PC 1963-1964-1075 ~ ,;
.
. ' +~
~ ~: ~
I
:,_ ~
~ .
" ^) ~
-n.
y~
RESOLUTION N O. 1075, SERIES 1963~64
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. 63-64-86 BE DENIED
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City af Anaheim did ceceive a verified Petition for Reclassifica-
tionfcom CARL J. KYMLA, Box 429, Fullerton, California,.Owner; 4iARVEY HETTINGA, 6392.Orange-
.wnod, Cypress, California, Agent of certain real.property situated in the Gity_n£.Anaheimt._.
.County of Orange, State of Califoxnia,.described..as the.Dlor.th 165.DO.feet of.the West.122- -
feet flf the East 26.4000 fee.t of the Northeast.quarter of the Southwest quarter of_Section.l2,
in Township 4 South, Range 11 West, in the Rancho Los Coyotes, as shown on a map.there,of.. -..
recorded in book 51,.page 7, et seqo,.Miscellaneous Maps, records of said Or.ange..Coun~y,_as
the Southwest quarter of said Section 12 is shown on a map of survey recorded in book 16,
.page 11, Record of Surveys, in the o£fice of the County Recorder of said Orange County
; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing et the City Hall in the City of Aneheim on
February 17~ 1964, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as cequired
by law and in accordsnce with the provisions of the Maheim Municipel Code, Chepter 18.72,to hear and consider evi-
dence for and egainst said proposed reclassification and ,to investigete and meke findings and recommendetians in
connection therewith: and
WHEREAS, seid Commission, after due inspection, investigation, end study mede by Itself and in its behelf,
and efter due consideration of ell evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following
facts:
1. That the petitioner pcoposes a reclassificetion of the above described property from the R-A9 Residential
Agricultural, Zone to the C-1, N?ighborhood Commercial, Zone to establish a drive-ir~ dairy
products store.
2. That tfie proposed reclassification of subject property does not properly relate to
the.zones and their pexmitted uses locally established in ~lose proximity to subject property
and to the zones and their permitted uses generally established throughout the community.
3. That the proposed reclassification would be detrimental to the residential subdivision
development pxesently existing to the.north and west of sub~ect property, and to the developed
R-A, Residential Agricultural, Zoned properties abuttiny io the south.
4. That two persons appeared representing five persons present in the Council Chamber,
and one letter was received in opposition to subject petitiono
Rl-^u
;;~
;,,_
•-. -=~
-1-
i
:~
~ ~
~ _ ~~ ~ ~
_~
.,:
r.
~
t~
,~
;:.
,_~
;~
~~
~
NOW, THER~rORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Aneheim City Plenning Commiesion does hereby recommend
to the Ciry Council of the City of Aneheim that aubject Petition for Reclassification be denied on the besis of the
efo:ementioned findings.
THE FOP.~GOING RESOLUTION is sioned and epproved by me this 2 ay of February, 19640 •
~- ~ : ~,,,~,~D
~, • ,. • ,
CHAIRMAt+ ANAHEIM CITY P NING COMMISSION
ATTEST: •
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I~ Ann Krebs ~, Secretery of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do heceby certify thet the foee-
going cesolution was pessed end edopted et e meeting of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on
FebrLary 17~ 1964~ et 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:Allred, Chavos, Gauer9 Mungally PeLley, Perryy Rowlanda
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Noneo
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Campy Sideso ,
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hend this 27th day of February~ 1964a
RESOLUTION r 0. 1075
R2-D
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-2-
~ `~
; ~
~
~
i' ~
~
~ ~
~
-- ---~