PC 69-34i
-- ',.._.. ...... .. .__......._ __ .... ___. _.
_ . .._ _ ...._~ _
- , `~.
~.
.y
R~SOLUTLON NO. PC69-34
A RE,SOLUT[QA1 OF' THE CITY PLANlflNG CONIi1SS[ON OF THF C2TY OF ANAHE~1
lrEC01~lE!'IdNu TO'i1{E CITY COUlPCIL O!'6~'Hfy,C~12'Y OF ANA!liBIM THAT
PETITION FOR F4ECLASSrFlCA1~OM IIO. O7 BE DISAPPROVED
WHEREAS, the City Pl~mntng Commir~sion d tAe City of M~heim did receive e verified Petition for Rr
classificatlon irom BROADWAY VILLAGE OF ANAHiEIM, % BEVERLY COMSTOCK HOTEL9 10300 Wilshire
Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90024, Qwner; RAYNIJND N. ROUGH~ P~ 0~ Hox 330G, Anaheim,
California 92803, Agent of certain real property situated in the Ci~y of Anaheim, County
of Orange, 5tate of California, described as the South 2 acres of the Southeast quarter of
the Northeast Quarter of the Nortneast Quarter of Section 8 Township 4 South; Range 10 Nest;
in the Rancho Los Coyotes; as per map recorded in book 51, page 10 of MiscPllanaous Msos,
in the office of the county recorder of said county. Except the Easterly 279.33 feet thereo`.
~
; and
;~ '!'TiEREAS, the City Plmnin~ Comoissian did 6old ~ p~eblic 6earin~ ~t the City H~11 in the City ot Maheim
.; s on Feb. 26, 1969, et 2:C10 o'ctock P.Af. aotle~ o( ~afd public headn~ having txen duly eiven os requir~d by
~ ~ l~w and in accordance with tMe prov;aion~ ot the MQ»tm lfnaiclpd Code, Chapter 18.72, to heu ~nd conetder
~~ evidance for snd a~alr.at arid propo~ed recl~siHc~tiae wd to investigate andmeke Eindin~e ~ndeecommendationa
' x in coaneetion therewith; ~nd
"r
WHEREAS, s~id Commiaeion, afte~ due inspsction, inve~tiption, anE study m~d~ by itself and in its be-
h~lf, ~nd ~ftor due conridentian ot dl evidence rsd roports oEferod at a~Id hearing, doea find ~nd dstermine the
follo~ins f~cts:
1. Thwt the petitioncr pwposea ~ reclosaific~tion of the above deacribed property from the R-A,
Agricultural, Zone to the R-3, Multiple Family Residential, Zone.
2. That the proposed reclassification is in conformance with tne General Plan.
3. That the proposed reclassification c~f. subject property is not necessary and/or
desirable for the orderly and proper development of the community~
4. That the proposed reclassification of subject property does not properly relate
to the zones and their permitted uses locally established in close proximity to subject
property and to the zones and their permitted uses genera'_ly established throughout the
community.
5. That the propos ed density and coverage on a cul-de-sac street would be too
excessive and could be detrimental to the living environment oi i:he single family homes
within 150 feet due to traffic and other inherent noises associated with high density
developments.
6. That approval of the proposed development c.ould set an u~desirable precedent
for similar requests for small parcels to be dev eloped with high density apar•tment
uses, and adequate site development star,dards have noi: been adopted in the R-3 Zone
to prov:de the proper amenities for ;~otential residents of these facilities.
7. Thet one person representing several persons present in the Council Chamber
appeared in opposition to the density proposed under the zoning requested for a local
cul-de-sac street.
~
RD _1_
_., . ,~
` ~
\ h
r } : ~.
. _ _.. _ . _.
~J
'y~ri '
`
~~ ?
~~'~~ 1
. ' ~;
~a~t..
~`~~,.~.',
t.,ti.
s;
~ l::
r
~
i:
~
1
:
~;,
~' >
~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thet the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council of the City of Anaheim that subject Petiti
:~
eforementioned findings.
on for Reclassification be denied on the basis oE the
t
"
a,.. i THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 6th day of Nar
h
c
y 1969.
~i;l
.; j
~ ~`~ - ~' l '.~~ ~~
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMM
ATTEST:
i ~
fi
't'
j
: ' t~
x;
~M
/~/ ~/~/
i i~??/12~ 7~/Z~/
~;~ SECRETARY ANAHEIAI CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
'
y
~ ,
c~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY pF ORANGE ) ss.
t
I ~
' CITY OF ANAHEIM )
~ I+ Mn Krebs ~ Secretary of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Aneheim, do hereby certify that the f
going resolution was passed and adopted at a
i
j ore-
meet
ng of the City planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on
February 26~ 1969~ at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the followin
vote
f
h
g
o
t
e members thereof:
I ;~ AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Gauer, Rowland, Thom.
~
'i NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
I
~
' ABSENT: COMMISSIONER~: Fierbst.
ABST
.~I ; ;
{ AT•N: ~MNISSIONERS: Farano~
1 ~
i ' ?:
'ri IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hend this 6th day of Marcn, 1969.
r ~ I -~' _ " U~ ~~ ~~,/4~/
r~~r~ v
i: ..
~ j ! SECRETRRY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
: RESOLUTION NO. 34
'' R2-D
~ -7•-
~
c
\
~