Loading...
PC 1963-1964-1175~'~ ~ RESOLUTION N0. 1175, SERIES 1963-64 A RESOY.UTTON OF TTiE CITY PLANNIhG COM:.IISSION OF THE CITY OF /~NAHEIM RECOMMENAING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM :iHAT PE 111ION FOR RECLASSIFTCAT?QPI D(Q. _ 63-64-~ 2Q BE BEp:IiO iUHEREAS, the CiCy Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim 3id receive a verified Fst~tion for Recla'ssifice- tionfrom OWEN B, AND ROSE MARIE LAMPMpN AND WILLIAM Bo AND WANEVA HaRRIS~ 1243 Eastridge, Whittier, California, Owners; JOHN r, HARVEy, III, Rimel 8 Harvey, 4th'Floor, U,G.B. Bldg., 1010 North Main Street, Santa Ana, California, Agent of certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, describ;d as Lot Noso 76, 77, 78, and 79 of Tract No. 1808 ; and WHEREAS, the City Plenning Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Hall in the City of qnaheim on May 25~ 1964, et 2:00 o'cIock P.M., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as requiced by law and in accordence with the provisions of the Maheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.72,to heer and consider evi- dence for and against seid propo~ed reclecsificetion and to investigate end meke findings and recommendations in connectian therewith: and WHEREAS, seid Commission, after due inspection, investigation, and study made by itself and in its behalf, and a£tee-due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at seid hearing, does find and determine the following facts: , 1. Thet the etitioner proposea a reclassification of the ebove described property from the R-],~ Qne Family Residential, ~ne to the C-1, Neighborhood Comrnercialy Zone to establ?sh a service station and_small.off3ce.building, .2e That the proposed reclassification and use would be incompatible to the residential integrity of .the.single famiiy subdivision in which subject property is locateda 3o That tihe propoced.xeclassification of ~abject prop~rty is not necessary ond/or des.9rable.for the..oxderly and proper development of the community. 4o That two persons appeared one of. whom represented six persons present_in the Council Chamber and who also presented a petition signed by 40 property owners, opposing sub3ect petitiono ~ ~.! . . ~ 1 l a 4 ~, ~ ~,._' ~ r ~~:~ ~ '~~_ ~ ~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the AnaheIm City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council of the City of Anaheim thet subject Petition for Reclessi~ication be denied on the besis of the aforementioned findings. ~ ..._.•~~-^ THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and epp:oved by me this 4 of June~ 19640 ~ ~ CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLAN G COMM?S';ION ATTEST: ~ ,~ SECRETARY ANAHFIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. C1TY OF ANAHEIM ) Iy Ann Krebs~ , Secretery of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Aneheim, do hereby certify that the fore- going cesolution was pessed and adopted at a meeting of the City Planning Commission ofthe City of Anaheim, held on MAy 259 1964~ et 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote o: the niembe:s thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS:Allredy Camp9 Chavos9 Gauer, Munga119 Perry, Rowlando NOES: COMMISSIOIdERS: Notteo ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: pebleyo IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have heceunto ~et my hend this 4th day of June~ 19_640 . RESOLUTION N0. 1175 R2-D SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -2- ` i s "~ ;i ~'1~1: .___' ~