PC 1964-1965-1442~
~
RESOLUTION N0. 1442, SERIES 1964-65
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMIQSSION OF THE C1TY OF ANAHEIN
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERfITf 657 BE GRANTED
WfiEREAS, the City Planain~ Commbsiaa oE t6e Gty of M~6elm did re~eive ~ verifted P~tltlon Eor Coaditloa~l
Use Permlt 5om FLORENCE E~ TAYLOR, 501 Arroyo Square, South Pasadena, California, Owner;
CHARI.ES P. TAYLOR, 942 Emerald Bay, Laguna Beach, California, Agent of certain real property
situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as the
Easterly 250 feet (the Westerly line of which is parallet with the Westerly line of Citron
Street~ of that portion of Lot 39, "Anaheim Extensicn", as shown on a Map made by Wm. Hamei
and filed for record in the office of the County Rec:~rder of Los Angeles County, California,
described as followse Beginning at the Northeasterly corner of said Lot 39s thence Southerly
along the Easterly line thereof 175.7 feetR thence Westerly, parallel to the Southerly line
of said Lot, 1184.3 feet to the Westerly line thereof~ thence Northerly along said Westerly
line 500.42 feet to the North line of said Lots thence East along said North line 1225,8 feet
to the point of beginning; Excepting therefrom the Southerly 48.00 feet of the Easterly
149.75 feet
; ~nd
N~HEREAS, the City Pl~nnin~ Commission did hold ~ pnbllc hearin~ ~t the Citq Hdl ia the City ot M~helm oa
December 7, 1964, at 2:00 o'clodc P.M., notice ot sdd pablic heule` h~via~ been duly ~iven ~s eeqnlred by
law and in accoed~aee alth the pevvisioas of the M~heim Nnaidpal code, Ch~pter 18.61, to he~r ~nd considec evidence
Eor and aQaiast ~dd propo~ed ooeditia-d nse ~nd to levestlpte aad m~ke findie`s ~nd reoommead~tlons ia connsctioe
therewith; ~nd
WHEREAS, sdd Commia~lon, aRer dne iaspecUon, investiptlon, ~nd stndy m~ds br ibelt ~nd in it~ bah~lE, a~d
after due crosidentioa o( dl evidenee ~ed eeports oHered ~t s~id 6e~rta~, doer Md ~ed detasmine the followia~ t~ets:
.
1. Th~t tLe proposed use i~ peoperly one fa which • Canditlonal.U~e P~emlt b~nthorised bp thb Cod~. to
wit: establish a coin operated car wash and possible future development of a drive-in or
drive-up refreshment atan~.
2. 17ut ehe propo~ed we will not advecsely ~Ifad t6e ~djolnin~ l~md w~s imd th~ powth wd d~wlops~at oE
t6e w~ in whieh It b proposed to be lonted.
3. 'Ibat the sise ~ed sh~pe of the ~ite propo~ed (ot tba nse i~ ~dequ~te M tllow t6~ lnll dewlopu~nt oE the
Propo~ed use !e a m~nuer not detrimenttl to the paRienl~c ~re~ nor to the pe~ee, 6tilth, s~[etr. ~ud rneral welt~re
of the Clds~at of the City of M~heim.
4. '!'h~t the ~nting oE We Conditload Use Peemit mder t6~ eonditions imposed, if ~q, wi11 not b~ detrim~nW
to the pe~ce, hedth, s~fety, ~nd ~eaeral welf~e of the Cltis~os ot !6~ Gty oE An~helm.
5. That the traffic engineer sh~ll determine the feasibility of permitting the proposed
number of curb cuts into La Palma Avenue, since the petitioner pioposed to develop subject
property easterly for a drive-in restaurant, necessitating additional curb cuts.
6. That the southerly 65 feet of subject peoperty may be leveled and blacktopped
~il.l~ a retaininy waii tv preveni erosion, or tnat ine soutnerly 65 t ieet may be s:oped
and landscaped with ground cover to prevent erosion, since the petitioner stipulated that
the southerly 65 feet would not be developed. •
7o That the Commission hereby grants that use of subject property for a coin operated
car wash only, and the proposed drive-in shall be submitted ir. the form of another Conditional
Use Permit, since development plans were not submitted for the drive-in restaurant.
8. That three persons appeared in opposition to subject petitiono
Cx-G -1-
,'.1~
~ .~...4•, .
~~ • i
~
a
~
•
!
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the An~helm dty Plaanin~ Cwemiuion does hercby `aat subject
Petitlon for CondlUon~1 Use Pmnit, upon the EollowinQ conditlo~s whieh ~re A~e~r fonad to be ~ necessary peerequi~ite
to the proposed use of the subject property in oeda to prcserw tUe s~fety ~ed ~enenl welt~re of the CiUseas of the
City of An~heim:
1. That trash storage arezs shall be provided in accordance with approved plans on
file tivith the office of the Director of Public Morks.
2e That this conditional use permit is granted sub,ject to the completion of Reclassifi-
cation No, 64-65-63.
3. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and
specifications on file with the City of Maheim, marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2.
4. That a 6-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the south property line.
5. That Condition NGs. 1 and 4o above mentionedy shall be complied with prior to final
._„ _ buildiag inspection.
THE FOREGOMG RESOLU'itON is aisned and approved by me this 17t ay of December, 1964e
ATTEST:
CHAIRMAN ANAHEiM CiTY ANNiNG COA~MISSION
~ %~TLL~G~/
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CTfY OF ANAHEIhf )
I, Ann Krcbs, Sccretary of the City plenaing Commission of the City of An~heim, do hereby cMiEy th~t the
Eore`oiag resolution w~s passed and adopted at a meetlng of the City Pl~nnia` CommisNon of the City of Anahetm,
held on December 7~ 1964, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the maobers thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Ailred, Camp9 Gauer9 Mungall, Perry, Rowland.
NOES: C010NISSIONERS: Nonea
ABSENT: COMMiSS10NERS: None.
IN WITNESS WEiEREOF, I havehaeunto set my hand this 17th day of December, 19640
RESOLUTION N0. 1442
C2-G
~.2~~Z?iH~ ~~~~~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CI'fY PLANNING COMNISSIOP"
-2-
/
r
~ ~
A',•
~
'
/ ~.
:
a -
~ ~~ s
~ ~ ~