PC 66-21RESOLUTION NO. P"~' 66-21
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEII4 THAT
PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NO. 66-67-2 BE APPROVED
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did recelve a verified Petitian for Reclessifica-
tionfrom EDDIE BRINKMAN, ~ A"„ A~ Vinding, 722 North West Street, Anaheim, California, Owner;
JOSEPH P.NTON, 1016 West Pioneer, Anaheim, California, Agent of certain real property situated in
tt~e City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as Lot 3 in Block A of
:~ Tract No. 374, Allen Tract, as shown on a Nap recorded in book 15, page 28 of Miscellaneous Maps,
•records of Orange County, California
; end
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing et the City Hall in the City of Anaheim on
July 1R, 1966, at 2:00 o'clock P.M. notice of seid public hearing heving been duly given as required by
law and in accordance with the provisions of the Aneheim Municipal Code, Chepter 18.72, to heer end consider evidence
Eor and against said proposed reclessificetion end to investigate and make findin~s and recommendetions in connection
therewith; end
WHEREAS, seid Commission, efter due inspection, investigation, and study made by itself end in its behelf, end
efter due consideretion of ell evidence end reports offered et said hearing, does find end determine the following Eacts:
1. That the petitioner proposes e reclessification of the above described property from the R-2, ~dULTIPLF
FA~AILY RESIDE`dTIAL, ZONE to the C-1, GEN[RAL C0~~IMERCIAL, ZOIJE to expand an existing service
station site~
2o TIZat the scope of the proposed reclassification, if approved, does not warrant an
amendment to the General Plan at the present time, however, its relationship to the existing
General Plan symhol will be considered at ti~e next annual reviev~~
I ; 3. That '' nroposed reclassificetion oE subject property is necessary end/or desirable for the orderly end pro-
i per developnrent of the community.
4. That the proposed reclassification of subject property does properly relate to the zones end their permitted
uses locally established in close proximity to subject property end to the zones end their permitted uses generally estab-
1 lished throughout the community.
• 5~ ThaL the proposed recJ.assification of subjec~ property requires the dedication and
improvement of ab~tting streets in accordance with the Circulation Element of '..he General
~ plan, due to the anticipated increase in traffic which wiil be generated by the intensifi-
cation of land use.
~' 1~ 6. That the Cit is
~,: ~
Palma Avenue as a primary highway1vithna1fu11nha7fGwidthlof153 feetdfortthe southnsideLof
~~ the street, and the owner-lessee of the service staticn is advised by this action that
~~:~ - facilities proposed at this time sfiould be located so that future street widening will not
c i ~ necessitate a subsequent re-lecation of the facilities.
~.. ~ 7, That one person appeared in conditional opposition to tY~e requirement of a 6-foot
;; rrasonry wall adjacent to 'he east proper~ty line~
i RA ~
~
. • . ~
NOW, TFTEREFORE, HE I1 ..ESOLVED th~t the Anahcim City Pl~nni~.s Commiaaion doea hereby recommend
to the City Council of the City of Anaheim that subject Petition for Recleeaification be eppmved end, by eo doing,
that Title 1&Zoning of the Aneheim Municipsl Code be emendcd to exclude the above described property from the
R-2, Multiple Family Residential, Zone, and i:o incorpora#e said described property into the
C-1, General Commercial, Zone upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a
necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of subject property in order to preserve the safety
and 5eneral welfare of the citizens of the Ci~y of Anahei~r~.
1~ That the owner(s) of sutlect property shiall deed to the City of Anaheim a strip
of land 45 feet in width, from the centerline of the street, alon9 Harbor Boulevard, for
strPet widening purposes, shall be complied with within a period of 180 days from the date
hereof, or such further time as the City Council may granto
~
; THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed ~nd ~pproved by me this 2Rth day of July, 1966.
;, ~ -
I
I I ~
. j HAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANN G COMMISSION
~ ~ ATTEST:
t' 1
~' i
~.. ~
;~ I SECRETARY ANAHE:M CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
~ I STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY CF ORANGE ) ss,
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Ai1n Krebs, Seccetary of the City Plannin4 Commisai~n of the City of An~heim, doher~by certify thet the forc-
~ going resolution wes pessed end edopted at ^ meettn` of the City Planning Cammiesion of the ~ity oE M~hei~n, hr,•~ on
~ ~ July 1~, 1966, et ~:00 o'clock P.M., by the [ollowing vote oE the members thercoE:
~ AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ALLRE.D, HERBST, MUNGALL, ROWLAIJD, CAMP.
i
NOES: COMi2ISSIONERS: GAUER.
~ ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: pERRY.
~'1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my h~nd thia 2Rth d'dy of July, 1966.
r:,
u
F~ \
M"~ ~ `~~%/27
~
~ ~ ~~~ ~~~
,
~ ` ~ SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
I ~
;~~. j ,~x ! RESOLUTION N0. 66-21
, I;
~:~ ~ R2-A _~_
i.
;, ~
: ~
~ . _,.s.. .. i . - -
^'j ._ --- ~. ^ +~wi._' fg:ltri'~v ~.
[`, ~ , .
::i~ ~
~