PC 1961-1962-76;.
. , ,
~... ~~. ~ ~ ~ ~~ .r; ~ ~ ~ . .'.
.'
, ~~~ ~,
y;: ~ . ~
RHSOLUTIQN N0. 76, Series 1961-62-
t
`,~ A RBSOLUTI@i OP Tfffi CITY PIANNII~lG COli9~lISSI~i OP THB ~TY OF ANAI~IM
RBCOkA~1DING TO TH8 CITY COiJNCYL OP TH8 CITY OP ANAt~I14 THAT
`(1 PBTITION PO.R RBCIASSIPICATION N0. 61-62-20 BE DENIED
ll.'
1~It~tBA3, the City Planning Commieeion of the City cf AnaFteis did receive a~rezified
Petition for Reclassificatioa from W, A. and OLIVE HINKLEY, 3171 West Ball Road,. Anaheim,
California, Owners; RICHARD GUTHERY, 2101 "B" West Ball Road Anaheim, California, Agent;
proposing recTassificati'on of the following described proper~ys - ••
Legal de'scription, Exhibit A, on file in the Cffice of the Planning Department.
; ond
WfIDRBA3, fhe City Plannimg Cormniasion did hoid s public hearing at the City Hxii in
the City of Anaheim on September 6, 1961 at 2;00 o~clocic P,li.~ aotice of said
public hearing having been duly given as required bylar and ia Qccordance xith the~provi-
aions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chaptcr 18.72~ to hear aad cpnsider evidence for and
against said proposed reclasaification and to inveatigate and aake fiadiaga tnd secosaea-
datiotts in eonnection therewith; and
WHffitE~13, said Commisaioa, after due inepection,iaveatigatioa, and atudq sade by it-
self and in its behalf, aad after due considera4ion of ail evideace aad reporta offered
at said hearing, doea find and determine the .foilo~aing facta:
1. That the petitioner propoaea a reclasaification of the above deacribed pro-
perty from tIle R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAI.,ZONE to the C-3, HEAVY COh1MERCIAL, ZONE.
2. That the propased reciasaification of aub3ect propertq - not neceaasry or
desirable for tfie orderly and proper development of the community.
3. That t~:e proposed C-3 Heavy Commer;cial, use of the subject property for a service
station would not be compatible with•the surrounding residential development due to its size
and location, but that because of its size and location at the intersection of Ball Road and
Western Avenue, the subject property could be developed for a suitable C-l, Neighborhood
Commercial, use limited to business or professional offices only.
4. That verbal opposition, in addition to a petition of protest containing 22 sig-
natures, was recorded against subject petition.
R-1
-1- ~.
!
.':
~_._._._---- - ---- --------. _..._ __ _ ~_ _ ---....._ .-------- ,
-*:i:._ _ --;:`;: ~ ~ - - ---- ~
. ,.
, .
------- -
~~:
,Y~..
NOW, TF~RHPORH, BB IT RBSOLYED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission hereby
recommends to the City Council of the City of Anaheim that Petition for Reclasaification
No, 61-62-2o be denied and, by so doing, that Title 18-2oning of the Anaheim
Municipal Code not be amended to exclude 1he above described property from the
R-A, Residential AgrucUltural, zone and to iacorporate said described property in the
C-3, Heavy Commercial, zone.
THB PORHGOING RHSOLUTION is sigtted and approved by me this 6th day of September, 1g61
ATfB9T:
SB ANAHSIM CITY PIANN~~JNG CQMh1I~^~.4ION
ST OP CAI,IPdRNIA ) "
COUN'lY OP ORANGS ) s8.
CITY OP ANAF~IM )
~ .
CHAI ANAt~Ib4 CIT7C PIJINNING C SIQd~1
:
I~ JEAN PAGE ~ gecretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of
Anaheica, do hereby certify that the foregoiag resolution was pasaed and adopted at a
meeting of the City Planning Com~ission of the City of Anaheim~ held on September 6, 1961,
at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of tha members theseaf:
AYBS: COtMtIS3I0NBR8: Allred, Gauer, Morris, Mungal.l, Pebley, Perry, Summers.
NQ83: CQMMI3SIONSRB: 4one.
AB3ffiJT: CoMMI3SI0NHRS: Hapgood, Marcoux.
i
IN WITNH3S WI~IDRBOP, I have hereunto set my hand this 6th day of September, 1961.
SHCRB ANAHBIM CITY pIANNI COh4dI33I(.`21
~:>:::
R2-D -2- ,
Resolution No. 76