PC 72-9~ ~
RESOLUTION N0. PC72-9 ---
A RESOLUTION OF THE C1TY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
RECOMMENDIAIG TO THE C1TY COUNCIL OF T4iE CITY OF ANAHEIM THAT
PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION N0. ~ 1' ~ 2' Z 8 gE APPROVED
WHEREAS, the City Plen~ing Commission of the City oE Aneheim did reeeive e veritied Petition foc ReclesslEica-
tionfrom VIRGSL L. LONSDALE, 2557 Rowland avenue, Anaheim, California 92804,
Owner; DOROTHX R. FULMER, 1556 Chateau Aver~ue, Anaheim, California 92802,
Aqent, of certain real property eituated in t'he City of. P.naheim, County of
Orange, State of California, described as the East 55.00 feet of the North
300.00 feet, a~easured from the center line of the 40.00 foot street, adjoin-
ing :.ot A on the North, of Lot A of Tract No. 25, as shcwn on a map recorded
in book 5, page 28 of Miscellaneoua Maps, in the office cf the County
Recorder o£ said Orange County
; end
WHEREAS, the City ~lenning Cammission did hold a public hearing et the C[ty Hall in the Clty oE Aneheim on
January 24, 1972 , et 2:00 o'clock P.M. notice of sald public hearing havin~ been duly given as cequired by
law and in eccordence with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chepter 18,72, to hear and consider evidence
Eor end egeinst seid proposed reclessificetion end to investigete and make findings end recommendciions in connectlon
therewith; end
WHEREAS, seid Commission, eftcr due inspection, investigetlon, end study mede by itself end in its behelf, end
aEtec due consideretion of oll evidence end repotts oEfered et seld heering, does find end determine the Eollowing fecte:
1, Thet the petltioner proposes a reclassificetion oE the ebove described property fcom the, C-] , GENERAL
CONRIERCIAL, 20NE to the R-3, MULTIPLE PAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ZONE.
2. That the scope oi the proposed recJ.assification, if approve3, does not warrant an
amendment to the General Plan at the presene time; however, ite rclationship L•o the General
Plan symbol w:.ll be cor.sidered at the next annual review.
3. That the proposed teclessificetion of subjrct property is necesaery end/or desireble for the orderly end pro•
per development oE the community.
4. Thet the proposed reclasaification of subject property does properly relate to the zones and their permltted
uses locally established in clo~e proximity to subJecl property and to the zones end their permitted uses.geaecally esteb-
lished throughout the community.
5. That the proposed reclaesification of subject property requires the dedication and
improvement of abutting etreete in accordance with the Circulation Element of the
General Plan, due to the anticipated increase in traffic, which will be generated t+y the
inteneification of land use.
6. That the petitioner stipulated to providing a 7-foot masonry wall along the east
property line.
7. That because subject property is unusual in size and a difficult parcel to develop,
special consideration hae been g:ven to the propoaed buffer between single-fanily and multi-
ple-family residential or commercial uses, however, thie shall not be construed ae setting
a precedent for ~ther requests where apecific buffering techniquc~e are required to shield
the single-family residential uses from commercial or meltiple-family residential uses being
proposed:
8. That one p~ersongappeeeastinro ertitlinn_requesting tha't a minimum 7-foot mesonry
wall be conatructe alon t p P Y
R-A -1
,~~~
' NOW, THF,REFORE, BE IT ~4LVED that the Anaheim City Pl~ning Commiesion does hereby
recommend to the City Council of the City of Anaheim that subject Petition for Reclassifi-
cation be approved and, by so doing, that Title 18-Zoning of the Aneheim Municipal Code be
amended to exclude the above described property from the C-1, GENERAL COMMERCIAL, ZONE, and
to incorpora~e aaid described propecty into the R-3, MULTIPLE-FAMILY, ZONE, upon the follow-
ing ccnditions which are hereby found to be a neceosary prerequisite to the proposed use of
subject property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citiaens of the
City of Anaheim:
(1) That the owner(s) of eubject property ahall deed to the City of Anaheim a atrip
of land 45 feet in width from the centerline of the street along Broadway for street widen-
ing purposea.
(2) That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim slong Broadway, including
preparati.on of improvement plans and installation of all improvemente, such as curbs and
gutters, sidewalks, street grading and paving, drainage Facilities, or other appurtenant
work shall be complied witit as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with atandard
plens and specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer; and that a bond in an
amount and form eatisfectory to the City of Anaheim shall be poeted with the City to guaran-
tee the installation of the above mentioned requirements.
(3) Thet the owner(s) of aubject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim th2 sum of
$2.00 per front foot along Broadway for street lighting purpoaes.
(4) That the owner(s) of aubject property shall pay to the City of Anaheiin the aum of
15C per front foot along Broadway for tree planting purposes.
(5) That trash etorage aresa shall be provided in accordance aith approved plans on
file with the office of the Directar of Public Works.
(6) That fire hydrants shall be installed as required and determined to be necessary
by the Chief of the Fire Department.
(7? That a 7-foot masonry wall shall be consCructed along the eaet ~roperty line and
a 6-foot wall along the west and south property lines.
(8) That all air conditioning facilities shall be properly ahtelded from view, and
the sound buffered from adjacent residential propertiea.
(9) That subject pruperty shall be aerved by underground utilities.
(10) That the owner(s) of subject property sha11 pa;~ to the City of Anaheim the appro-
priate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be appropsiate by the City Council,
said feea to be paid at the time the building permit ie issued. ~
(11) That the drainage of eubject property shali be disposed of in a menner satiefac-,;
tory to the City Engineer,
(12) Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, Condition
Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, a(iove menCioned, ehall be completed. The provisione or righta granted
by this resolut~on shal.l become null and void by action of the City Council unless eaid
conditione are complied with within 180 days from the date hereof or au~h further time as
the City Co~mcil may grant.
(13) That Condition Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11, above menCioned, shall be complied
w3.th prior to finel building and zoning inspections.
(14) That sub3ect property shall be de~~eloped subatantially in accordance with plana
and specificatione an file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, and 3.
THIs POREGOING RESOLUTION is aigned and approved m thie 3 day of February, 1972.
CHAI N ANAH M CITY PLANNING COMMISSIUN
ATTEST:
SECRETARY ANAHEfM CITY PLANNLNG COM~'TSSIGN
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) sa
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
RESOLUTIJN N0. PC72-9 .2_
R2-H
. ~ ~
I, Ann Krebs, Secretery of the CiCy Planning Gommiesion of the City of Anaheim, do
hereby cer.tify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the
City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on January 24, 1972, at 2:00 o'clcck
r.M., by the following vote of the members thereaf:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS; ALLRED, FARANO, GAUER, HERBST, KAYWOOD, ROWLAND, SEYMOUR.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONF..
IN WITNESS WHERF,•OF, I have hereunto set my hand this 3rd day of Febr:iary, 1972.
/J~`,~tJ'TJ~i • -~1
SECRETARY ANAI~M CITY PLANNINC COMMISSION
RESOLUTION N0. PC72-9
R2-A
- 3-