PC 1963-1964-940i
~
,' ~~' •
' i
.~
. ~-------
S'
~
~
~
RESOLL`TION N0. 940, SERIES I9b3-64
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 NO. 63-64-43 BE DENxED
IYIiEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive a verified Petition for Recla'ssifica-
tionfrom FAYE OOTLER9 118 West Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim9 California, Owner of certain real
property situated in the City of Anaheim, Couni:y ef Orange, State of California, described
as Lot Noo 3 of Tract Noo 426, and further described as 417 North Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim,
California
; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold e public hearing at the Ciip Hall in the City of Anaheim on
OCtober 149 19639 at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of seid public hearing heving been duly given es required
by law and in accordance with the provlsions of the Aneheim Municipal Cade, Chapter 18.72,to hear and consider evi-
dence for end ageinst said proposed reclassification end to inveciigete and make findings and recommendetions in
connection there;vith: and
WHEREAS, said Commission, a$er due inspection, investigation, and study made by itself and in its behelf,
end after due considecetion of all evidence end reports offered at seid hearing, does find and determine the following
facts:
1. That the petitioner p:oposes a reclassification of the above described pzoperty fcom the R-3y Multiple Family
Residential9 Zone to the C-1y Neighborhood Co~ercial, Zone to permit the following limited
C-1 usess. Baxber shop or beauty pa:c'lorg baok or.stationery store; dress or millinery shop;
hobby shop; 'laundries or.dry cleaning agency; medical and dental office; notion store;
business and professional and real estate agency office; tailor, clothing or wearing apparel
shnps; jewelsy and gift shop~
2o That the proposed reclassification of subject property is not necessary and~or
desisable for the orderly and proper de~•elop~ne~t cf the communityo
3o That the proposed reclassification of subject property does not properly relate to
the zones ancl their permitted uses locally established in close proximity to sub~ect property
and to the zones and their permitted uses generally established throughout the communityo
4o That the prQposed reclassification would be considered a further encraachment of
commercial deuelopment into •this residential area9 and is not considered compatible to the
existing single famil•y.xesidences9 that the parkino facilities are not adequate, and that the
heavy flow of traffic on Harbox Soulevard would ~reate a further traffic problem in this areae
5o That fiYe persons appeared, and one petition with signatures of 18 property owners
was presented in oppositio:~ to subject petitiono
Rl-D -1-
,.:.,.
~,;'`
E'.
~".j"..
r,::
I' .
i
~ 1
~~~
~1
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thet the Anaheim City Plenning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council of the City of Anaheim that subjec.t Petition for Reclassification be denied on the basis oF the
aforementioned findings.
~.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 24t11 day of Octobery 1963e
.
.
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PL ING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
S TARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
0 TF~uI
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I3 Jo Suliivan~ Secretery of the City Planning Commission of the City of Aneheim, do heceby certify that the fore-
going resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the City Plenning Commission ofthe City of Anaheim, held on
OCtObeT 14y 1963y at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the membets thereof:
AYES: CoMMiSSIONERS: A11red9 Campy Charros9 Gauer, ldungall, Pebley„ Perry, Rowlando
NOES: COidMISSIONERS: Noneo
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Sideso
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand 4his 24th day of October9 19630
~ ~. /~ D ' ~
~~ , ~`~
ETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
RO TIIuI
RESOLUTION NO. 940
R2-D -2-
~:,