PC 1963-1964-976~
~
~
RESOLUTION NO. 976 SERIES 1963-64
P. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMt5SY0N OF THE CITY OF ANAHF.IM
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUI~CIL CF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THAT
PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NO. ~+~-64-59 - BE DENIED
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commis~ion of the CitV of Aneheim did ceceive e vecified Petition for Recla'ssifica-
tionfrom. VIYIAN F. SIMMONS,.~821-.Ka.tella_Avenue, An~heim, California, Owner'of certa~n real
property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described
as Lot No: 247 of I'ract No. 2294
; and
~ ,'.~
;,~
f;~
i:~
~ - ~;, .
'v,':
~
~_,._. --. , !i~!„
WHEREAS, the City Plenning Commission did hold a public hearing ¢t the City Hall •in the City of Anaheim on
November 27 ~ 1963, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice oE said public hearing having been duly given as requiced
by law and in eccordance with the p:ovisions of the Aneheim Municipal Code, Chepter 18.72,to hear and consider evi-
dence for and again~t said pcoposed reclassificetion and to investigete and make findings and cecommendatious in
connection thetewith: end
WHEREAS, seid Commission, after due inspection, investigation, and study mede by itself and in its behalf,
~~:.._ ~c on ay;clence and repods offeced at seid heering, does find and determine the following
and aiter due con~iua. :....•
facts:
1. That the petitioner pcoposes e~eclassification of the aaove described property fcom the R-1~ One Family
Residential, Zone to the C-1, Neighborhood Comme•rcial, Zone to permit the establishment of
a commercial.bui_lding on subject propertye
2..That the..proposed reclassif.ication of subject property is not necessary and~or
de~irabJ.e for the orderly and proper development of the community. -
3. That the.proposed use would be incompatible to the single family residential
environment existing to the south, east, and north of subject propertyo
4. That the.property .siding on arterial streef.s and highways, and fronting on a
dedicated residentia~ street should be encouraged to remain in the R-1, One Family Resideitial,
Zane i~ which it is lecated.
g. That sub3ect property has deed restrictions pronibitiny its being used for o'cher
than residential purposes, which restrictions do not expire until 19800
6. That two persons appeared one of whom presented a petition signed by,thirty-five
persons and also representing a number of persons in the Councii Chamber, opposing subject
p~tition~
Rl-D
-1-
i
~,
i
j
,
1
i
l
i
':
;
5
,
i
~
;
i
~
i
i
~
f
i
.?
,
1
;
i
y
3
~ ~j
:
~~ ~
'. ~ , :-~
~
, ~
~,
.~ _
~~~ .;~
-
~ .
~
i ~L
~~~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Meheim City Plana:ng Commission does heceby cecommend
to the Ciry Coiincil of the City of Anaheim thet subject Petition for ReclassiIIcation be denied on the besis of the
afo:ementioned findings.
, THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and epproved by me this 6th day Of December~ 1963e
.~!~ _ . ~ e ~~
•~ ~
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLAN G COMMISSION
ATTEST:
/~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM Ci;Y PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I~ Ann_ Krebs~ . Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, da hereby certify that the fo:e-
going cesolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Anahetm, held on
iVovemner 27, lybJ ' Sy '--:cL'a~':6:c:e v.,~ mha. rt, rPnf:
flC L:UU o ciodK c.in.~ uac C- °- L^.°-----8 9---
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: A11red, Chavosy Gauery MungallY Rowland, Sideso
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Noneo
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Camp, Pebley, Perryo
IN WITNESS WHF.REOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 6th day of December~ 19630
~ /7~r2!'/v"°'
SECRCTARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION N0. 976
R2-D
~:
. . -_, _-:±;;,
-2-
d~g
~..~-
i
~
:.
, ;
~
s