HomeMy WebLinkAbout0018
..
.
.
.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 18.
A RESOLUTIOIv OF THE CITY PLANNING COMI.!ISSION
OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, DECLARIllG ITS INTEN-
TION TO RECLASSIFY CERTAIN PROPERTIES ON FOR-
EST AVENUE, FROM ZONE R-l TO ZONE PR-2.
THE CITY PLANNnlG COMMISSION OF Tlffi CITY OF ARCADIA
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the public interest and convenience
require, and it is the intention of the Planning Commission
of the City of Arcadia to amend, reclassify and alter the
boundaries of a certain zone established by the provisions
of Ordinance No. 760 of the City of Arcadia, adopted May 3,
1949, so as to reclassify and change those certain properties,
to wit:
The east 45 feet of Lot 72, and all of the vacated
alley adjacent thereto on the east, in Tract No. 7820,
as per map recorded in Book 83, Page 30 of Maps, re-
cords of the office of the County Recorder of Los
Angeles County,
from Zone R-l to Zone PR-2, as provided in said Ordinance.
SECTION 2. Notice is hereby given that on the 2nd
day of February, 1950, at 8 o'clock P.M. of said day, in
the Council Chamber, in the City Hall of the City of Arcadia,
any and all persons having any objections to said reclassifi-
cation and rezoning may appear before said City Planning Com-
mission and wmow cause why said rezoning should not be effected
in accordance with this Resolution and vdth the provisions
of said Ordinance No. 760.
SECTION 3. The Secretary of the Planning Commission
shall post, or cause to be posted, in front of the property
under consideration, not leas than ten days prior to the date
of hearing, to wit, February 2, 1950, notices consisting of
the words, "NOTICE OF PROPOSED CHANGE OF ZONE BOUNDARI~S OR
CLASSIFICATION", printed in plain type with letters not less
than one inch (I") in heighth, and a statement in six or
1.
18
~
.
, .
.
.
.
.
.
of the Commission public necessity and convenience and general
welfare do not require or indicate the desirability of the re-
zoning requested by the petitioners.
The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution, and shall forward a copy to the City Council of
the City of Arcadia.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was
adopted by the City Planning Commission at a regular meeting
held on the fifth day of January, 1950, by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Anderson, Knutson, Robertson, Smith and Stoner.
NOES: None.
ABSE}IT: l~. Davis.
~t1~.
Chairma~ Planning Commission.
ATTliST:
f~.~
(/
Secretary.
.
.
.
.
.
.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Commission
recommends to the City Council of the City of Arcadia that
the aforesaid petition be disapproved and denied for the fol-
lowing reasons:
1. The request of petitioners is contrary to the
spirit and intent of the Master Zoning Plan of the City of
Arcadia tlhich was adopted and became effective on June 3, 1949,
after a series of public hearings and which plan was unanimously
approved by the Planning Commission of the City Council; that
at the time of said public hearing~, due consideration was given
by this Commission to the extension of multiple dwelling zoning
in an Easterly direction upon and along Huntington Place from
!'lolly Avenue;
2. It is the opinion of the Commission that there have
been no changes in circumstances relating to the petitioners'
property, since this same matter was reviewed during the public
hearings prior to the adoption of the Master Zoning Plan, which
warrant or justify the re-zoning of subject property at this
time;
.
3. This proposed re-zoning would be in direct conflict
with the restrictions in the deeds to this and surrounding pro-
perties and would be contrary to the expressed wishes of practical-
ly all of the property owners in the general vicinity of peti-
tioners' property, such property owners being desirous of main-
taining the present single-family zoning of the area involved.
4. Under the terms of Ordinance No. 760, covering
the planning procedure of the City of Arcadia, land use should
be re-zoned by the Planning Commission and the City Council
only in the event that such re-zoning is required by "public
necessity and convenience and general welfare". In the opinion
2.