PC 67-132•
RESOi.UTION A10. PC67-132
A RESOLU:I0~1 OF THE CITY PLANNING COA1MISSION OF THE CITY OF A~AHEIM RE~MMENDING
TO THE CITY ~UNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM I'HAT GEIJERAI_ PLAN AMENDMENT
N0. 91 BE DISAPPROVeU
NlHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Anah?im did adoot a G eneral Plan by
Resolutior. No. 63R-869, showing the general descrip'ion and extent of land u=es within
t~e City ar,d indicating the present belief of the ~ouncii as to oossible .uture develoo-
~~ ment and redevelopment of iand within the City; and
~„
t WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anzheim did receive a veri:ied
'~~ Petition for Reciassification No. 66-67-68, ~rihich petition nas imn?ications on oolicies
i~ as ex~ressed on said General Plan; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the notice of tne hearing on =_aid reclassification, notice
was slso given regarding the consideration of an amendment to the General Plan in the
aeneral location and vicinity of subject property o: s~id reclessification; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning C~mmission did hold a public nearing at the City Yall
~n the City o: Anaheim on June 5, 167, at 7:00 0'clock P.M., notice of said oublic
hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions
ot the Anaheim Municipal Code, to 5ear and consider evidence ,or ano against said
Amen.ime;.t to the General Plan to investigate and make findings and recommendation=_ in
~onnectian there~~~ith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission after due inspection, investigation, and =_tudy made by
itseif and in its behal"r and after due consideration oi all evidence ano reports of:ered
at said 'nearing, DOFS I;EREBY FIND
!_. Ihat the pr2sent yeneral description and extent of land use=_ in ttie
arorementioned area adequately reoresents past and c~.r=ent City oolicies
regarding possible future deve:opment oi s~id gener:,l area, described as:
That area bounded on the north by Vermont Avenue, on the east
by State College Boulevard, on the south by Bali Rozo, and on
the west by East.Street.
2. That no evider,ce was presented at said hearing which vrouid 'ustiiy •c^e
City Pianning Commission recommending a ~hanae in the above mentioned
policies to tne City Council
d. I'nat Exhibits "A" and "B" of General Plan Amendment No. 91 does not
consti~ute an acceptable alternat~ve to current oolicies as illustrated
on the General Plan.
NOW, iHERE?ORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Plannina Commission of the Git! of
Anaheim do~s he_eDy recommend to the City Council of the City of Anzheirn that subiect
General Plan Amendment be disapproved on the basis of the aforementioned :indinos.
~
~
5
r,
i .. .. ~ . . . .. .
~F
~t~
.; .
i: j ;
~~
~
f.~1 *
THE FORfiGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved y me this 15th y une, 1967.
C AN A AHEIM CITY PLA NIN3 MMISSION
ATTEST j,
`L 2z : z'~.=.~~ /,~ ~ .
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY ~LANNING COMMISSION
Sl'ATE OF .CALIFORNIA 1
~UNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
I CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Ann Krebs, Secretary .of .the City Ptanning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby
certify that the foregoin9 resolution was psssed and adopted at a meeting of the City Planning
Commission cf the City of Anaheim, held on J~ne 5, 1967, at 7:00 0'clock P,M., by the
following vote of the members thereof:
,~YES• COMMISSIONFRS: Allred, Farano, Gauer, Herbst, PAungall, Rowland, Camp~
NOES; CONWiISSIONERS; None.
, ABSENi~. COAM4ISSIONERSs None~
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 15th day of June, 1967.
% ~ < ~ t . ~2 <" .~~.:, ,
SECRETARY ANP.H~IM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIDN
Res. No• 132
~
~,. ~~
~.:
~,
i:
~
f