PC 1963-1964-1159~ ~'~~ ~
~::' , Y ~_, ;~--~,, -
,:.
;.
3%.
RES~LUTION N0. 1159. Series 1963-64
~ :;
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
`` RECOMMF.AIDII~G TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CTTY OF ANAHF.IM THAT
'GEAI~?o? ?rAN AMENDMENT N0~ 18 BE DISAPPROVED
is_
{~
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Anaheim did adopt a General Plan by
'~ Resolution Noo 63R-869, showing the general description and extent of land uses within
T the City a^v i^dica±3^; the p*?sent belief of the Council as to possible future develop-
] ment and..r.edevelopment of. land within the City; and
7.~
<~: WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive verified
a' Petitions for Reclassification Noo 63-64-112 and Conditional Use Permit Noa 56R, which
petitions have implications on policies as expressed on said General Plan; and
WHERcAS, in conjunction with the notice of the hearing on said reclassification,
and conditional use permit notice was also given regarding the consideration of an
amandment to ths.Gen~ral Plan in the general ?ocation and vicinity of subject property
of.said reclass.ification and conditional use permit; and
WE~REAS, the City Planr.ing Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Hall
in the City of Anaheim on May 11, Z964 at the hour of 2s00 0'clock PoMoq noiice of said
public.hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, to.hear and consider evidence for and against
. said.amendment to the General Plan and said proposed Petition for Reclassification and
. Conditional Use Permit to investigate and make f indings and recommendations in connection
therewith; and
YiHEREAS9 said Commission after due inspectiony investigation9 and study made by
itself and in its.behalf and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered
at said heazing, DOES. HERIDY FIND
-le That the present general description and extent of land uses in the aforementioned
area adequately represents past and current City policies regarding possible
future development of said general area9 bounded on the north by Romneya Drive,
on the west by the Sania Fe Railroad~ on the south by North Street and the
i east .'^.y. Sria..^t~ood Stseet~
2o That no evidence was presented at said hearing which would justify the City
Planning Commission recommending a change in the above mentioned policies
to the City Councile i
3, That Exhibit "A" of General Plan Amendment Noo 18 does not constitute an ,
acceptable alternative to current policies as illustr_ted on the deneral Plano ,
~
;:, >
- `~
i
;,r .
-~«.:. :
_.._~....__,.._„~ ,.
": . . ;..
_,.c ..__.~__~
3
y
I
~
1
_,.,..,-.._._,....'__'__'_ .' '
~ SE •
i
'•-'~ .
l^ 3
~ ~
_NOYJ, THEREFORE~ BE IT RESOLVID that the City Planning Commission of the City
of .Anahe,im. does her~by recommend to the City Cocr.~i.l cf the City of Anahei.m that
subject.General.Plan Amendment be disapproved on the basis of the aforementioned
findings.and in.accordance with Exhibit A,
THE FOR~OING RESOLUTION is signc~d and approved by ma this 21st day of May, 1964,
, i ~
CHAIRMAN ANAHHIM CITY p ING COMMISSION
ATT~Ts
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CIT1` PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE.OF CALIFQ&NIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) sso
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Ann Krebs, Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of ~Anaheim do
hereby certify that.the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the
City.Planning Commis3on of the City of Maheim, held on May 119 1f364, at 2:00 0'clock PoMo9
by the folluwing vote of the members thereofa
AYESa CONU7ISSIONERSs Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Mungall, Perry, Rowland.
NOESs COMMISSIONERSs None.
AB6ENfs COMMISS.IONERSs Pebley, Sidesa
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 21st day of May, 1964,
L%/~/Ylirit/ j~ '~i/~j~.a~
SECREI'ARY ANAHEIM CITY PiANNING COMMISSION
':i
,
,.
?~~---- -----...___ _ ---..._,_------.__._______~ 3