PC 75-7~~ ~ kESULU~UN NU. PC75"7
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNiNG C~n7MIS5I0N OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERt~[IT ~ ~ BE GRANTED
NHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City oE Anaheim did receive a veriEied Petition for Con-
ditionalUsePcrmitfrom STERLING BUSINESS COMPLEX, P. 0. Box 500, Los Alamitos, California
90720 (Owner); JERRY WILKES, 114 North Bradfor•d, Placentia, California 92670 and ROBERT S.
SHELTON, Asha~ill-Burke and Company, 1833 South State College Boulevard, Anaheim, California
92670 (Agents~) of certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County or Orange,
State of California, described as PARCEL NO 2: THAT PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN PARi.EL OF LAND
THEWOFFICER01'ITHELCOUNTYL1RE~CORDER OFFORANGENCOUNTY~7CALAFORNIA FBOUNDED ANDSDESCR~IBEDDASN
fOLLOWS:
BOUNDED ON TIiE NORTH BY Thc SOUTH LINE OF LA PALMA AVENUE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP; BOUNDED ON
TNE EAST BY 'fHE WEST i.INE OF PARCEL N0. 1 AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP AND THE NORTHERLY PROLON-
GATION THEREIJF; BOUNDED ~N THE SOUTH BY THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE RIVERSIDE FREEWAY AS
SHGWN ON SAI!) MAP; AND BOUNDED ON THE.WEST BY A LINE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNIN6 AT A POINT ON SAID SOUTH LINE OF lA PALMA AVENUE, DISTANT THEftEON SOUTH 73~ 44'
00" WEST, 154.00 FEET FROM SAID NORTHERLY PR~LONGATION OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL N0.
1; THENCE SOUTH 16° i6' 00" EAST, 173.50 FEET TO THE BEGINNIN6 OF A CURVE, CONCAVE
WESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 668.50 rEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH
A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 33° 00' 00", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 385.03 FEET TO A LINE TANSENT; THENCE
ALONG SAID TANGENT LINE, SOUTH 16° 44' 00" WEST, 260 fEET MORE OR LESS TO A POINT IN SAID
NORTH LINE GF THE RIUERSIDE FREEWAY.
; and
WHEREAS, the City Ple^ning Commission did hold a public hearing et the City Hell in the City of Anaheim
on January 6, 1 g75, et 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of said public hearing heving been duly given
as cequired 6y law end in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Munici~el code, Chepter 18.0~ to hear
and consider evidence for and egainst said pruposed conditionel use and to investigate and moke findings and
~recommendations in connection therewith; and
• WHEREAS, said Commission, efter due inspection, investigation, end study medP by itself and in its Ue-
half, end after due consideration of all evidence and ceports ofEeced a[ seid hearing, does Eind end determine the
following facts:
1. 'Chet the proposed use is properly one Eor which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized by Code Sect i on
18.b1.050.400, to wit: to permit the sales and distribution af office supplies in an
existing industrial complex.
2, That the petitioner stipulated that 75% of the retail sales would be telephc,ne
ot'ders on a delivery basis and less than 10% of the retail sales would be of the walk-in
type trade and, therefore, the existing ~arking would appear to be adequate.
3, That the proposed use would be oriented to commerce and industry and, therefore,
is considered to be a compatible use within the P1L Zone.
4. That the petitioner stipulated there would be no greeting card sales or sales
of stationEry or school supplies at the subject location.
5, That the petitioner stipulated that no free-standing signs would be utilized and
that the only sign to iden*_ify the ~ise would be a wall sign located on the building.
6. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the
growth and development of the area in whEch it is proposed to be located.
7, That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the
full devel~pment of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area
nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim.
8, That the granting of the Conditional Use Permit under the conditions imposAd, if
any, wilj iiot be detrimental to the pezce, health, safety, and general •.velfare of the
Citizens of the City of Anaheim.
9, That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition and no
correspond~nce was received in apposition to subject petition.
ENUIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FINDING:
That the Director of Developsnent Services has determined that the proposed activity falls
within the definition of Section 3.01, Class 1 of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the
Requirements for an Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, categorically exempt
from the requirement to file an EIR. ,
-1-
RESOLUTION N0. PC7~-7
,Y NOW, THEREFORE, BE~RESOLUEU that the Ansheim City Plaani~ Commission does hereby grent subject
Petition (or Conditional Use Permit, upon the Eoll~wing conditions which are nereby found to be e necessary pcerequisite
to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the sefety and general wel(ete of the Citiaens of the
Clty of Aneheim: '
l. That sidewalks shall be installed along La Palma Avenue as required by the City
Engineer and in accordance wiYh standard plans and specifications on file in the office of
the City Engineer.
2. That subjact property shal! be developed substantialiy in accordance with plans
and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos, 1, 2, 3 and 4.
3. That Condition Nos. 1 and 2, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to the
commencement of the activity authorized under this resolution, or prior to the time that
the building permit is issued, or within a period of one year from date hereof, whichever
occurs first, or such further time as the Planning Commission may grant.
4. That no free-standing si9ns shall be utilized at this locatSon and the only sign
to identify the use shall be a wall sign located on the building, said sign to indicate the
name of the business only.
TI:E FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 6th day of'Janua~y, 19]5.
`
_/ -
CHA MAN ANAH IM [TY PLANNING COM~1ISSION
ATTES'P:
~ • ~ ~
SLCRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFOF2NIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CYTY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Pat r i c i a B, S can 1 an , Secretary aE the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify thet
the foregoing resolution wes passed and adopted at a meeting of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Aneheim,
held on January 6, 1~975, at 2:00 o'cloek P.M., by the following vote of the memhers theceof:
AYES: COMMISSIONEP.S: FARANO, GAUER, JOHySON, KING, MORLEY, TOLAR, HERBST
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunta set my hend this 6th day of January, 1975.
~ ~ ~
SECRETARY ANAFSEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
C2G -2-
RESOLUTION N0, PC75-7