PC 1961-1962-17~ - .~_, ;~: • .
' ' ~ ~" ;~ . ~ ~ ~-~ `~ .
~
,~
t~~
.:- ;~,,
.4.
~
RBSOLUTInx pp 12 SEItIH3 1961-62
~ ~
I
A RBSOL*JTI~I OP TEffi CITY PIAHNIti"v C~0(ISSI@i OP Tf~ CITY OP ANA2i8Ilt
REC~NDING TO TlIB CITY CdiTNCIZ OP 1H8 CITY OP AHAE~IM THAT
pB1ZTI@i POR RBCIA3$IPICATIt?N NO 61-62•-3 BH DHNIBD.
11HBRBA3, the City Piaaaiag Commiaeion of t}u: Cit7~ of Anaheia dia receive a oerified
betitioa for Reclassif~.cotion fxom ORA E. and ByELYN D, HARDACRE, MURRAY W. SPORN and
MARTIN SCRRIN, 1016 North Magnolia Avenue, Anaheim, Cali;urnia, Owners; Martin Sorkin,
Agent, proposii~g reclassification of the followin5 described property; All that certain
land situated in tl~e City of Anaheim, described as follows: Lot Ttvo of 17cact No. 1948
as show~: on a Map recorded in Book 58, pages 41, 42 and 43 of Miscellaneous Maps, records
of Orange County, California: lot 1 of Tract No. 1948, in the city of Anaheiai, county of
Ormnge, state of California, as per map recordPd in book 58 poges 41, 42 and 43 c~f Miscel-
laneous Maps, in the office of the county recorder of said county.
: aad
1Kl~tBAB, the City Planning Co~isaion did hold a public heariag st the 6ity Haii in
th~e City of Anaheim on July 24, 1961 at 2:00 o'cloct P.ll., notice of said
publ3c hearing having beea duly given as required by ffix and in sccordattce xith the prnvi-
sions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.72, to hear and consider evideace for and
againat said proposed reciasaification and to iavestiga2~ and aake £indings sad secasAen-
dat3ona in coanection therewith; und
Wf~RAA3, said Comxiasioa, after due inepection,iaveatigation, and atudy aade by it-
seif and ia ita behalf, aad after due consideration of ail evidence and zepor+Ya offered
at saiG hearing, doea find and determine the foilovring facts:
1. That the petitioner propoaea a reclasaification of thE above descsibed pro-
perty from tII~ R-1, One Pamily Residential, ~one to the C-1, Ne~ghborhood Comm,ercial, Zone.
2. That the propoae3 reciaeaification of aub,~ect property not aeceaear~ or
desirable for the orderly and proper developmeat of the co~uaity.
3. That the proposed seclassification of subject property uould permit a use of the
sub,ject property that is not compatible with the R-1, One Pamily Residential, development
uf the tract of which sub,ject properky is a part.
4, That a large amount of commercial acreage locaxad nor:herly of subject property
is available for co~mercial development.
5. That no ene appeared in opposition to subject petition.
~
i
!
R-1
i
_ __. -
_. ` . .
~ y,A
-~'
-1-
--- _ .. - -----.__..~. _ _ _ ---- - -
. ~ ~ .. _ . - ----__ .
; Y
~~'•' ~ ~^~ ..-•o ~.~
~v
1; '--M....._.._.,,_.~'------
s,
.~
i:
5'. ,.
~'
~
1~
~~
.i
i:
,I~
ppMl, THBRBpORH, BB 1T RBSOLVHD that the Anaheim City Planaing Cormniasion h~reby
recommends to the City Council of the City of Anaheim that Petitioa for Reclassification
No. 61-62-3 be denied and, by ao doiag, that Title 18-Zoning of the Anaheim
Municipal Code not be amended zoneeaad to incorporate saidcrdescribed ~roqertr~in the
R-1, One Pamily Residential P F Y
C-1, Neighborhood Commercial zone.
TF~ PORHGOING RRSOLUT:{ON is sigaed and approved by se 24th day of July, 1961.
CHAIRMAN ANA}~IM CITY PIAHIiII~FGG C~ Q~1
A1TB3T:
Y ANAHSIM ITY P ING COMAIIS4ION
$TATS OP CALIPQRNIA )
COUNTY OP ORANGB ) $s•
CITY OP ANAHSIM ?
i
I
1
1
I~ JgpN ppGg , 3ecretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of
pnaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing cesolution was pasaed and adopted at a
meeting of the City Plamiing Commiasion of the City of Anaheim, held on July 24, 1961
at 2:00 o`clock P,IN., by the following vote of the membera thereof:
py83; C~9dIS9I0NSRS: Allred, GauQr, Marcoux, Morris. Mungall, Pebley, Perry and
Summers.
NOH3: COMMI3SIONffit8: None.
AH9ffidT: C~MMI3SIONHRS: Hapgood.
~
E
IN WITNB3S WHHRHOP, I have hereunto aet my hand this 24th day of July,, 1961.
~~SCY~ ANAHEIM C TY P ING COIA~[IS$ION
~ i
~
R2-D -2'
RBSOLUTION N0. 17
~_,^_---._~ ._ __----- -.. --- -_ _ .._ .._ .._ _.
. ._-- - _ __ _ -----_ _._ ..
n>;i ~ ~;