88-415RESOLUTION NO. 88R-415
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAItEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 3078.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of
Anaheim did receive an application for a conditional use permit
from JAMES ALLEN CANNADAY and BETTY BETE CANNADAY, 512 Las
Riendas Drive, Fullerton, CA 92635, owners, to permit a second
residential dwelling ("granny unit") on certain real property
situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of
California, described as:
THE SOUTHERLY 70 FEEl' OF THE NORTHERLY 120 FEEl' OF THE
EASTERLY 156.50 FEET OF THAT PORTION OF VINEYARD LOT
H5, AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK 4, AT
PAGES 629 AND 650 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF THE SOUTHERLY
BOUNDARY, AND THE EASTERLY EXTENSION THEREOF, OF TRACT
NO. 400, AS SHOWN ON A MAP T[iEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK
16, AT PAGE 7 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID
ORANGE COUNTY; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public
hearing upon said application at the City Hail in the City of
Anaheim, notices of which public hearing were duly given as
required by law and the provisions of Title 18, Chapter 18.05 of
the Anaheim Municipal Code; and
WttEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection,
investigation and studies made by itself and in its behalf and
after due consideration of ali evidence and reports offered at
said hearing, did adopt its Resolution No. PC88-297 denying
Conditional Use Permit No. 5078; and
WHEREAS, thereafter, within the time prescribed by law,
an interested party or the City Council, on its own motion,
caused the review of said Planning Commission action at a duly
noticed public hearing; and
WHEREAS, at the time and place fixed for said public
hearing, the City Council did hold and conduct such public hear-
ing and did give all persons interested therein an opportunit7 to
be heard and did receive evidence and reports, and did consider
the same; and
WHEREAS, the City Council does find, after careful
consideration of the action of the City Planning Commission and
all evidence and reports offered at said public hearing before
the City Council, that all of the conditions and criteria set
forth in Section 18.03.030.030 of the Anaheim Municipal Code are
not present for the following reasons:
1. That the proposed use will adversely affect the
adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in
which it is proposed to be located since such use would be used
as a commercial rental unit on property already developed with a
single-family residential unit which would result in two
separate, unrelated, single-family residences upon one parcel and
would not be consistent with existing single-family zoning; and
2. That the size and shape of the site proposed for the
use is not adequate to allow the full development of the proposed
use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the
peace, health, safety, and general welfare since such use would
be used as a commercial rental unit on property already developed
with a single-family residential unit which would result irt two
separate, unrelated, single-family residences upon one parcel and
would not be consistent with existing single-family zoning; and
3. That the granting of the conditional use permit would
be detrimental to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare
of the citizens of the City of Anaheim since such use would be
used as a commercial rental unit on property already developed
uith a single-family residential unit which would result in two
separate, unrelated, single-family residences upon one parcel and
would not be consistent with existing single-family zoning.
NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Anaheim that, for tile reasons hereinabove specified,
the request of said applicant to permit a second residential unit
("granny unit") on tile hereinabove described real property be,
and the same is hereby, denied.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the time within which
rehearings must be sought is governed by tile provisions of
Section 1.12.100 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and the time
within which judicial review of final decisions must be sought is
governed by the provisions of Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil
Procedure and Anaheim City Council Resolution No. 79R-S24.
TIlE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is approved and adopted by the
City Council of the City of Anaheim this 29th day of November,
1988.
(MAY~OR OF TIZI~--~TY OF .~'kl~AHEIM
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
3LW:db
2833L
I13088
CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, LEONORA N. SOHL, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 88R-415 was introduced and adopted at a regular
meeting provided by law, of the City Council of the City of Anaheim held on
the 29th day of November, 1988, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly,
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
Ehrle, Kaywood, Pickler and Hunter
AND I FURTHER CERTIFY that the Mayor of the City of Anaheim signed said
Resolution No. 88R-415 on the 5th day of December, 1988.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal
of the City of Anaheim this 5th day of December, 1988.
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
(SEAL)
I, LEONORA N. SOHL, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that
the foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 88R-415 duly passed and
adopted by the Anaheim City Council on November 29, 1988.
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM