PC 68-105wti
-,.;.
RE9pt,UT10N N0. P~68'"105
A itBSO[.U'IiQN QF THE C1TY PLANMII~(G COI~I:SION OF T!1! CtTY OF ANA}IE~1
RE~'019!'LrNDMG TO 7HE CT!'Y CO!)IICII, OF 'THE CITY OF ANAHB01 '1HAT
P~TITlON FOR RECI.ASS~FICA'i'Ii1N N0. 6~"b8'-6? BE DtSAPPROVED
MHERLAS, the City Pl~nning Commiuioa o[ tht Clty o( Aaatiaiu Qid neeive ~ verified POtitioa [or Re.
clwsificatioa [ro~ EDWARD AND VIVIAN SIMONSAUX JR., 604 North Magnolia Avenue, Anaheim, Californi
92801, EPHREN AND ROSE ALBA LAPLANTE, 608 I~orth N~agnolia, Anaheimy California 92801, and
E,MILY E,. 0'KEEFE, 612 North Magnolia, Anaheim, California 92801, Owners; E~ LEE SCHULTZ,
415 West 4th Street, Suite D, Tustin, California 92680, Agent of cei•tain real property
situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as Lot Nos.
15, 16 and 17 of Tract No. 2118 ~
~ m~d
~
MNELtLAS, tM City Pfaeai~~ Co~~i~ww di~ hold ~ pablJc hNria~ ~t t6s Clty Hali L tM City of ~leabd^
o~ P.prii 8, 1968, at ~:~ o'doei P.p(. ~oUw o( sWd p~blic bewis~ hwlas bNO dn1Y C~~ ~~e9uind by
le~ rwl i~ ~ccord~ace ~ith t6~ provida~s ot HK M~eim Mualdpd Cods, Chytec 1s.72, w hau ~ad coadder
h'i~~ ~~ oLWst ~ud PtopoMd roela~ait{eaN~ ~nd to inwatl~eie andsdtt ft~diaQ~ ~udeecommeadations
ie caw~ctio~ t6~rtwitl; and
d'HEREAS, a~id Comoisofoa, dter dur ia~tp~ctiao, lave~tiptioa, and study eade by it~df and in its bo-
holt, ~nd dter due coneideradon of el! evidsnce end reports of(c•-ed ~t said he~rin~, does Eind ~md determ;ne the
bollowin~ focts:
1. 'That tho petitloner proposes ~ nclasai(ic~tion of the above described property froe the R-1, One
Family Pesidential, Zone to the C-1, General Commercial, Zone to establish a service
station ~n subject property.
2. That the scope of the proposed reclassification, if aporoved, does not warrant
an amendment to the General Plan at the present time, hox~ever, i.ts relationship to the
General Plan symbol will be considered at the next annual review.
3. That no land use change has taken place to warrant consideration of a heavy
C-~1~ commercial use of subject property since the homes adjacent to subject property
still retain their residential characteristics.
4. That the recently approved Front-•On Study or' homes fronting on Arterial Highways
recommended that the subject and adjoining properti.es alonq both Magnolia and Crescent
to be retained for residenttal purposes.
5. ?h3t the proposed reciassification o; subjecc property is not necessary and/or
desirable for the orderly and proper de~~elopment of the community.
o. That the proposeu' reclassification will adversely affect the residential '.ntegrity
of the area in which it is proposed to be located.
7. That 3 oersons appeared, representiny 15 persons oresent in the Council C;~amber,
all in opposition to subject petition.
RD _ 1 _
~
~
~
. ~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Counci] of the City of Anaheim that subject Petition for Reclassification be denied on the basis of the
eforementioned findings.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 18th day of Aprii, 1968.
` ~ ~
~ ~ `~ ~
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PL`ANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~.l-r ~; ; %~~.~./:i
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I~ Ann Kreb=, Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the fore-
going resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Ciry Planning Commission ofthe City of Anaheim, held on
Apr i 1 8 y ] 968 ~ at ~:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COh1MISSIONERS: Farano, Gauer, Herbst, Munyall, Rowland, Camp.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ~lone.
ABSENT: COMn115SI0NERS: A~lred.
IN WITNESS 14FIEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 18th day of April~ 1968.
~G~? 7~> i., ~ ~( G~_'-i
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 105
R2-D
-2-
.•„r.•.:,..y...`. _ , ~-~.--_..- . . +rw~.rw.a.
. ." ~• ~ -~ `~`H~.L J~};r,~''.
~
. ~