on Parcel "A", and the R-39 Multiple Family Residential, Zone ,
for Parcel "B" upon the following condi~ions which are hereby found to be a necessary pre~ ~.
requisite to the proposed use of subject ~roperty zn order to preserve the safety and general ~i
,r „r ~;;o ..;±,~o.,~ ~f +..h.e C;.ty of Anaheima . '
~a... arc .. --
lo That a final tract map of subject property be recorded in the office of the urange ;
County Recordero `
••30~ That~a modifiod cul-de-sac be provided at the terminus of Bluebell Avenue, Troy Street, ~,
and Tiara Street, sub3ect to the approvai o£ the City Engineero ?
3o That the completion of these rec'lassification proceedings sha11 be subject to the ~;~
granting of Conditional Use Permit Noso 440 and 441.. :
4o That the vehicular access rights, except at street and~or alley openings to Orange- ,`
wood Avenue, shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheime ;
3, That Subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and ,;
specifications on file with the City of Anaheim, marked Revision Woo lj Exhibit Nose 1 ti
through 18~
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed end approved by me this 15th day of August9 19630
- ~
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY NING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SECRETRRY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
5TATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY CF OR(~NGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
Iy Arn Krebs9 Secretery of the Ciry Plenning Commission of the City of Anoheim, do hereby certify thet the fore-
August 59ut1963as pessep ~ oo a°clock P M~, bylthe fol owing vote of the members thereofhe Ci!y of Aneheim, held on
AYES: , COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Gauer, Mungall, Pebley, Perry, Rowland, Sidesa
:NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Noneo
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Cam~9 Chavoso
IIV WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 15 th day of Augustg 1963a
/ _
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CIT`1 PLANNING COMMISSION
4 ` RcSUi.UTION NO. 858 ' - =
~<: ; . ~
~k: ~
k R~_A "Z' ~ ~
~ .
f ;
{..
c' . . . . . - ~ .';~ . ?
~.: a >
_ .;:.
----- --~---- ~---------- ----,---- ---.___ ___-.
k ; ~ -- ----~--___ ___ _-___ -_ , . :
.~ _,..,e~,__ ~ . ~ ~-.