PC 71-45~ . ~ - _.. ..
~
~;,
~~ j'~
RESOLUTION N0, z'C71-45
A~2ESOLUTION AF THE CYTY PLANNYN3 COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF ~'hE CIiY OF ANAHEIM THAT
PETITION ^~R RF.CLASSIFICATION N0, ~0',,... ~~_ BE DISAPPRQVEG
WHER~AS, the City Plenning Commiasion of thp City of .lnehelm did receive a verifled Petltlou for Re-
clessifica;ton from ALBGRT S. TOUSSAU, 3851 "yst Howe 5treet, Piru, ~alifornia 93040, pwner;
PONDEROSA HOMCS, 4570 C~mpus Drive, Suite ..,, Newp~•_~ 3each, California 92660, Agent of
certain real pr~,per~y situated in the City o~ ~naheim, Coun~y af Orar,ge, State ~f California,
deacribed sa that portion of the Southwebt quarter of the Saur.heast quarter of Sectton 13,
Township 4 South, Range 1Q West in the Ra•~^cho San Juan Cajon de Sar,h.a Ana ahown a3 I~arcel "A"
and the Eost 2d feet of Sunkiat Sl•reet adjuining said Parcel "!~," on the M~p filed in Aook 22,
page 2U oF PArcel Mape in the ofEice of the County Rec,~rder of. Orange County.
; en~
WHEREAS, thP C:ity Planning Commission did hold a p~blic hearing at the City Hall in the City of Anaheim
on March 22, 197i, at 2:00 o'clock P.M, notice of said pub(ic hearing having been duly given as required by
law and in accordence with the provisions of the Maheim Muc~icipel Code, Chapter 18.72, to hear ond consider
evidence for and against said praposed reclassificatlon and to investigate and make findings and recommendations
in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigetion, and study made by itself end in its be-
half, and aEter due consideration of ell evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the
following fects:
1. 1'het th ~titioner proposes e reclessifi~ation oE the above described property from the R-A,
Agricult«ral, 'Lone to the R•-3, Multiple-Family Residential, 2one.
2. That the proposed reclassificatlon {s nat in confonnance with the A naheim
General Plan. _,_.~.
3. That no land use changes have occurred on the east side oI Sunkiat Street
to warrant favorable cottstderation of the proposed land use chaTige for subject property.
4. That although the property lo the south is zoned C-1, General Commercial,
Zone and the claim of ~pe pel-itionerthat bufferiag between th~ existing single family
uses and commercial uses has been favorably co~sidered by the Commission in the pa3t,
the petitioner has created his own hardship by requestitig and obtaining the commercial
zonin~ ~nd the fact that there is C-1 property to the soutti does not constitute a
reason to approve R-3 yoning on subject property.
5. That Lhe Commission, at ttie previo~~s public hearing on a multiple family
zonin~ request on subject p:operty, recognizQd possible difficulties with the develop-
ment of subject property, due tu the freeway off-ramp and the commercial zoning to
the south, and recommended as an alternate to an R-1 subdivision th~at a single family
subdivision with 6000 square foot lots would appear to be appropriate under these
circumstances.
6. That the propo~ed reclassification would be incompatible with the existing
single family residential development on properties to t.he north and easl•.
7. That one person appeared representit-g ten persons present in the Council
Ghamber, alI in opposition, that a petition sigr.ed by 102 persons representing 59
single family homes was received in opposition; and that a pet:ttion signed by eight
persons was received indicating no opposition provided certain provisions for
protection of the single famity homes ad,jacent to aubject proper~y were provided.
RD
..~, .
- 1-
~
~.
\
~ t ~
", ~
i ~ ~ ZZ-i'^v'"~.~~.
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
y l ~
STATE OF CALIFOF.NIA )
COU~TTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHGTM )
I, Ann Krebs, Secretnry oE the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify thnt the fore-
going resolution wes passed and adopted at a meeting oE the Gity Planning Commi~5ior, of the City of Anaheim, held on
March 22, 1971, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Gauer, Kaywood, Seymiour.
NOES: COMMISSIOrIERS: Allred, Herbst, R~wland.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
. ~j~ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this lst day of April, 1971 .
~
~
~
"•i
''~i
'`(~'~
"~ A:;. NOW, TFiEREE'ORE, BF IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
;~~ to the Ciry Counctl of the City of Anaheim thet subject l~etition for Reclessificetlon be denied on th~~ bASis of the
'~ aforementioned findings.
~
: THG I'OREGOING RESOLUTION is signad and epproved by me this lst day of April, 1971,
~
`'~" / • ;
: r _~
~ _ - % ,.--G ~ ~~J _~
'~ CH IRMAN ANAHEIM CIT'Y PLANNiNG COMMISSION
'~ ATTEST:
;~
.
~i~ "]~
C.,~L= 72•-J~L.~~ /,, (..~=--~~...
SECF~ETARY ANAIiETM CITY PLAKNING COMMISSION
~ ie! RESOLUTION NG. 45
I.l A
R2-D
.2-
~~
*
.d~t
f
~~srp~ypQL'~.
i
~
heaiJH{if~r~
,~;
ru
.* .
.. / w~n
. ,
. _.. .... ,. t ~'_ .
1+, y - . . ~
.
~ ~ . ~
~
.. ~ ~ . . .• ~ 1
, ~
` M