PC 1964-1965-1596f _ ' _ .'
. . ... .. . . .. .. . . .... ..........._.... ... ......r.~.....-............._._.~........... ._._._.._..._... . ~.......: ......_..~... ~
~
~ ~~ .
.~
~!
~
~
~
S
RESOLUTION NO. 1596, SERIES 1964-65 ~~
~
A RESOLUTION OF 1HE CI'fY Pa.ANNWG C01110SSION OF THE C1TY OF ANAHEIII ~
t
RECOMIIF.AiDII~W TO THE CCPY COUNCII. OF THE CITY OF ANAHEd THAT "
PETITION FOR RECLASS[FICATION N0. 64-65-94 BE DENIED ~
FOR R-2, MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDHNTIAL, ZONE, 3
BUt APPROVED FOR R-1~ ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL~ ZONE. ~
WliEREAS the Cihr Plamia` Commiuion oE the City of An~hNm did eec~iw a wd~~d Mtitlon fae R~lwiBct
INCORPORATED
921 West Bever3~y Bovlevard, Nfontebello
California
FINAN~IAL FEDERATION
U
( `
~
,
,
,
a,
~
,
Owner of certain real property situated in the City of Anahe#m, 6ovnt~ of 'Qiange, State of California~~y
described as begirwing at the most easterly corner vf lot 15 af-Trac~t-tdo:"5~29~ as per map recorded x
in book 192 page 10 of Miscellaneous Maps, in the office~ of the~ crnmty•recoralei of said county, be- ?
ing a point on the North line of the Santa Ana Valley Ir•rigation•Compatrq~aanal,right of way, as per ~
map filed in book 4 pages 44 to 50 inclusive, of Recor-d of Surveys;i~r`ttte"office of said county
recorder; thence following said North line in a generai~i•~ ~aeterYX dfrection to the easterly line of ~
the land described in a deed to Financial Federation Inc., a Delaware corporation, recorded January
25, 1963 in book 6408 page 106 of Official Records, being the center line of the Placentia Yorba r
Road; thence North 0°28'00" West 57Q.00 feet to the intersection of the easterly prolongation of the i
North line of said Tract No. 5229; thence North 88°31'20" West 1158.61 feet along said prolongation
to the northeasterly corner of lot 8 of said tractf thence along the East line of said tract, South ~
1°28'40" West 500.12 feet and South 17°21'20" West 105.37 feet to the point of beginning s and
Wf{EREAS. the Citq Pl~aning Commiuion did hold ~ pqbllc he~rln~ ~t the Citp Hdl in tb~ Citp ot Aa~halm on
April 26, 1965, ~t 2:00 o'cloek P.M., eotia ot ~tld pnbllc 6~aln~ hrL~ bMn ddr ~lltia u nquired
by laa ~md in accordmce with the peovisioas of We M~6eim Moo~idpd Code, C6~pt~r 18.92, to hNr ~ed aooslder evi-
dence Eor aad ~`~iast sdd proposed reclu~iqe~tioe ~nd to lawstipb ~nd m~k~ 8ndiep ~ed nco~aad~tioe~ in
oooaectioe t!-eeewiH~: ~ad ;
y
WHEREAS, said Commis~ion. ~Qer due lo~pectioa, iavs~tiptloa. ~ad ~tndp m~ by lbdE ~nd ia ib Mh~lf, :
end attec dne considentiaa oE d1 evideace ~ad npoRt o~Ked ~t sdd he~ela~, doe~ $ad ~nd detuale~ t5~ 6ollowln~ y
facts: ~
,
1. T6.t the petiUoaer proposes . recluslfiatioa ot th~.bove ducrlbsd prop~ety irom tM R-A, Agricultural,
Zone to the R-2 I~htltiple Family Residential, Zone to develop 25 duplex units.
2. That the Cam~ission recomreends to the City Council that R-2, Zoning be disapproved,
based on the f act that although the proposed 25 R-2 lots would have no significant detrimental ~
effect on the area~ the City has not projected multiple family residential density for the ';
area and has installed and pro~ected sewer, water, and street facilities commenserate with ~
single family subdivision development as is presently developed to the west of subject j
property.
3. 7hat the single family homeowners in the tract to the west had purchased their ~
property on the assumption that the ad~acent property to the east was proposed for single ~
family subdivision, and to approve the requested zoning would be setting a precedent for ~
other properties in the northeast Maheim area which is virtually undeveloped, ~
4. That the Comwission recaeaiends to the City Council that subject propexty be ~
reclassifiad.to the R-1, Dne Family Residential, Zone as being more appropriate and in ~
conf.ormar~ce with single family residential subdivision development already established to
the west of subject property. !
5. That no one appeared in opposition to subject petition.
Rl-D -1-
~ i ~ Ri
~~
s~
~
~
~
I~11~ THFRE~E, BE I? RFSOLVID that the Maheim City Planning Commission does hereby
recnmmend to the City Council of the City of Maheim that subject Petition for Reclassification
to the R-2, Yultiple Family Residential, Zone be disapprovede
BE IT FURTI~A RESOLVm that the Maheim City Planning Commission does hereby recortunend
to the City Council of the City of Maheim that sub~ect property be approved for the R-1, One
Family Residential, Zone and, by so doing, that Title 18-Zoning of the Anaheim Municipal Code
be amended to exclude the above described property from the R-A, Agricultural, Zone and
included in the R-1, One Family Residential, Zone subject to the following conditionsa
1. That a f inal tract map for R-1, One Family Residential, Zoned subdivision of
subject property be approved by the City Council and recorded in the office of the Orange
County Recorder.
2. That the rnmers of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of
525.00 per lot, to be used for park and recreation purposes, said amount to be paid at the
time the building permit is issued.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed end apQroved by me thla 6t of May~ 1965e
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY P ING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SECRETARY ANAHEI1t CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) i
COUl1TY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEDI ) ..
I~ Ann Kt~s~ Secretery of the City Plaaaing Commission of the City of Meheim, do hereby cexUfy that the fore-
golog rNOlntion was poesed end adopted et a meeting of the City Planning Commission of the City of Meheim, held on
April 26~ 1965~ at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the membera thereeE:
AYES: Cn1URSSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Herbsty Wungall, Perry, Rowland~
NOES: COIO~I1SS10NERS: Noneo !
ABSENT: CONIQSSIONERS: Gauer. ;
IN WITNF.SS WHEREOF,1 hnve haennto aet my head this 6th day of May~ 19650 ;
RESOLUTION N0. 1596
R2-D
/' ///Jil~w /_17~s~C~='K/
SECRETARY ANAHEDH CITY PLANNING COMMISSION '.
-2-