PC 69-37. _ ._ ..
~ _. __. _
~. .
~ .: ~,
~ ? _J
1tESOLUTiON M0. pC69-37
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNII~iG COMMISSION OF THE CI1T O~.~jAHgp~
RECOMMENDIlIG TO 'IlIE CITY COUIiCIL O 6~'H~QC,~'~Y OF AHAHE~1•'I'HAT
PETITXM~f FOR RECLA55IFICATION NO. ~3 BE D1SAlsPROVED
N'HEI2EAS, the City PlanninQ CommiQaion of the rity af Ma!uia~ did :eceive a verified Petition tor Ro-
cl~ssiflc~tion from R, J. DIXON, 539 South Indiana, Anaheim, California 92Q05, Owner; NE[.,SpN
DYE CONSTRUCTION~ INOJRP'JRATED, 402 North State College Boulevard, Anaheim, California 92806,
Agent of certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State oF
California, described as the Northerly 100 feet of Lot 5, measured along the EastErly line
t;ereof, and the Westerly 35 feet of the Northerly 100 feet of Lot 4 of Tract No. 1120, as
shown on a map tt~ereof recorded in Book 41, Page 12, Miscellaneous Maps, Records of sai.d
Oranga County
i 1 and
;~; NNEREAS, tix City Plr~els~ Co~d~alo~ d~d hold ~ publia hNdn~ ~t the Clty Hdl in the City oE M~heim
on Feb. 26, 1969~ ~~ 2;pp o~~~ p,r. ~~~ o~ ~d publlc Aeadn~ hwin~ M~a duiy `{ven ao requiced yy
• i ~~ M a
t loM end in ~ecord~nc~ with t6~ prorialo~~ o( tIN Ae~l»i~ Yuniclpv C~~, Cb~t~r 1s.72, to he~r ~nd eonaider
''' evidenc~ (or ~d Kainat s~1d
V~~ ~1~qHc~tio~ rd to iavs~ti`~te and malce Eindin~s ~ad recesmend~tion^
- , in connectlon th~rewith; aud
'~ ~'HEREAS, •dd Cw~misHon, aft~r 8r~ Iaspectjon, investl~etion, and ~tudy m~ds by itMi[ ~nd in its br
v h~lt, and ~ttsr dw cwiaidention of ~11 wld~ecy ~ reports o[taad at aaid hearln~, doas Ilad ~ed d~t~rmine th~
y followin~ t~cts:
~ 1• That th~ petitfoner propoees ~ ncl~s~jilcation ot the ab~ve dsecdbed peoperty fron the C-2, General
;~ Commercial, Zone to the C-3, Neavy Commerr..ial, Zone.
~ 2. That the scope of the proposed reclassification, if approved, does not warrant
,j an amendment to the General Plan at the present time, however, its relationship to the
; General Plan symbol will be considered at the next annual review,
~,j~r 3. That the proposed reclassification of subject property is not necessary and/or
~~ desirable for the orderly and proper development of the community.
~T; 4. That the proposed reclassification of subject property does not properly relate
` to the zones and their permitted uses locally established in clo~e pror.imity to subject
`;K property and to the zones and their permitted uses yenerally established throughout the
community.
~' 5. That the existing use of the property may be construed to be
' ~-2, General Cornmercial, Zone and since the permitted in the
the service station pumps, the requested reclassif~cationtisrno longer~necessa~y,eactivate
;; 6. That the size and shape of the parcel is inadequate to permit both the existing
;s brake shop 2nd service station, since most service station sites measure 150 by 150 feet,
;; with definite limitations as to the intensity of maintenance activity that is permitted;
and that the site development standards for landscaping and parking could not be accomplished
for both uses~
~~ ~
~
~ ~
i RD
,~
1 i ~
t
~
i .,
{
•:-~ .
-1-
~
~,,,.
~4:'
~ :~" _ .. , ~ ~
Y:-:
°
~
f
F ~
"''.,'
??
~:
~
~ ;.:
.t
~
E
~
c ~
~
i
f ~
~
~
~'.- t~
;+~ j ~`
; ~
~ ,
~'
~''? g .. i
~
-I
I'.
x~.
~
~•
~ ~ ,~
~ .t:t
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to tr~e City Council of the City of Anaheim thet subject Petitlon for Reclessification be denied on the basis of the
af:,rementioned findings.
THE FOREGOI~G RESOLUT~ON is signed and epproved by me this 6th day of March, 1969.
`'.r` ~'U2 !i7 ~ 0~T11~
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
_ (./~/IVJ~7~ ~ G4~i
i -i -
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COM11;gSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF AA`AHEIM )
T' A~~ ~ebs~ Secretary of the City Plenning Commission of the City o{ qneheim, do hereby certify that the fore-
goin~ resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on
February 26~ 1969~ at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the fallowing vote of the members therecf:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Farano, Gauer, Rowland, Thom.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONCRS: Herbst.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hend this 6th day of March, 1969.
~~ ~ ~ ~~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION N0. 37
R2-D
-2-
~
` ~