PC 1964-1965-1656~
~'
RESOLUTION NO. 1656, SERIES 1964-65
A RESOLUTION OF THE CTfY PLANNIIdG CONOI~SSION Q~' THE CTfY OF ANAHEI~I
~JpT pETITtON FOR COR'DTfIONAL USE PER~1T Y0. ~~ HL DE1~iIED
WHEREAS, ffie CitY Planniaa Commissioa oE ttee City oE Aaaheim did receive a veri6ed Petition for Conditional
Use Peem;t from FRANK AND ~NqNEFA H< I~CDADE, 1703 West Crone Avenue. Anaheim, California~
Owners of certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, Stata
of California, described a$ Lot Noa 221 of Tract Noo 2377
; end
p~HEREAS, t6e Citp pleaalag Commiuioa did hold a pablic hearing at the City Hall L- the City of Anaheim on
June 1965~ at 2:00 o'dodc P.11., aotice of suid pnbllc headng havin~ beep dolry ~iven n eequined by
1aW and in ance wiW the peovisions of the Me6eim Montaipd Code, Ch~pter 18:64, to heac a~d coasidu e+videnae
for~ and aeaiast add conditlond we aad to invwtlQate aad molce Hadieas and eeoommeadaUoas ia coanection
therewitht aad ~
WFIEREAS, add Comm~su~n, ~~ dne laspectioa. investiiation, n-d stndy m~de by itself and ia its behalf,
aad after due ooasideeatloa of ~1 evidence and cepoets offered ~t wid hearin~, doea 8ad aad deteimine the 6ollwvla; fado:
1. That the proposed use is p~oPedq m-e for which a Coaditloaat Use Peemlt is anthodaed bq tWs Code, to wit:
permit the eatablishment of a real estate-accounting office in an existing.residential
structure with waiver of maximum sign areae
2. That the size ~d shape'of the site proposed for the uie is not adequate to allow
the full development of the proposed use 3n a manner not detrimental to the particular area
nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare of the Citizens of the.City of Maheim.
3. That the proposed use.will adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the gxowth
and devaloppnt cf the az'ea in which it is propo~ed to be located.
4. ihat the traffic generated by the proposed use w±ll impose an undue burden upon the
Btreets and highways.designed and improved to oarry the traffic in the areaa
5. That.tha grsnting of the Gonditional Use Permit under the.Conditio~s imposed, if any,
will.be.detx.imental to tha.pQace, health, sa£aty, and general welfare-of the Citizens of the
City of Anahai,m. '
. 6. That the granting of sub~ect petition weuld set a precedent for similar reguests
,o£•combined.commercial-residential usee in an azea predominantly residential.
7. ihat a letter was received, and one person,appeared, in opposition to subJect
petition.
_1 .
= ~r~~ . ~
.:~~
.<k~. ,,
h: y
~ ~ V
~
NOW~ • TfiEREF'ORE, HE IT RESOLVED that the Aaaheim C:ity Planning Commissioa does hsreby deny anbject
PeBtion for Coaditional Use Pecmit on the basis of the a[oeementloned findings.
THE FOREGOIIdd RESOLUTION is si~ed aad approved by me.this 1 ay o: June' 19650
~ ~
• CHAIRMAN ANAHEAH CITY P a COMMISSION
ATTEST:
SECRETAI2Y ANAHE~ PLANNII1a ION
PRO TEII
STATE OF CALII~'ORNU )
COUNTY OF ARAN(3E ) s~.
C1TY OF ANAH~IA!
Pro em
I, Carol Groggy Seccshry of the Cf~y P1~aniaQ Commiuioa of the City of M~heim, do hereby cectify that the fore-
Qoiag rao~ution wu pus~d ~ad adopted ~t ~ meetin~ of the Clty PlanainQ Commi~~ioa of We City of pn~heim, held oa
June 7~ 1965, , ~t 2:00 o'elodc P.I~., by the folloaia~ vote of the membees ther.eoE:
AYES: CO~IONERS: A11red, Camp, Gauer, Herbst, Mungall, Perry, Rowlande
NOES:. COlOlI3SIONERS: Nonee
'AHSENT: CO~ONERS: None.
:-~:a
.'E :
"c;4~:
'r:'~
^.i.:~..,
_ =:1;: .:.