PC 1963-1964-1186{,_)
RESOLUTION N0. 1186. SERIES 1963-64
A RESOLUTION OF TF?E CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
RFCOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THAT _. ..
Pr.itii0i3 rOcc RECLASS:FICATION T:Q. 63-54-121 BE DENIED
'NHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive e verified Petition for Recla'ssifica-
tionfcom STUART D. AND FLORINE M. NOBLE, 5i4 South Reseda Street, Anaheim, California, Owners
of certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of Cali-
fornia, described as Lot No. 3 of Tract Noo 1758
; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold e public hearing at the City Hall in the City of Anaheim on
June 8~ 1964~ at 2:00 o'clock P.M., nntice of seid public hearing heving been duly given as required
by law and in eccordence with the pcovisions of the Aneheim Municipel Code, Chapter 18.72,to heer and consider evi-
dence for end egainst aeid proposed reclessification and to investigate end make findings end recommendations in
cronnection therewith: end
WHEREAS, seid Commission, after due inspection, investigetion, end study mede by itself and in ita behelf,
end after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at seid hearing, does find end determine tha~llowing
facts:
1. Thet the petitioner proposes e ceclessiEication of the above described property from the R-1~ One Family
Residential, Zone to the C-0., Commercia2 Officey Zone to establish a real estate loan
broker's office in a residential structureo
2o That the proposed reclassif ication is considered in conjunction with General Plan
Amendment Noo 220
3o That the_proposefl reclassification of sub3ect property is not necessary and~or
desir.able for the orderly and proper development of the communityo
4o That the p'roposed reclassif.ication is incompatible to the single family residential
properties abutting tu the east, west and south and would retain undesirable precedent --
for strip commercial development on Ball Road between Iris Street and Harbor Boulevardo
5o That one person appeared and one letter was received in favor of subject petitione
Rl-D '1"
••:.~
J
1~`
i?~.
1,
. i
; ;~' ' •.~I ~,
-- ! .
4 ~ ;
j`~~
NOV', THRREFORE, R~ 2'~ ^E~OLu~u that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recam:nend
to the City Council of the Citp o£ Ananeim thet subject Petition for Reclessi£ication be denied on the basis of the
aforementioned findings.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed end epproved by me this 18t y of June~ 19640
r , ,
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PL ING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
L.~Z~YC/
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ,
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I~ Ann KTebs!r., Secretery of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do heteby certify th¢t the fore-
going resolution was passed and edopted at a meeting of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on
June 8y 1964, et 2:00 o'clook P.M., by the following vote of the members theceof:
AYES: COMMISSION~RS: Allred, Camp, Chavos9 Mungall, Perry9 Rowlando
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Noneo
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Gauer~
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hend this 18th day Of June~ 19640
J
RESOLUTION N0. 1186
R2-D
-7r
i
i
~~~iI~Z,/12%L~/
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMM SION
x
k
,~,
;
..`
r':
':~ .
_~a '
;:J i