PC 1964-1965-1511
•.'~ ~ ' - ~ )
RESOLUTION NO. 1511, SERIES 1964-65
A RESOLUTION OF THE CTfY PLANNIIdG COMMISSION OF THE ~ITY OF ANAHED~I
THAT PETITION FOR CONI3TfIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 644 BE DENffiD
WHEREAS. the Citq Pl~mia~ Commission of the City oE An~hei~m did receive ~ veri6ed Petition for Conditiae~l
Use Peemitfiom FRANK AND MARGARET MULI.HR, 6363 3unset Boulevard, Hollywood, California, Owners~
OORDON BROWN, 17400 Otsego Street, Encino, California, Agent of certain real property situated
in the City of Anaheim, County of Qrange, State of California, described as Parcel 11 The North
320.00 feet of the East 122.00 feet of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of the
NorthMest quarter of Section 17, Township 4 South, Range 10 West, in the Rancho Los Coyotes,
as sham on a Map recorded in Book 51, page 10 of Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange County,
California~ Excepting therefrom the North 66.00 feet as described in a deed to the State of
California, recorded January 15, 1958 in Book 4163, page 589 of Official Records~ Parcel 2t
Lot C of Tract No. 2299, as shown on a Map recorded in Book 70, pages 44 to 49 inclusive of
Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange County, California
; ~ad
WtIEFEAS, the City Pl~enicQ Commission did hold e public hearing at the City Hdl in the City of Anaheim on
February 1, 1965~ at 2:00 o'doek P.Id., noUce of said public hearing h~vinQ beep dnlq given u reqniied by
laA ~ad ie ~ccordance Aith the Providoa~ oE the M~heim Mnnldpd Code, Chapter 18.64, to hear and coasidec evidence
for aod a~ain~t sdd peoposed coaditlond use ~nd to iavestigate and m~ke fiadings ~ad recommeedations ia coaaection
t1-e~ewitht aad
WHEREAS, s~id Commisdon, ~Eter dne lnspection, iavestlgatioa, ~nd study made by itselE aad in its behdE,
~ad aRer dne considention oE ~11 evideace ~nd reports offered ~t uid hearine, does find sad determiae the £ollowln~ fads:
1. Th~t We proposed use is ProPeelY one Eor which ~ Coaditload Use Permit is ant}-odzed by this Code, to wit:
establish a two-story, forty-one ,41) unit motel on sub,ject property.
2o That the ~.:oposed use will adversely affect the adjoinina land uses to the south.
and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located.
3. ?hat the petitioner stipulated at the first public hearing that he would develop
subject property with commercial uses on the Lincoln Avenue frontage and single family
residential lots on the southerly or Embassy Avenue frontage.
4. That the proposed use would be incompatible with the established single family
residential deveLopment on the southerly boundary of subject property. !
5. That the proposed use would be an encroachment of commercial uses in a primarily `
residential area on the Embassy Avenue frontage. l
6.Ihat seven persons appeared in opposition to subject petition. '
~
.~
~
~
Cl-D '1'
;
i
~
.f. ;
~ ~ 1
NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Pl~nning Commission does heteby deny subject
PeHtlon for Condldonal Use Permit on the basis of the aforcmentloned findings.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is si~ed ~nd epproved by me•thls llth day of February~ 1965.
~ 1
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CTfY P ING CObIMISSION
ATTEST:
~~2~%7~!'~/
SECRETARY ANAHEIIM C1TY PLANNIIVG COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) e~~
CITY OF ANAHEIM ) •
I~ Ant~ Krebs~ Secret~ry of the City Planaina Commissioa of the City oE Anaheim, do hereby certify that the fore-
~oiag resolution wu pas~ed aad adopted ot a meeting of the City Planning Commission oEthe City of An~heim, held on
February 1, 1965~ , ~t 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the followiaQ vote of ttie membeis thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allrad, Camp, Gauer, DEungall, Perry, Rowland.
NOES: COA~IISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: CObIbtISSIONERS: None.
tDi WTfNESS WHEREOF. I h~ve herennto set mp h~nd thi~ llth day of February, 1965.
/ Ai~lti(~ ~~~Y1
,~~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CObIMISSION
RESOLUTION N0. 1511
C2-D '~