PC 1964-1965-1323~
~
RESOLUfION N0~ 1323. Series 1964-65
~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLMINING COId~IIISSION OF T('.E CITY OF AlU1HEI1~
~ RE~MMEEmIt~ TO THE CITY CAUNCIL OF T~HE CITY OF ANAHIIMI THI~T •,
GENERAL PLAN AMEI~IEM' PAe 34 BE DISAPPt~YED
WNEREAS, the City Council of the City of Anaheim did adopt a General Plan
by Resolution No. 63R-869, showing the genesal description and extent of laAd
uses within the City and indicating the present belief of •rhe City Council as
to possible f.utwce. develnpment.and.xedevel.opment of.land.within the..Cityf and ~
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commiss.ion of the City of Anaheim did receive
a verified Petition for .Conditional Use.Permit No. 616, which petition has im-
plications on policies as expressed on said General Plan; and
WHFREAS, 3n conjunction with the notice of the hearing on said Conditional
Use Permit, notice was also given regarding the consideration of an ame~dment to
the General Plan in the general location and vicinity of subject proparty of -
said Conditional Use Fermit; and
WHEREAS9 the City Planning Coimnission did hold a public hearing at the
City Hall in the City of Anaheim on September 14, 1964, at 2t00 0'clock p.me,
notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in
accordance with the provisions of the Maheim Municipal Code, to hear and con-
sider evidence for and against said.Amendment to the General Plan and said pra-
posed Petition for Conditional Use Permit to investigate and make f indings and
recommendations in connection therewith; and
WFiFREAS, said Commission after due inspection, investigation, and study
made by itseif and in its behaif and after ~;~e consideration of all evidence
and reports offered at said hearing, DDES NEk~Y FIt~
1~ That the present general description and extent of land uses in the
aforementioned area adequately represents past and currPnt City
. policies regazding poesible future development of said genexal area,
bounded.on .the north by Katella Avenue, 600 feet east of State College
Bouleuard on the east, Anaheim Boulevard on the west, and Orangewood
A•venue on the southe
2. That no evidence wa. presented at said hearing which wo:ild iusti£y
the City Planning Gomniss~on recommending a change in the above
mentioned policies to the. City Council.
3. That Exhibit "A" of General. Plan Amendment No, 34 does not constitute
an acceptable alternative to current policies as illustrated on the
General Plan.
4o That the area has been supported as an industrial area by the Commission
and City Council for a number of years.
~` .
.~
~
~
~
~
~.
~
i
.`
~
~~~~ ~
,
~.~,..~
~ . t^i
.,.
il -
NJi4~ iHER~ORE BE IT RFSOLVID that the Cit~ Planning Commission of the City
af Anaheim.does.hereby.recommend to the City Council of the City of Anaheim that
sub~ect General Plan Amendment be disapproved on the basis of the aforementioned
findings.
THE R1RH3fJING RESOLlJTION is signed and approved by me this 24th day of
September, 1964.
ATTEST:
/ C
CHAIHIAAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING f~MMI
PRO ?Drt
SECREI'ARY ANAHEIN CITY PLANAIING dDWOuIISSION
STATE JF CALIFaR1VIA )
WUNTY OF ORANGE ) sso
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
Iy Mn Krebs, Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim,
do hereby certify that the..foregoing.resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting
of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on September 14, 1964,
at 2i00'clock pemo, by.the following vote of the members thereof~
AYE~Se GnMM.:SSI0.1ERSi Allred9 Camp, Chavos,.Gauer, Perry, Rowlando
t:J$St COMMISSIONERS~ None._
AB~ENfa ~MMISSIONERSt Mungall. ~
IN WITNESS WHERgJF9 I have hereunto set my hand this 24th day of September,
1964e
Li2~i~~~~ lY.~/./
SECREIARY ANAHEIIrI CTfY PLANMNG WMkISSION
Resolut!.on No. 1323
~-:_. ---