Loading...
PC 73-53~. .. ~ ~ ~ RESOLUTION N0. PC73-53 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECOMMENDING TO T?IG CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM Tf~ ADOPTION OF AREA DEVELOPNENT PLAN N0. 121 - PROVIDING SECONDARY ACCESS FOR THOSE PROPERTIES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD BETWEEN SOUTH STREET AND VIRGINIA AVENUE THERETO WI~REAS, a request had been made for reclassification of two single family homes located on the easi; side of State College Boulevard in the conter of the block bounded on the north by Virginia Avenue and on the south by South Street for commercial purposes whioh could have an effect on the residential and commercial potential of the adjoining properties; and W:~REAS, the City Plenning Commission did initiate a public hearing held in the City Fiall in the City of Anaheim on March 19, 1973 at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice c~ said public hearing having been duly given as required bg law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anahein Muniuipal Code, to hear and consi.der evidence for and against said pro- po~ed area develorment plan and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therFwith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation, and study made by it- tielf and in its behalf, and after due consideration of a11 evidence and regorts offer•ed at ~aid hearing, does find and dei;ermine the folloviing facts: 1. That commercial zoning and development had occurred ~o the north and south vrithin this same block along State College Boulevard, leaving 7 parcels in the center still developed with single fttmily residences. 2. That State College Boulevarc~ a primary arterial highway,presently carries approxi- mately 34,188 vehicles per de~y and is projected to carry approximately 44,600 vehicles per day vrithin ten years, although the traffic er~gineer had indicated that when the oroposed Orange Freeway was built, the number of vehicles could be cut in half. 3. That access rights to State College Boulevard had not been dedicated to the City of Anaheim for these lots, although there was no di•rect access from State College 3oulevard for the seven parcels, and secondary access was provided in the form of a standard 20-foot dedicated alley from whiah these seven parcels took access to their garages. 4. That three alternatives wsre presented with Exhibit "A",indicating one or two standard 20-foot alley roturns to State College Boulevard, and if this alterna- tive were adopted,the traffic engineer recommended that they be offset from direct alignment with the existing east-west alley to the east or the local streets across State College Boulevard; Exhibit "B" indicated one to three evenly-spaced pri.vate vehicular access drives to State College Boulevard, although the traffio engineer indicated that if this alternative wer.e adopted these c'.rives should bo offset from direct alignment with the local streets across 5tete Co'llege Boulevard; and that Exhibit "C" indicates the existing elley between Virgi.nia Avenue and South Street would continus to be utilized as the primary source of vehioular access to the parking areas at the rear or side of the various properties, and if this exhibit were adopted~the traffic engineer indicated that this would be the most preferable because it did not present any traf~ic conflicts to Ste.te College Eoulevard. 5. That land assembly ~vould appear to be the best alternative to usage of these parcels. 6. That i~he Planning Commission determined that Exhibit "C;' would more adequately serve the needs of these soven parcels since it would present fewer traffic con- flicts to the State College BouJ_ev~.rd traffic. 7. That two property owners of three parcels appeared to presont their viewpoints on the area development plan. ,.. .. .. ~ ~ i30YJ, TI~REFORE, BE IT RESOL4ED, that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby adopt, and recommends to ~he City Council of the City of Anaheim the adoption of Exhibit "C" of Araa Development Plen No. 111 as being the best alternative to service the seven remaining lots located between Virginia Avenue and South Street. TI~ FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved~y his 2 h day of,March, 197 j ,! A_1'ES^s : °Er_.RE''iARY ANAHEI~ui CITY PI~ANNING CONMIISSION S_AiE OZ~' CALIFORNIA ) COIIii'S'Y OF ORANGE ) ss. o?_~ o~ Arrn~z~ > I, Ann Krebs, Searetary of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby oerti£y that the foregoing resolution we,s passed and adopted at s meeting of •the L'it,y Planning Commission oP the City of Aaaheim, held on March 19, 1973 at 2:00 o'clock p.m., by the following vote of the members thereof; AY~S: - CODQuIISSIONERS: ALLRED, FARANO, GI~UER~ HERI3ST, KAYWOOD, ROWLAND, SEYMOUR. ~?OES: COLINIISSIONERS: NONE. A3Stu?~^1: COMMISSIONERS; NONE. .CiI Wl~l'ti~L+'SS WI~+'AEOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 29th day of March, 1',373. ~~~ SECRETARY ANAf~IM CITY PLANNe.T'G COMAM1ISSIOtd I`U~~OL'J^ION N0. PC73-53 -2-