Loading...
PC 73-227RESOLU~ NO. P~~3"Z2~ o A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSiON OF THE C1TY OF A.NAHEIM RECOM~dENDIHG TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THAT PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NO. .13'74'10 gE APPROVED WHEREAS, the City Planniag Commission of the City of Anahetm did i n i t i~ te a ve r i f i ed pet i t i on fo r Reclassification on property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as PARCEL ONE: Lots 1, 2 and all that portion lying south ~f said Lot 1 bounded on the west by the southerly prolongation of the west.line of' said Lot 1, and bounded on the east by the west right of way line of Kathryn Orive, anc~ bounded on the south by the north right of way line of Lincoln Avenue, and all that paircel shown as not a part of this subdivision, all in and shown on the map of Tract No,. 1633 record- ed in Book 47, page 50, Miscellaneous Maas, records of Orange County, Calii~ornia. Excepting therefrom any portion thereof lying with Lincoln Avenue on the south end Bt~ookhurst Street on the east PROPERTY OWNERS: ~ack-in-the eox, 933~ Balboa Avenue, San Diegn. California 92123 Cracker Citizens National Bank, Bank Properties Dept., 453 So. Spring St., Suite 1200,; . Los Angeles, California; 90013 Edward Shoemaker, et al, c/o Oscar Lcuderback, 12201 Burns nrive, Garden Grove, California 92640 Standard 011 Company, 225 Rush Street, San Francisco, Califor~ta 94120 ; and WHEREAS, the City Ylenning Commisslon dld hold e publie hearing et the City H~!1 in tlie City of Aneheim on October 1, 1973. at 2:00 o'cloek P.M. notice of said public hearing heving been duly given as cequlred by Iaw and in eccordence with the provisions of the Aneheim Municipel Code, Chepter 18,72, to hxeriand cor.sider evidence Eor end egelnst seid pioposed reclessificetion end to investigete end make flndings end recommendatlons in connectian therewlth; and ~ WHEREAS, seid Commission, after due Inspection, investigotlon, end study mede by itself end in ite behelf, end ettet due coneideretfon of el] evidence end reports offered et seid heering, does find and detecmirie the following Eecte: 1. Thatthe Plarining CortmTssion proposes a reclassification of the above described property from ths R-A+; AGRICdLTURAL~ZONE to the C~1, GENERAL COMM'cRCIAL, 2.ONE, 2, That the proposed reclassificatton ts in conformance wlth the surrounding land uses and land use designation of the General Pla~. 3. That although the property owner of some of the subject property claimed he had City Council approval of C-3 Zoning in 1958, a cursory review of the resolution of intent required complying with conditions within 90'days or at the time the a~nexation of the property was effective, and said annexation was in the process of being considered; ho~vever, the City Attorney's Office stated that any „~nnexation not completed within one year was considered null and void, therefore the resolution of intent was, therefare also voi•d. 4. Thet the proposed reclessiticetion of aubject propedy fs necessery nnd/or desireble [or the orderly end pro- per development oE the communiry. 5. Thet the pcoposed recleasifieadon of subjec! p:operty does properly relate to tFC zunea end thelr permitted uses locally esteblished In close proximity to subject property ead to the zonea unc~ ".•~c petmltted uges generelly eateb- lished througfiout the communlty. 6, Tha*. the proposed reclassification would L^e mere c;:•. ._ withi the existing devel- opment in l•his general area and along lincoln Avenue, than ~ .~ing whfch would be less desirsble and would encourage others to request hedvy comrt~s:r, ~• ,ses in close proximity to adJoining residential uses thereby establishing in undesirab?e ,.recedent„ 7, That the Planning Commission reaffirms the previous rECOmmendat'lon of C-1 Zoning as being the most logical zoning for :he area; hawever the Commission would:recomn~end that the necessary zonin9 actions be initiated by the City to bring into conf~~rmance those exist- ing uses on subject property which would be made non conforming upon the adoption of the C-1 zoning. 8, That one person appeared in oppdsition to the C-1 Zoning recomme~}ded by the Com- mission when subject petition was considered previously, and in oppositicri to any proposed C-1. -1- ~~V'JIRL''?:~1ENTAL IMPACT REPORT~NDING: ~ in~t the Planning Commission, in connection with an Exemption Declaration Status request, fir.ds and deteri~ines that the propasal would have no significant envi.ronmental impact and, the~efore, recommends,to the City Counci,l that no.EnVironmental' lmpacY Stafement is.neces- sary. . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council of the City of Anaheim that subject Petition for Reclassir'i- cation b~ approved and, by so doing, that Title 18-Zoning of the Anaheim Municipal Code be amended to exclude the a~^ove desc~'ibed prope~ty from the R-A, AGRICULTURAL, ZONE and to incorporate said described property into the C-1, GENERAL COMMERCIAL, ZONE; upon the foilowing conditions which are hereby found to be a necessar;~ prerequisite to the proposed use ofi subiect property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the Cit~ of Anaheim: (1) That the sidewalks shall be installed along the west side of Kathryn Drive as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the office of the City En9ineer. (2) That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of $2.00 per front foot along Kathryn Drive, Brookhurst Street and Lincoln Avenue for street lighting purposes. (3) That the owner(s) of subJect property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of 60 cents per front foot along Kathryn Drive, Brookhurst Street and Lincoln Avenue for tree planting purposes. (4) That i:rash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans on file with the office of tne Director of Public Works. (5) That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and deter:niried to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department. (6) That a six-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the north property lines except where abuCting o*_her C-1 property. (7) That all air conditionin9 facilities shall be properly shielded from view, and the suund buffered from adjacent properties. (8) T'hat any parking ar~a lighting proposed shail be down-lighting of a maximum height pf sir. feet, which lighting shali be directed away from th; property lines to protect the residential integrity of the area. (g) That draina;e af subject property shall be disposed of in a manner that is sat- isfactory to the City Engineer. (10) That Condition Nos. 1, 2. 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, and 9, above mentioned, shall be com- plied with priur to the commencement of the activ~ty authorized under this resolution, or prior to tfie time that the building permit is issued, or within a period of one year from the date hereof, Hhichever occurs first, or such further.time as the Planning Com- mission may grant. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTIUN is signed and approved by me this 11th day of October, 1973.. CHAIRMAN ANAHEtM CITY P UINNING COMM ATTEST: ~~2~'~?/~ %~fiL[~c`z~ SECRETARY RNAH IM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ST~TE OF CAL4FORI~IA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. C!TY OF ANAHEIM ) FESOLUTION NO: PC73-227 . -2=.,1; . , .: , , .. , , . ' , . . . ~ ~ I, Ann Krebs, Secretary of the Cit'y Planning Commission of the,City ofi Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the City Planning Commission of the City of:Anahein, held on October 1, 1973~ at 2;00 o~clock P.M;, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ALLRED, FARANO, GAUER, HERBST, KING, ROWLAND, SEYMOUR. NOES: COMMISSIONE.RS: NONE. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE. IN WITNESS.WHEREJF, I have hereunto set my hand this 11th day of.Octobar, 1973. ~~G;yYYC~ ' SECRETARY ANAHEII° CiTY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. PC73-2~7•. "3-