PC 1964-1965-1432! ~"
RESOLll1'ION NOa 1432o Series 1964-65
P RF50LUiI0N OF IHE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
OF PF~ CITY OF ANAHEIW REOOMMEt~IDING TO THE CITY ODUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM THAT GENFRAL PLAN AMFSIDMFM AAe 23 BE DISAPPADVm
~~
WHFREAS, the City Council of the City of M aheim did adopt a General
Plan by Resolution No. 63R-869, showing the general description and extent
of land uses within the City and indicating the present belief of the City
Council as to possible future development and redevelopment of land within
tha Cityj and
WE~REAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive
a verified Petition for Reclassification No. 63-64-122, which petition has
imF~,licetions on policies as expressed on said General Plan; and
YIfIEREAS, in con~unction with the notice of the hearing on said Reclassi-
fication, notice was also given regarding the consideration of an amendment
to the Genera2 Plan in the general locatian and vicinity of sub~ect property
of said reclassification! and
1MF~REAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the
City Hall in the City of Anaheim on June B, July 8, August 3, and September
14, 1964, at 2~00 0'clock P.b.~ notice of said public hearing having been
duly given as requir.ed by law and.in accordance with the provisions of the
Aaaheim Idunicipal Cade, to hear and consider evidence for and against said
Amendment to the Gene:al Plan and said proposed Petition for ~~classification
to investigate and make findings and recom:.endations in connection therewithf
and
MF~REAS, said Commissian after due inspection, investigation, and study
made by itself and in its behaif and after due consideration of all ev:dence ,
and reports offered at said hearing, DOES HFREBY FII~
1. That the present general description and extent of land
uses in the af~rementioned area adequately represents
• past and current City policies regarding possiDle future
development of said general area, bounded on the north
by Ball Road on the east by the pazochial school and a
community park, on the west by Brookhurst Street and a
line appzoximately 600 feet north of Cerritos Avenue.
2. That no evidence was presented at said hearing which would
justify the City Planning Commission recom~~nding a change
in the above-mentioned policies to the City Council.
3. That Exhibiis"A" and "B" of General Plan Amendment No. 23 do•
not constitute an acceptable alternative to current pol-
icies as illustrated on the General Plen' but should be considered
at,the annual review of the Plan.
~
~
a,
:;
•' -,....,
. ,a ~
i; e ~ - ~ ~ g `~ .
a.~
~ 1 .
NpW, THEREFORE, BE IT RFSOLVID that the City Planning Commission of the
City of Anaheim does hereby recommend to the City Council of the City of
Anaheim that subject General Plan Amendment be disapproved on the basis
of the aforementioned findings.
THE PORBGOII~ RFSOLUTION is signed and apN:oved by me this 3rd
day of December, 1964.
CHAIRMAN A"'"Hi.?td CITY PLANN OOMIMISSION
--- ~ Al'iESTt
, I ~~Q~~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIN4 ~MMISSION
~, ,
~ STATE OF CALIPORNIA )
, ~ ODUNTY OF ORANGE ) sse
• CITY OF AIdAyEIM )
~' I, Ann Krebe, 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 Gity Planning Commission of the City of
Anaheim, i~eld on November 23, 1964, at 2ti00 0'clock P.Me~ by the following
vote of the members thereof~
, AYESi ODMWIISSIONERS~ Allred, Camp, Gauer, Mungall, Perry, Rowland.
P10ESs COMMISSIpNERSt None.
ABSENA't ODIAMIISSIONERSt None.
IN WITNESS WHFR~F~ I have hereunto srt my hand this 3rd day of
December, 1964,
~, ~
i SECREiARY ANAFiETM CIT1~~ Y PbA.MNING GOMMIISSION
.{
i
-,
i
~
Res. No. 1432
,r
~
. -- ~