PC 70-130~.
. ~'
Rc50LUTI0N N0. PC70-130
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF TFIE CITY OF ANAHL-IM
RECCMMENDING TO THL- CITY COUfJCIL OF THE CITY OF Af~AHEIIvi ADOPTION
OF AFEA DcVELOPMENT PI.AN N0. 95, THERETO
WHEREAS, as a result of the filing oi Petition for Reclassification No. 70-71-3,
proposing reclassification of the prop~rty to the C-1, General Commercial, Zone, said
property bei.ng a part of properti.es encompassed in Area Development Plan No. 95
considered and approved by the Planning Commission in June, 1968 and denied by therCityUSly
Council in July, 1968, it was determined that said area development plan should again be
considered at an advertised public hearing to review i:he circulation for these properties;
~'~ and
; WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hoid a pubiic hearing at t;~e City Hall in
I; the City of Anaheim on July 13, 1970, at 2:OU 0'clock P.h9., notice of said pulilic hearing
'' having been dul
Anaheim Mur~icipalgCode,atorhearrandbronsiJderdevidencerforcandlahainstnsaidsions of tne
Development Plan P7o. 95 and to investigate and make findinas and recommendationssed Area
connection therewi.th; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation, and study made by
itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered
at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts:
1. Tnat subject property is comprised of seven parcels, the northerly five
oarcels are presently developed with low-density single-family homes; the
sixth parcel is a large R-A parcel ~,vith two single-family residential homes;
and that the southernmost parcel, zoned R-A has a sinqle family hoir~e and a
parking lot used by an adjacent commercial use.
2. That the adjoining land uses include low-density single-family horne sites to
the west; retail commercial to the north; retail comrnercial, commercial-pro-
fessional, and a low-•density single-family home site planned for commercial
uses, to the east; and commercial-professional and retail commercial to the
south.
3• That tFie Traffic Engineer has indicated that the present daily vehicular traffic
count on L-uclid Street is 32,000 automobiles, and is projected to carry 40,600
vehicles per day in ten years.
4• That all properties have c~irbs, gutters, and sidewalks, and a half-~width dedication
of 50 feet on Euc]id Street, however, 53 feet is required for a primary street.
5. That the minimum depth of any of the lots would be 97 feet after ultimate dedi-
cation o~ Euclid Street; and that a ~naximum front yard depth on any of the lots
would be approximately 17 feet a:ter ultimate dedication.
6. That rear parking and/or secondary access (alley) could not be developed on the
northerly five parcels without removing the existing structures, since rear yard
depths average only 20 feet; however, the three structures on the two southernmost
pa*cels could be retained for office or professional use conversion, since lot
areas are large enough to accommodate parking towards the rear of the lots and
at the side of the structures. Furthermore, all existing structures would have
o conform to all the pertinent building and zoning provisions of tfie Anaheim
Municipal Code.
~• That circulation is still the prime consideration if these seven parcels are to
be rede~+eloped for commercial uses, due to the possible access conflicts if
secondary circulation is not provided, and each parcel develops individually
providing separate access to Euclid Street.
~
I .
i
L
~ ~ -~-.~.ve..,.,.~
~ -
, ~ -`r~"+tr:.' •'im"i~ ;, . ~
r :
$. That four persons appeared representinq nine persons present in the Council Chamber,
, and a petition sicjned by 25 persons, in opposition to tiie proposal for secondary
circulation in the forrn of an alley to the rear of subject property.
NOW, THER[FORE, BE !T RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby adopt
and recommends to the City Council of the City of Anaheim the adoption of Area Development
Pla.^. No. 95, as a method of providing secondary circulation for those lots fronting on the
' west side of Euclid Street between Broadway and Orange Avenue, subject to the following
conditions:
1. That a etandard 20-foot alley be provioed and dedicated to the City, to the rear
~ of all subject properties as they develop for commercial or commercial-professional
uses (since a 2:1 structural setbacF: ratio adjacent to the single family, resi-
, dential home sites to the west would be required).
2. That only three (3) vehir,uiar accessways be permitted to Euclid Street, to 1?ssen
the vehicular movements onto this street. The locations shown on Exhibit "A"
are suggestions. Final vehicular accessway locations would require the approval
of the Development Services Department and the Traffic Engineer, when the properties
are inii:ially developed for cor~merc5.a1 or com~nercial-professional uses. If the
_ vehicular accessways are mutual~y developed and the ~roperties adjoining said
accessways are developed singly or jointly, it will be necessar~ that a mutual
agreement be recorded, by property owners involved upon initial zoning actior~,
to guarantee final joint vehicular access, namely 10 feet from each property.
i-:
THE FOR~GOING P.EiOLUTI0t9 is signed and approved by me this 23rd day of July, 1970.
" ~/ i -~ ~ ~ ~
----" C IRMAN ANAH M C TY PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
(/L'?~ ~ ~i •ve~~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIDIG COMMISSIUN
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Ann Krebs, Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do
hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the City
Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on July 13, 1970, at 2:00 0'clock P.tii.,
by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: CON~AISSTOtJL-RS: Allred, Gauer, Kaywood, Seymour, Rowland, Herbst.
NOES: COMMISSIGNERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: yone.
AASTAIN: COMMISSIONL-RS: Farano.
IN WITNESS l'uH~.REOF, I have liereunto set my hand this 23rd day of July. 19%0.
_ j ~, L .,.-- `7~..~~ -C~ ..
SECRETARY ANAHEI CI;Y PLANNING COMMISSION
;'~ _ Res. No. 130
,~
~
-1 ~
r,
~