PC 78-277RESOLUTION N0. PC73-277
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNINC COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION N0. 78-79-22 QE DENIED.
WHEREAS~ the Anaheim City Planning Commissio~ did reccive a verlfled
petition for Reclassification from MELVIN AND MARRIAM E, SCHANTZ, 123~2 Harbor
Boulevard, Garden Grove, Californfa 92640, owners, and FLOYD L. FARANO, 2555 East
Chapman Avenue~ Sulte 7Q5, Fuller[on, Californla 92631, agent, of cer[aln real
property sttuated in the Ctty of Anahelm, County of Orange~ State of Callfornia,
descr)bed as follows:
Portion A- the westerly 4.633 acres of that property descrtbed as
follows: Those portlons of Lo[s 3, k and 6 of the Oexninguez
Es[ate as shown on a map filed tn Book 2 page 15 of Record of
Surveys, fn the Offlce of the County Recorder of said county and
that portton of tha[ certaln parcel of land described tn deed
recorded July 31, 1464 as Instrument No. 32263 in Boo~ 7160 Page
165 of offictal records in said office descrlbed as follaws:
Comenctng at a poinc In the center line of Placentia-Yorba Road~
as shown on plans enti[led "Plan and Prof(1e of Placentla-Yorba
Road", on filc in the office of the County Surveyor of said
county, distant thereon N 0° 26' 36" E~ 334,42 feet from its
intersection with [he centerltne of Santa Ana Canyon Road, 60,00
feet wide as Shown on a map on file in said office of the Louncy
Surveyor; thence S 83° 46'S7" E, 230.68 feet to the west ltne of
tha[ certain parcel of land described in deed of the State of
Califor~ta recorded January 23, 1953 In Book 2441 Page 84 of
official records in said County RecorJer's Offlce; thence N 65°
02' OE" E, 202.77 feet to the true poinx of beginning; thence F' B6°
25' 2$" E, 160.31 fce[; Lhence N 710 12' 00" E, 248.2f~ feet;
thence N 61° 40' 44" E~ 1$?.36 feet; [hence N 56° 49' 36"E~
1~+30.3q feet to the easterly line of the land descrlbed as Parcel
8 in che final O~der of Condemnation filed in Superior Lourt Case
No, 15agg~ {SLate Parce! fto. C 2$791 in and for sa(cf Councy, a
certified copy of said final order being recorded October 24, Igog
in 8ook 9117 Page 9z5 of officlai records in said County
Recorder's office; thence along said easterly line N 5a 27' 42~~ 41~
~91.57 feet; thence as 60° 38' 00" N~ 229,07 feat; thence S SSQ
39' 49" v, 692.60 fcet; thence S$8~ 24~ 53~~ W, 351.~+3 feet;
:hente 5 71~ 06' 42" N, 1?2.33 feet; thence S 62~ 13' 31" W,
328.86 feet to the beginning of a curve concave sou[heasterly and
having a radTus of 250.00 feet; thence sou[hwesterly and southerly
along sa(d curve through an angle of 47° 04' 17" a~ arc distance
of 20$,39 feet; thence non-tangen[ S 90 56~ 32" I1. 61.21 feet to
thc true poin[ of beg(nning,
Portion D- the easterly 4,630 acres of that property descrfbed as
foilows: Those portions of Lots 3~ 4 and 6 of the Domtnguez
Estate ss sham on a map filed in Book 2 page 15 of Record of
Surveys~ in the Offlce of [he Coun[y Recorder of said county and
that portion of that ctrtain parcel of land descr(bed In deed
recorded July 31. 1964 as Instrument No. 32263 In Book 7160 Page
165 of offlcTal records tn said office described as follows;
PC78-277
. /
Commencing at a point in the center line of Ptacentla-Yorba Road,
as shown on plans entitled "Plan and Profile of Placentla-Y~rba
Road", on file in the office of the County Surveyor of said
county, distant thereon t~ 0~ 28' 36" E, 384.42 feet from its
intersecx(o~ wtth the centerline of Santa Ana Canyon Road, 60.00
feet wide as shown on a map on file in said office of the County
Surveyor; thence S 830 46'S7" E~ 230.68 feet to the west ltne of
that certain parcel of land descrlbed in deed of the State of
California recorded January 23, 1953 in Book 2441 Page 84 of
official records in said ';:ounty Recorder's Office; thence N 65°
02' 06" E, 202.77 feet tc the true point of beginning; thence N 86~
ZS' 25" E, 160.31 feet; thence N 71° 12' 00" E, 248.24 feet;
thence N 61~ 40' 44" E, 189•3b feet; thence N 5b° 49' 36"E,
~~+30.39 feet to the easterly line of the land described as Parcel
8 In the final Order of Condemnation flled in Supertor Court Case
No. 159981 (5[ate Parcel No. C 2579) in and for said County. a
certified copy of said finat order being recorded October 24~ 1969
in Book 9117 Page 925 of official records in said County
Recorder's off(ce; tiience along said easterly line t~ 5° 27' L2" 41,
~91.57 feet; thence as EO° 38' 00" W, 229.07 feet; thence S 55°
39' 49" W. 692.60 feet; thence S 58° 24' S3" w, 35~.43 feet;
thence S 71~ 06' 42" 1J, 192,83 feet; thence S G2° 13' 3t" W.
328.85 feet to [he begtnning of a curve concave :outheasterly and
having a radius of 250.00 feet; thence southwescerly and southerly
along said curve [hrough an angle of 47~ 04' 1;+" an arc distance
of 205.39 feet; thence non-tangent S 9° 56' 32" W, 61.21 feet to
the true point of beginning.
WHEfiEAS, the Lity Planning Crxnrnission did hold a public hearing a[ [he City
Holl in [he City of Anaheim on Decemoer 4. 1978, at T:30 p.m., notice of said public
hearing having been duly gfven as required by law and in accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Lhap[er 18,03, to hear and consider
evidence for and against safd proposed reclassificetion and to lnvestigat~ and make
flndings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
NHEREAS, said Cortmission, after due inspcction, investfgation and study made
by itself and in its behalf, and after due cor.sideratio~ of all evtdence and reports
offered at said hearing, daes find and determine the Tolloritng facts:
1. That the pel•i[ioner proposes reclassification of subJect property:
Portion A: from the RS-A-43,000(SC) (Residential/Agricultural-
Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone to the CL(SL) (Commercial, Limited-
Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone; and
Portion B: from the RS-A-43,000(SC) Residentlal/Agrfcultural-
cen c Cor•ridor Gverlay) Zone to the RS-500Q(SC} (Residentlal,
Singie-Family-Scenic Corrido~ Overlay) Zone,
2. That the Anahetm General Plan designates subJect property for general
cortxnercia) and low-medtum density residentlal land uses.
3. That the proposed reclasslfication ts hereby denied on the basis that
Lhe existfng access to subJect p~operty consists of an easement which (s not adequate
to properly serve the property and the uses permitted under the proposed zoning; that
-2- PC78-277
no plans have been submitted to show adequate on-site circulatton or adequate access
[o the property; and also thaL no specific conceptual or specific plans have been
submitted for development of the property.
4. That the proposed reclassification of subJect property is not necessary
and/or desfrable for the orderly and proper development of the community.
5. That the proposed reclassificatlon of subJect property does not
properiy relate to the zones and their permitted uses locally established Tn close
proximity to subJect properiy and to the zones and thelr permitted uses generally
established througho~it the community.
6. That 4 persons indlcated thetr presence at satd publlc hearing tn
opposition; and tha[ no correspondence was received in oppositlon to the subject
peCitton.
ENVIRONMENTAL (MPACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has
reviewed [he proposa to rec ass y subJect property from the RS-A-43,000(SC)
(Residential/Agricuitural-Scenic Corrtdor Overlay) to the CL(SC) (Co~merclal,
Limited-Scenic Corridor Overl~y) zone on Portion A, and from the RS-A-43,000(SC)
(Residentlal/Agricultural-Scenic Ccrridor Overtay) to the RS-5000(SC) (Restdentia~.
Singte-Family-Scenic Corrtdor Overlay) zone on Portion 4 on an irreyularly-shaped
parcel of land consisting of approximately ?.3 acres located southeast oT the
Riverside Freeway overpass at Impertal Hlghway, havtng a frontage of approximately
2i00 feet on the south side of the Rlverside Freeway, havina a maximum depth of
approximately 260 feet, and being located approximately 675 feet north of the
centerline of Santa Ana Canyon Road; and does hereby approve [he Negative
Declara[lon from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report on [he
basis that Yhere ~+ould be no significant individuai or cumulative adverse
environmental im~act due to the approval of this Ne9ative Declara[lon since the
Anaheim General Pla~ designates the subJect property for general comnerctal and low-
medium density resldential land use commensurate wtth the proposal; tha[ no sensittve
environmental (mpacts are tnvolved in the proposal; that the Initial Study submJtted
by the petitioner indtca[es no sign?ficant individual or cumula[Ive adverse
environmenta7 impacts; and that the Negat.ive Declaration substantiating the foregotng
findtngs is on filc in the City of Anaheim Planning Department.
IJOW, THEREfORE. BE IT RESOLVED that the Anahelm City Planning Commission
does hereby deny subject Petition for Reclasstffcation on the basis of the foregoing
findings.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is' signed and approved by me this 4th day of
December, i978.
~'s.
.. !, AH 1 CIT ING CGHMISSION
A7TEST:
SECRETARY~ ANAHEIIi CITY'PLANIlING COHMISSION
-3- PC78-277
b
4._
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY Of ORANGE ) ss.
LITY OF ANAHEIM )
i, Ediih L. FSarris, Secretary of the Anahctm City Plannfng Commission~ do
hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted ac a meettng of
the Anahein City Planning Conunisslon held on December 4~ 1978, at /:30 p.m., by the
foilowing vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIOI~ERS: BARNES, 4U5HORE, DAVID, HERBST, TOLAR
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: JOHNSON~ KING
1978.
IN WITNESS WFIEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 4th day of December.
le ~ ~~~ ~_
SEtRET RY~ ANAHEIM CI Y PLANNING COMMISSION
-4- Pc78-277