PC 1965-1966-2027E2f:S01.UT10N N0,
WFIF,REAS, said Commission, aEter due inspection, investigation, and study mnde bv itself and in its behelf,
nnd nfter due considerntion of ell evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the foUowing
Eects:
A RESO[,U'['1~N OI~ THF CITY F~LANNING COMMISSION Or THE CI1'Y 0~ ANAI1!?Ih1
R~CnMMENDING TO THC CITY COUNC(L UF Tl1F. CiTY Oh ANA}IEIM 7'fi~'t
PFTITION FOr2 12I:CLASS[FICATION N0, 65_65-1 l5_ flF: OF.NiF,~
d~'x ;,
~ ~
I
,:i
t:
i
1. Th~t the petitioner proposes a reclassification of the r+bove described property from the R- i~ ONE Ftih^ILY
RESIDEN'1'IAL., ZOP~Ey t~~ the C-1. GEPIERAL Q~P.1h;ERCIAL~ ZO~dE~
~~ Zf1F3L t(1f? proposerJ tC'C1~3SSlf 1Cc7t10f1~ 1}~ zl~~~,~TOV~~C,jy ::q(15t i~:Ul_E'S 5U~'.fl =i 'f11f10Z' r1eVi~3-
tiony thak no irr~rnedia?~ amendrnent to tf;e Gener-}1 Pl::n is neces;a:-y; ho~,vever, ii:s
relationsfiip to tlle exi~r_in~ General Pl~n syr~bol wiil L~e conside.reJ at f.he next
annual ~revie~v.
3. That ttie t;asic development of prnperties in C105(? ~~roxirr,ity is re~idential in
charactei, and the F,roposed co~nmerci~~l use ~vould ke an inCrusi~n intn t,~,E~ residential
in+_eqrit.y in t'tir a; e~ ~t is ;~roposed t_~ ht~ 1~~~~„ed~
4. Th~;,~ the commercial use .is r;roposc~d at the ter~r~inus of ~ t'~~rE~~-~~lcc~ st1-eet, which
learls into r3 resident.ial s~ibdivisionY ,:nd to ~~p~;rovc s~,l~j~,,t ~v~~,ild er.couraqe t;~c
est.~bii~hment of a patte.n for ,in:ilar zequest.s ;'or ~o~~;r.;~ICi:~] zonin~ of the adioininn
pro,r.erties,.
~• That t}~e I~ome on t.'u~ scuthern ~:arcel does not ;r~nL onto K~3tellc: Avenue, but. sides
Otl~ Wfl1C}l WOULC) 7~ lOW COtiS ~TUCt.iqfl O; a,.;asonry W811 E3U jf1C~?tl} t.7 ~:};~~ C17ilt:-Oi -lV_I`' 1 inEq
th~ret~~, ;~e~rmit+~ing ;n~~intenance of a sai:iscac±ory resi~lential environr~,~nt.
F>. T~lc~'. S 1 X persons ~pDP.c, er~ l tl O~?I~OS l t lpfl y Of1P p( ln:",~n; t;rE'Sttlt t'C1 a E`E't ~ f 1Ofl S.c~f1E'C3
by ~,. property ownersY a letter was received in c~E~c:• ;ition; _~nd one E-,ersr~n ~~ppe.3rcd
in favor o~' subject petition~
I
y:
,;
:- .;
*
~
~ '' ~
~
,,;~ ~l
_. ,
WI~F.REAS, tha City Planning Commisgion uF the City of Anohcim did receive o verified Petition for R~cinggiticn-
U~n from CASSA'CT GCAL, 1'l71 South D~a11as Drive, and JACK c;., DELL, 1'!75 SouLh ~~llas I~rive,
Anaheim, California, C)wners of certa.in real propc~:rCy situated in the C;ity of Anaheim,
County of Oc~,ange, State of California, described as L,ot Na~~ 1 and 2 of 'Cract~ No~ ?689
; end
WHER~:AS, the City Plnnning Commisslon did hold e publlc he4ring nt the City Hall in the City of ~nAheim on
May 9, 1966, at 2;00 o'clock P,M., notice o[ said public hearinq heving been duly given es required
by law nnd ln accordance with the provisions of the Aneheim Municipel Code, Chepter 18,72, to hear nnd consider evi•
dence for and ngalnst ssid proposed reclessificntion end to investigate c~nd make findings and recommendc~tions in
connection therewith: and
R 1-D
•,. ~,
2027, S~.R'[tS 196;i-b6
-1-
r
~ •
,,..~ ,
I
f. •
` i~:
\ !
n ,~
I ~,;
~ ;iY
!f
;
i.
i
~
•i
~ I
~ I
i
~
i
: ~
~~ ~
,_;
~
I
:~
i I
1
E
T" 'j
~4~ t
!'
;;'
-~,u:.
NOW, THEREF'ORE, BE IT RESOLVED thet the Aneheim City Plpnning Commission does hereby cecommend
to the City Council oE the City of AnOhelm that subject Petition for ReclAasiBcetlon be denied on the beais of the
aEorementioned findings.
THE FOREGOMG RESOLUTION ~s aigned and epproved by me this 19th day of May, 1966.
~
~,;.v~~ i
C AIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING C MMISStO
ATTEST:
~ -', ~ i- ' 7`~'~~ c _ f~ ~~ ~ ;
SECRETARY ANAHEIM C1TY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
C1TY OF ANAHEIM )
1~;;At~M•~(re~,, Secretery af the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do here~y certify :that the fore-
going resolution was passed and edopted at a meeting oE the Clty Planning Commission of the City of Anal~eim, held on
May 9, 1966, et 2:00 ~'clock P.M., by the E~~ lowing vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ALLRED, GAUER, HERBST, h1UP~ALL, PERRY, RO'1JLAND, CAMP.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set ny hend this 19th day of May, 1966.
~ -Z-L`L- '
- , , ~ . : ~ ~ ~ .~~ _ ;
SECR~.TARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
RE:SOLUTION NO
R2-D
2 02 7
-2-
_~~.
~
~