PC 1962-1963-489~
..,
~ ~ ~ ___ _ . .
-- --- -- - ----- . .. - --_
RESOLUTION--rf0.4~9+ SERIL-S 1962-63 ~., ,~
A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
RECOMNIENDTdG TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THAT
PETITION ~'OR RECLASSIFICATION N0.61-62-120 gF pppROVED
WHEkEAS, the CFty Plenning Commission of the City of Anaheim did teceive a vedfied Petltion for Reclessifica-
tion from JESSE Eo PRUSfT and CALLIE A. PRUETF, 311 South Placentia kvenue, Anaheims California,
Owners; CHARLES J. and CLARE DUODFFy 1430 Vinevale Street, Anaheim, California, Agents of
certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, Cour.ty of Orange, State of Caiifornia,
described as follows; Lot 99...in Tract No> 1565, in the City of Anahe3m, as shown on a map
thereof recorded in book 49, pages 22 through 24 of Miscellaneous Maps, records of said
Orange County ,
; and
WHEREAS, the City Plenaiag Commission dld hold e public hoadng et the City Hali ia f~e City o¢ M~heim on
September 5~ 1962, et 2:00 o'clock P.M. .notice of seid public heariag having been dvly giveu es reqnlred •by
lew end in accordence with the provisians of the Maheim Municipel Code, Chepter x~.72, to heae and con~ider evidence
for end ageinst said ptoposed reclesaification and to investigate end meke findings end recommendatloas in connection
therev:ith; and
WHEREAS, seid Commission, after due inspection, investigetion, and study mede by itself end in its behelf, and
after due considecetion of ell evidence and teporta offered et aeid headng, doea ~nd and determine tP~e folloaing fecta:
1. Thet the petitioner proposes a reclesaification of the ebove descdbed property from the R-1~ One Family
Residential, Zone to the C-1, Neighborhood Commercial, Zone to permit the establishment
of a.real estate office within an existing single family residence.
2. That the proposed reclesaification of subject property is necessery end/or desireble for the orderly end pro-
per development of the community.
3. Thet the proposed reclassificeUon of aubject property does properly telate to the zones and their perm?i!ted
uses locelly eatebliahed in cloae proximity to subJcct propecty end to the zones end thoir permitted uses ~~ntrral3y osteb-
lished throughout the communlty.
4~ That the proposed,reclassification of subject property does require dedir.ation
for and standard improvement of~abuttin3 streets because said property does relate to and
abut upon streets and highways which er~ proposed to carry the type and quantity of traffic~
which will ba generated by the permitted uses, in accordanr,e with the circulation element
of the General Plan.
5. That no one appeared in opposition to sub3ect petitiona
Rl-A .1,
-I . . •
~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~f~/j~ ~-YYt
~. ^r~ M .: r~ ~. ~.`V ~ ~ i .
x'- '
y ~i :' r
:N_;._,,
'6i!,';~~' '
zi~,
:,~
~ • J ,~
f~'~'1
`..j
S "'~
NOW. THEREFORE, SE IT RES~~JED that the Anaheim City Plenning :..,..,.Jission does hemby cernmmend
to the City Cauncil of the City of Aneheim tLet subject Petition for Reclassi~icatlon be epproved aad, by so doing,
that Title 1&Zoning of the Anaheim Municipal Code be ameaded to exclude the ebove described property fmm the
R-i, One Fanily Residential, Zone, and to incorporate said described property i.n the
C-1, Neighborhood Commercial, Zone upon the following con~itions which are hereby found
to be a necessary lrerer~uisite to the proposed use of the subJect prcrerty :n order to
preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anuheim.
1. Payment ot $2.00 per front foot for street lighting purposes on State College Boulevard.
2. Provision of scandard trash storage areas as detPrmined by the Dep~.~i:.nent of Public Works,
Sanitation Division, prior to Final Building Inspectiono
3. Dedication of fifty-three (53) feet from th~ monwnented centerline ~~.° State College Boule-
vard (50 feet existing).
4. Time limitation ~f one hundred and eighty (18Q) days for the accomplishment of Item Nos. 1
and 3.
5. Development substantially in accordance with Exhibit Noso 1 and 2.
6. Pxovision of a one way drive from State College Houlevard along the northerly property
line of subj~ct property to the abutting alley to the rearo
7. Recordation of C-1 Deed Restrictions limiting the use of subject property to
business and professional offices only. ,
8. Posting of a tveo-year bond to insure the construction of a six (6) foot masonry wall
along the north and south property iine of subject propertyo
9. Limitation of all display signs on subject property tu one unlighted sign with the
maximum area of eight (B) square feet~
10. ~~Construction of a six (6) foot masonry wallopposite subject property along the west side
of the abutting alley unless waived by that property owner, prior to Final Building Inspection.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 5th day of September, 19E2.
ATTEST:
CHAA2MAN ANAHEIM CI'TY PLANN~iG COdQy1LSSI0N
1
~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLAId:iING GOMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY CF OR~NGE ) ss.
Ci'~'Y OF ANAH£IM )
I~ Ann Krebs~ Seeretary of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Meheim, do h=:r.by cerUfy thet the for~
¢oine recolvti~~ was pessed and adopted et a meetiag of the Clty PIannina C~,mmission oF the City of Anaheim, held on
September 5~ 1962~ at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the folowing vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Camp, Gauer, Mar.r:oux, Mungall, Pebley.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
AF.`~'':VT: COMMISSIUNERS: Allred, Chavos, Hapgood, Perryo
IN "'iTNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 5th day of Sept2mber~ 19G2.
RESOLUTION N0.4a9
R2-A
C~/2,~' ~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-2-
~