PC 1964-1965-1490~\~~.~i' ~ ~
RESOLUfI011 D10. L490. Series 1964~65..
A RE90LUTI0l: OF TF~ CITY P1.ANWING ODIWISSION OF THE CI2'Y OF ANAHEIM
~~RB~1~lFaIDING TO TF~ .^~I?Y ~UNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM TNAT
GENERAL PLAN AMF.NDIAENT t~q. 45 BE DISAPPApVID
`~P.~
,MI~REAS, the City Council Df the.City of Maheim did adopt a General Plan
by Rlsolutiun No. 63R-869, showing the general description and extent of land
us~ss within the City and indicating the presant belief of the Council as to
poasible.futur.Q.developmeat.~nd.radevolopa~at.of land within th~.Ciiy{ and
wt~REAS, the City Planning Comonisaion of the City,of Anaheia did receive
verified Petitions for Reclassification No. 64-65-52 and Conditional Use Permit
No: 641, which petitions have implications on policies as expressed on said
General Plani and
WF~REAS, in con~unction with the notice of the hearing on seid reclassi-
fication and conditional usa permit notice wae also given regc~rding the con-
aideration of an amendmant to the General Plan in the general location and
vicinity of subject property of said reclassification and conditional use permitf
and
WFiEREAS, the City Planning Comniasion did hold a public hearing at Lhe
City Nall in the City of Aneheim on NovavtQr 9, 1964 and January 18, 1965,
notice of said public hearings havi~g been duly given as required by law and
in accordance with the proviaions of th~ Maheim Idunicipal Code, to hear and
consider evidence for and against said aonen~nent to the Qeneral Plan and said
proposed p~tizioRS fpr reclaseifi~ation end codditional us• permit to investi-
gate and maki fi~~rqs and r~aoda~ndations in connection therewith{ and
Wt~REAS, eaid Comiaission ~ft~r dua inepection, invast:gation, and study
made by ~ttelf and in ~ts behalf and after due cot~sideration of all`~vidence
end repprts offered at said h~llring, DOFS f~lBAESY ~FIt~
1. ?hat the preaent general description and extent of land ue e,in
the aforement~oned area adequately repres~nts p~~t_end c ~l
City policies regarding posaibIs;future devel of ad~ .~~heral
arsa, bounded' on the north by tha Riverside FtV 'ot- :,~Duth
and wast by the Sante Ma Rreeway and 'extending 1~ feet eastQrly
from Brookhurat Street.
2. ?hat ~-o evide~ce was pr~sented at said hearing wh'ich wonld justify
~;;_ r~ty p~~;in~ ~~~ie~on ~Jlcommendinc a chatige in the above
, mentioned policies to .ttie Citjr Council.
3. That ~xhibit "A" of General Plan Nnmd~ent No. 45 does not con-
atftute an acceptabie alteruative to cursent policies as illustrated
ou ths Geaeral Plan.
~.~ : . ~ . :
• ~ V
~.
NQK, THFRF~RE,.BE IT RE90LVm that the Ciiy Planning Camnission of
the City of Mahdm doas .I~ersb~ -racommend tn the City Counci l of the City
of Anaheim that sub,~~ct Gaaeral Plan Amendment be disapprovod on tho basis
or' .Cha afor~maatian~d f indi,ngQ.
Tt~ PO~tH30I1~ RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 28th day
of Januazy, 1965.
, ~ ~
CHAIRMAN ANAHSIM CITY NG OOMWISSIp~(
ATfEST~
SEQtE1'ARY At~HEI1L.CITY PI.ANNING OOhWISSION
S?ATE OF C~ALIFORMA )
' OOU~iTY OF .ORAtiiE ) ss.
'' " CIl'Y 0~ AtdA~Ii6 . )
~ . I~. Mn.lr.r~hs, Sacr4iar~ of t~u Ci•:; Planning Comnission of the City of
~ M~3a*.do-lwx~-~ti~y that_tha f4raqoiwg r~4ol~iion was ,~assad and
' adopt~d at..a,~r~~•ef th~ City P.lenaing Coromissi~m nf the City of Jlnahaim,
h~,~d oc1 January 18. 1965, at 2s 00 0' clnck ~.M:, by tha following vote of the
mswbe~s thereoft
AYES~ C~YIISSIaNERS~ Allrsd, Camp, Gauer, Ikmgall. Perry, Rowland.
IOF9t 0016MI~T0[19tSt lbne.
Ati9E4[ft ~WIISSI01tFRSe Nona.
III 11ITNESS ~HER~F, I have hereunto eet tay hand this 28th day of
Januar~r, 1%5.
~ .~ i
SfiCRETARY ANAHQM CIl'Y PL~INNING ~IdMISSION
Res. lio. 1490
i
~
7
,
~
;
~:
~. -i". _