Loading...
PC 66-37c . . ~ a RESOLUTION N0. p~66-37 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THAT PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION N0. 66-67-7 gE APPROVED WHEREAS, the City Plenning Commission of the City of Aneheim did recelve e verified Petition for Reclessifica- tionfrom CHARLES W~ HUSHAW, 519 Peppertree Drive, Brea, California, and ROBERT J. CROFT, 638 South State College Boulevard, Anaheim, California, Owners; GEORGE L. ARGYROS, 415 West 4th Street, Tustin, California, pgent of certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as Lots 8, 9, and 10 of Tract No. 2300, as shown on a Map recorded in Book 68, pages 35 and 36 of Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange County, C~lifornia ; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold e puSlic hearing at the City Hall in the City of Anaheim on August 1~ 1966~ at 2:00 o'clock P.M. notice of said public hearing heving been duly given es required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim h1unicipal Code, Chapter 18,72, to hear and consider evidence for end ageinst seid proposed reclassification end ta investigate and meke findings and recommendetions in connection therewi:h; and WHEREAS, said Commisslon, after due inspection, investigation, and study mede by itselE end in its behelf, and efter due consideration of all evidmce and reporta of.fered et said hearing, does find artd determine the following fects: 1. Thet the petitioner proposes a reclassification of the above described propcrty Erom the R-1, U:dE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ZONE to the C-1, GENERAL COMMERCIAL, ZONE to establish a service station on subject property. 2o That the scope of the proposed reclassification, if approved, does n~t warran': an amendment to the General Plan at the present time; however, its r?lationshio to the General Plan symbol urill be considered at the next arinual review. ' 3. That the proposed reclassificr.tion of subject property is necesseiry end/or desireble for the orderly end pro- ~ per developm~ent oi the community. j 4. That the proposed reclassificetion of subject propecty does properly relate to the zones and their permitted uses locelly esteblished in close proximity to subject property and to the z~nes and t,heir permitted uses generelly estab- lished throughout the community. 5. That the proposed reclassification of subject property requires the c:edication and improvement of abutting streets in accordance with the Ci.rculation Element of the General P1an, due to the anticipated increase in traffic which will be qenerated by the intensifi- cation of land use, 6a That the petitioner stipulated to landscaping the northe~ly 35~69 feet of subject ~ property, since no development plans were pr?sented for that portion of the propertyo 70 1'iiat no one appeared in opposition to subject petitiono a ~x R-A -1- ~ ~ ~ i ~ NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED that the An~heim City Plannin~ Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council of thc City of An~heim that ~ubject Petition for Reclas~ific~tIon be ~pproved ~nd, by ao doing, thet TiUe 18-~oning of the Anaheim Municip~l Code be amended to exclude the above described property from the R-1, One-Family Residential, Zone, and to incorporate said described property into the C-1, General Commercial, Zone, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of subject property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim: ~. I'hat the owners of subject property shall deed to the City of Anaheim a strip of land 32 feet in width, from the centerline of the street, along South Street, for street widening purposes. 2. That the owners of subject property shall deed to the City of Anaheim a strip of land 53 fEet in width, from the centerline of the street, alonq ~tate C:ollege Boulevard, including a 25-foot radius corner return, for stre~t widening purposes. 3. That Condition Nos. 1 and 2, above mentioned, shall be comolied with witl~in a period of 180 days from the date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant. 4. That any air-conditioning facilities proposed shall bz properly shielded from view from abutting streets, and the sour.d buffered from adjacent residential homes, prior to final building inspection. 5. That landscaping, including irrigation facilities, shall be installed and maintained - in the northerly 35,69 fAet of subject property, as stipulated by the petitioner, prior to final building and zoning inspections~ THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by rt~e thts 1 th day of August, 19660 /~ / CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: / /, r :[%'vi'(~~ 2! -~~i~~~ SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY CF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Ann Krebs, Seccetecy of the City PlanninQ Commieeion of the City nf M~heim, do hereby certify that the forc- going resolution wes passed and edopted ~t • meetine of the City Pl~nning Commisaion of the Clty of An~heim, held on August 1, 1966, et 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the folloa•inQ vote of the members thereoE: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: GAUER, Ht"RBS"T, NUiJGALL, ROWLAND, CANP, NOES: COMMISSfONERS: NONE. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ALLRED, PERRY. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hrve hereunto ~et my h~nd thls llth day of Au9ust~ 19660 ~ ~ - - 'f 7-7/1'L-'/~,-iL::'_-U'~7_. * SECRETARY ANAHEIIM CITY PLANNlNG COIIMiSSION „!x R£SOLUTION NO. PC66-~7 ~ R2-A -Z- ~ ~