PC 75-250~ ~
It~SOLUPIO*1 N0. PC75-250
A RF.SOLUPIOtd OP Tf~ APl~FIEIf•1 CITY PLTIISIING COf+II~SSIOT~P RDCODR~NDIIdG ~
TI~: CITY COUNCIL OF Tf~ CITY OF ANAF~IM THAT I~ff?[7BST FOR DELEPIOi7 OE'
CONDITTOid N0. 1 OF CITY COU[QCIL RESOLLTrIO:d t~. 5555 AVD ORDIt~ 1414
BE DINIED
~~'.I1S, on October 13, 1959, the City Council of the. City of Anaiieim
approved Reclassification No. 59-60-20 in Resolution No. 5555 to change frcm the R-3,
tdultiple Family Residential Zone to the C-1, t?~ighborhood Cart~scial Zone, certain
pro~sty wnsisting of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Tract No. 2701, said appmval being
subject to certain c~nditic~ns; and
Wf~t'tE~.S, the petitioner requests an ~nenc~nent to the conditions of approval
of Resolution tdo. 5555 adoptc-d Octol~s 13, 1959 and Or.dinarACe 1414 adopt~. Tdovanber
17, 1959, in connection with Reclassification No. 59-60=20 to delete Cor.3ition rlo. 1,
to wit "That the awner of subject property place of record standard City of Anaheim
C-1 Deed Restrictions, approveci by the City Attorney, w}uch restrictions shall .limit
the uses oE the property to business and professional offices only; arsd
W~S, the Anaheim City Planniny Caimission did hold a public hearinq at
the City Hall in the City of Anaheim on Decanber 8, 1975, at 1:30 p.m., notice of
sai.d public hear~ng having been duly given as rec~,ired by 1aw and in accondance with
the provisions of the Anaheim Nhuiicipal Caie, C.hapter 18.03, to hear and oonsider
evidence for an1 against said proposal and to investigate and make findings and
reccrt~ations in oonnection therewith; and
Wt~F'1~5, said Caimi.ssion, after due inspection, investigation and study made
by itself and in its k.~ehalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports
offered at saisl heariny~ DOES I~FF2IDY FIND:
1. That the deletion of the C-1 Dee~l Restrictions, will adversely afEect
the adjoininr~ lazd uses and the growth and deve].ognent of th_e area.
2. That the deletion of the C-1 Deed Restrictions, will be detrimental t~o
the peace, health, safety, and qeneral welf-are of the Citizens of the City o£
Anaheim.
3. That the Dixector of the Planning llepartrnent has determixied that the
proposed activity falls witl~in the definition of Section 3.01, Class 1 of the City of
Anaheim Gliidelines to the Requiranents ~or an F~visoranental 7mpact Report arid is,
therefore, categorically exenpt fran the requisanc~t to f_le an EIR.
N(7W~ Tf~I~E;FpR~, BE IT RESOLUID that the Anaheim City Planning CcYrmission
does hereby recurtm_nd to the City Council of the City of Anahe.im that the proposed
deletion of Condition No. 1 of Resolution No. 5555 adopted October 13, 1959, and
ordir~nce 1414 adopte~l NovaN~er 17, 1959, be denied, based on the foregoing fiZdings.
TI~ EnItE~ING 1tF5oLLTrION is s:~.gned and approved by me this 8th day uf
Decanber, 1975.
S/Fl~oyd F ~/ ~~K~
GR~IIFE'~,N~ IM CITY P7ANNING COr1~IISSI~I
ATTF.ST:
C.~i~~'`'~s~aJ
s/Aletha Hurgess
~PARY PRD TII~ORE
ANAFIE7M CITY PLPSalII4G C(r'AIISSICIN
RESOLVPIGN N0. PC75-250
` ~ ~
szr.~ oF cazg'o~uvir. )
COWPY OF oRANGE )ss.
CITY OF AI~II~IM )
I, Aletha Burgess, Secretai.y Pro T9npore of the City Planning Crnmission of
the City of Anaheim, do he~'eby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and
aclopted at a meetinq of the City Pl.aivii.ng Camussion of the City of Anaheim, held on
Decenl~s 8, 1~75, at 1:30 p.m., by the following vote of the manbers thereof:
AXES: (.'(Y7hQSSIOt~'RS: BAR~IFS~ HERBST. KING, M~FtLEY, TOLAR~ JOHNS(~I~ FARANO
NCES: COrM~IISSI0I~RS: IQONE
ABSII~TP: COt+A~IISSId:~RS: NOi~
IN yilT[~SS Wf~FcrIJF, I have hereunto set my hand thi.s 8th day of DecenUer,
1975. ~,/,4L'C'C~'~v
ci/
S/Aletha Burgess
ST'~TARY P~ R~~'ORE
At~IEIM CITY PLANNING OON1~'iZSSION
-2- I~'SOI~TPIdN I~. PC75-250