PC 75-93~~ ' ~ ~
RESOLUTION N0. PC75-93
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF TfiE CITY OF ANAHEIM
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDMENTS
TO THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL COOE, TITLE 18-ZONING, PERTAINING TO SITE
SCREENING RE~UIREMENTS IN MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESICENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL
ZONES.
!~lNEREAS, at their meeting of October 29, 1974, the City Council d'+rected Staff
to explore the wall height requirements in all zones for consideration of amending
the Zoning Code to provide for requiring peripheral walls in excess of six ~S) feet
in height, without the necessity of variance approvals in cases where the Lity
Council deems such additional height necessary to prevent intrusions on adjoining
properties; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the City
Hall in the City of Anaheim on April 28, 1975, at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public
hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provi-
sions of the Anaheim Municinal Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against
said proposed amendments and to investigate and make i`indings and recommendati~ns
in connection therewith; and
WH~REAS, said Commi:~sion, after due irspection, investigation, and study made
by itself and in its beht•lf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports
offered at said hearing, DOES HEREBY FIND:
1. That existing provisions appear to permit City Co~~cil to require walls or
fences in excess of six (6) feet in height adjacent to residential ~.~ne boundaries
in all multiple-family residential and industrial zones, and in the C0 Zone, with
walls six (6) feet in height being required in all other commercial zones and in the
CL-HS Zone only when there is a grade differential of two (2) or more feet between
abutting properties.
2. 7hat, in order to insure that walls in exce~~s o` six (6) feet may be required
without variances in instances where such additional height is deemed necessary to
protect adjoining residential uses, it is necessary to amend the site screening require-
ments of all commercial zones (except3ng the CO Zone) to require that walls of not less
than six (6) feet in hei9ht be provided adjacent to residential zones in lieu of the six
(6) feet height limit presently specified.
3, That, further, to rectify certain inequities and ambiguities in existing
requirements, and ensure uniform standards for the protection of adjoining land uses,
the following additional amendments are necessary:
a. That in all zones wher~ walls or fences are required, that the option of
providing a landscaped earthen berm in lieu of, or in combination with, such Nall be
included in order to provide for a more aesthetically pleasing barrier than a wall
alone provides.
b. That a wall be requdr~d on an/ CL-HS zoned site ad?s.cent to any resi-
dential zone boundary regardiess of whether there +s a grade diff•er~~tia; ~f two (2)
or more feet +n height between such properties.
c. That adjacent to any residential-agricuttural zoned property tvhich is
under Resolution of Inte~t for reclassification to any zone other than residential,
no wall or berm need be required.
d. That where an alley is proposed to provide joint access with any other
land use, that wall requirements may be modified or waived by the Development Services
Department in instances where it may 6e shown that any truck loading and trash collec-
tion areas are view-screened from Lhe adjoining rasidential area and that no n~jor
traffic problems will be created by the joint use (existing provisions in the CL, CG,
and CH Zones) .
e. That no wall be required across any approved vehicle or pedestrian
ar,cessway.
RESOLUTION N0. PC75-93
^ ~ ~ ~
f, Tliat the Commission or Council may modify or waive wall requirements
in instances where the erection of such wall would not be practical in the exercise
of sound engineering practices.
g, That the height of any wall or berm be reduced in any required street
setback area (presently specified in some zones, not specified in others).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anahei~~~ ~ity Planning Commission does
hereby adopt and recommends to the City Council of the City of Anaheim the adoption
of amendments to Title 18, Zoning, pertaining to site screening requirements in
multiple-family residential and commercial zones, as set forih in "Exhibit A"
attached hereto and made a part of this resolutlon.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 28th day of April, 1975.
CH IRMAN, A M CITY PLANNING COM1115SION
ATTEST:
(~~ ' ,B ~~.J
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Patrtcia B. Scanlan, Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the City
of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopte~
at a meeting of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheirti held on April 28,
1975, at 1:30 p.m., by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: GAUER, JOHNSON, KING, MORLEY, TOLAR, HERBST
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: FARANO
IN WITNE55 WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 28th day of April, 1375.
. • ~,
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM ..; i~ PLANNING COMMISSION
-2- RESOLUTION N0. PC"15-93
- • ` ~ ~
GXIIIBIT A
Appropriate amendments to provide for the uniform application of the suggested
revisions would be as follows:
A. In hiultiplc-Pvnily Residential Zones: Repeal existing Sections 18.31.068
(RA1-4000), 18.32.068 (RM-2400) and 18.34.068 (RA1-1200) ~nd add new
Sections 18.31.068, 18.32.068 and 18.34.068 to read as follows:
18. .068 Required Site Screening. Except as otherwise provided
herein, a suTid decorative type masonry wall, landscaped earthen berm,
or any combination thereof, totaling not less than six (5) feet in
height, shall be provided along and imm~~.iiately adjacent to the site
boundary line of any multi- or multiple-family development abutting
any freeway, expressway, railroad right-of-way, or 'RS' (Residential,
Single-Family) Zone boundary or any alley abutting any such boundary.
The height of any such wall and/or berm shall be as measured from the
highest finished grade level of the building pad of the dwelling units
located nearest any such abutting boundary.
.020 Exceptions:
.021 Within any required street setback area, thc hcigltt of any
required wall and/or berm shall be reduced to not more than
forty-two (42) inches.
.022 No wa11 or berm shall be required adjacent to any residential-
agricultural zone for which a resolution of intent for reclas-
sification to other than an 'RS' Zone has been ap~roved.
.023 No wall or berm shall be required across any approved vehicular
or pedestrian accessways.
.024 Where any alley is proposed to serve as joint access for any
residential use, requirements for a wall and/or berm may be
modified or waived by *.hc Director of Development Services or
his designee where the following may be satisfactorily shown:
.0241 Any truck loading or trash collection areas are adequately
screened from any rea.sonable view from the residentia2 area;
and
.0242 No major traffic problem will be created by such joint use.
.025 Where um~sual topography exists, height requirements may be
modified or waived by resolution of the Planning Commission
or City Council if the City Engineer certifies that the
erection of such wall or be.r.m would not be practical in the
exercise of sound engineering practices.
B. In Commercizl Zones: Repeal existing Sections 18.41.068 (CO),
18.42.068 ((:i.-HS), 18.44.0G8 (CL), 18.45.068 (CG), 18.46.068 (CIi),
and 18.48.068 (C-R) and add new Sections 18.41.068, 18.42.068,
18.44.068, ]8.45.068, 18.46.068 and 18.48.068 to read as follows:
Z8. _.068 8xcept as otherwise provided herein, a~olid decorative
typa masonry wall, landscaped eart~:en berm, or any combination thereof,
totaling not less than six (6) feet in height, shall be pxovided along
and immediately adjacent to the site boundary line of any commercial
development abutting any freeway, expressway, railroad right-of-way,
residential zone boundary or any alley abuttir~g any such boundary.
The height of any such wall and/or berm shall be as measured from the
hi.ghest finished grade level of the subject or adjacent properties,
whichever is the higher.
_3- RESOLUTION N0. PC75-93
- • ~' ~ ~
In instances where a retaining wall is required between adjoining
properties, any other wall required shall be erected on top of said
retaining wall. IVhere a slope is used, any required wall shall bc
erected at the property line with thc slopc itsclf planted.
.020 Exceptions:
.021 Within any required street setback arca, the hcight of any
requ:.red wall and/or berm shall bc reduced to not more than
thirty (30) inches.
.022 No wall or berm shall be required adjacent to any residential-
agricultural zone for which a Resolution of Intent for reclas-
sification to other than ~n 'RS' Zone has been approved.
.023 No wall or berm shall be required across any approved vehicle
or pedestrian~accessway.
.024 Where any alley is proposed to serve as joint access for any
residential use, requirements for a wall and/or berm may be
modified or waived by the Director of Development Services or
his designee where the following may be satisfactorily shown:
.0241 A;iy truck loading or trash collection areas are adequately
s~,reened from any reasonable view from the residential area;
ar,d
.0242 No major traffic problem will be created by such joint use.
.025 Where unusual topography exists, hcight requirements may be
modified or wruived by resolution of the Planning Commission
or City Council if the City Engineer certnfies that the
erection of such wall or berm would not be practical in the
exercise of sound engineering practices.
_4_ RESOLUTION N0. PC75-93