PC 70-232A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THAT
PET!TION FOR RECLASSIFICATION N0. ~0-71-20 gE DISAPPROVED
I WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission oE the City oE Anaheim did receive a verified Petition for Re-
classification from LENORE N. KOEBRICH, 213G East South Street, Ar.aheim, California 92806,
Owner; EARL E, CLt?YTON, 2909 South Halladay, Santa Ana, Caiifornia 92705, Agent of certain
_,"~~~ real property situated in the City of Anaheim„ County ef Orange, State of (,alifo.rnia,
'.I described as the West 165 feet of the North 650 feet of the East. half of the Northwest
~ ';:~ qua~ter of the Northwest quarter of Section 13, Township 4 Soutn, Rar:ge 10 West., S.B.B. &
: ~: M .
I ~
,~ -
,I•
1
:~
i'
~ i;'i
I
~
I . and
Iy
; WHEREAS, che City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Hall in the City of Aneheim
;^;~ on Dec. 28, 1970, at2 :00 o'clock P.M. notice of seid public hearing heving been duly given as required by
I ;f law and in accordance with the provisions of the Maheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.72, to hear and cansider
i; evidence for and against said proposed reclassification and to investigate endmake findings endrecommendations
, in connection therewith; and
-% WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, invastigation, and study made by itself and in its be-
~ half, and after due considewtion of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the
following Eacts:
1. That the petitioner proposes a reclassifir.ation of the above described property from the R-A ~
, Agricultural, Zone to the R-:~ Multiple Family Resident.ial; Zene.
2. That the proposed reclassification is not in ci~nrcrmanc, with ihe land uses
already established in the area or as depicted on tne Ge~nt:~,~l Piar..
' 3. That no land use change has occuri•ed in t.hE area sincu ±he ~+revious denial
ti of' a request to establish R-2 zoning on the property, and the~efore, t.he denial should
,,, not be cverturned.
4. 'Ihat subject property is surrounded on three si9~s wi±h sin;~l~ famiiy homes;
and i:o inject multiple family residential uses into a prima~ily single family area
wocld be setting an undesirable precedent for similar req~.:esis tiuouyhout the City.
°. 7'l~at the petitioner submitted a petition sign~d by 27 property cwners vrithi.n
close proximity all i.n favor of the proposed development, and i.h~t three persons appeared
and ene letter was received in opposition to subject Fetition.
I=
I:
i .:
~i
~
~
.Ax Rp
I
~ -1 _
~
~
~ y 'n
~i
. , ~,
i?. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council of the City of Anaheim that subject Petition for Reclassification be denied on the basis of the
aforementioned findings.
~F
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and ~pproved by me this 7th day of January, 1971.
-~
`_ --C ~ ~ ~
' CHAIP.MAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
ri
ATTEST:
~ ~~ /'~/I%?~Z~~L~/
J SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
~ITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Ann Krebs, Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anoheim, do hereby certify that the fore-
'~ going resolution wes passed end adopted at a meeting of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on
December 28, 1970, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the members thereof:
' AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Gauer, HBTt:~L~ Kaywood, Rowland, Seymour.
~ ?
I ;,' NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Allred.
i
~ ABSEP!T: COMMISSIONERS: Farano.
~~ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my Land this 7th day of .January, 19,'1.
~ ~
i. ~ /
I Y / %
~ %~ 1~~,/ ~~_.%'~i~::'.i
I~,~ SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COA1MISSION
RESOI.UTION NO. 232
R2-D _2_
t= { -
&; ~
~~ ,
~;~ A
; ~ ~x
. _,...._
.._..._.-.. __ .,.._._.._. ..- ,
-. .:, ~ _ ..: ,
_. ,.~
~