PC 1964-1965-1326~~
~
RESOLUfION PA. 1326. Series 1964-65
A RfiSdLUI'ION OF I'HE.CITY PLAM~QtJ,i ~1~IlISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHIIM
R~AqIE1mING T0 THE CITY OOllNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THAT
GENERAL PLAN AI~IDMENT I~Ae 31 BE DISAPPI~V~
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Maheim did adopt a General Plan
by Resolution No. 63R-669, showing the general description and extent of lar~d
uses within the City and indicating the present belief of the City Council as
to possilile future development and redevelopment of land within the City{ and
YIt1EREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Mahdim did receive
verif ied Petitions for Reclassification No. 64-65-15 and Conditional Use Permit
No. 610, which petitions have implications on policies as expressed on said
General Plan; and
1ftiFREAS, in conjunction with the notice of the hearing on said Reclass-
ification and Conditional Use Permit, notice was also given regarding the ccn-
sitleration of an amendment to the General Plan in the general location and vicinity
of .subjact property of said geclassification and Conditional Use Permits and
M(f~RFAS, the City.Planning Com~ission did hold a public hearing at the
C~ty Hall in the City of Maheim on.Septamber 14, 1964, at 2s00 0'clock p.m.,
notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in
accordance xrith the provisions of the Anaheim idunicipal Code, to hear and consider
evidence for and against said Amendment to the General Plan and said proposed
Petitions for Reclassification and Conditional Use E~it to investigate and make
findings and recommendations in connection therewith, and
WHFRFJIS, said Commission after due inspection, investigation, and study
made by itself and in its behalf and after due consideration of all evidence
and reports offered at said hearing, DOiS HER~Y FIND
1. That the present general description and extent of land uses
in the aforementioned .area adequately represents past and currant
City policies regarding pocs~ble fvture development ~of said general
area, bounded on the west by State Callege Boulevard, on the north
by Ba1l Road, on the east by the Orange Freeway, and on the south
by the Southern Pacific Railrogd tracks.
2. That no evidence was presented at said hearing which would justify
the City Planning Comraission reconmending a change in the above
mentionvd policies to the City Council.
3. ?hat Exhibits"A" and "B" of General Plan Amendment No. 31 do not
constitute an acceptaY,le alternative to current pol,icles as
illustrated on the General Plan.
~ v ~
Ci~y of"Anahe3n--doe~ heieby r~Eec~o~mm~end~~o the City Council9of~theSCity of Maheim
that subject General Plan Amendment be disapproved on the basis of the aforementioned
findings.
THfi F~R~iOING RE90LUiI0N is signed and approved by me this 24th day of September,
1964e
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIN CITY PLMINING WNfkISSI
PRD TH~N
Ai"TESTa
~/v/~ ~
SBCRETARX ANAHEIM CITY ALANNING OObalISSION f
i
STATE OF CALIFORMA ) ;
ODUN'IY OF ORANGE ) ss e .
CITY OF MIAFiIIW )
I, Mn Krebs, Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, da
hereby certify that the f.oregoing.resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the '
City Planning Comnission of the City of Anaheim, held on September 14, 1964, at 2~00 ±
0'clock pam., by the following vote.of the members thereof~ ~
AYESs COWrtISS10NFRSs Allred, Camp, Chavos, Gauer, Perry, Rowland. ~
NDffi1 OOWYIISSIONERSt N011~e y
,
AB$E~Tf: OOWIISSIONFRSa ~ungall. ~
IN WII'NESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 24th day of September, 1964. ~
~
SECRETARY ANAHIIW CITY PLANNING ODMMISSION
Resolution No. 1326