PC 1962-1963-460,j
iw~
~. ~-
~ .~
RESOLUTI~N NO. 4fi0~ SERIES I962••63
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMM1519 N OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. BE GRANTED
NHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the Clty of Aneheim did receive e veriHed Fetition for Varience
{~ I._~-WIS E:OOOPFR~ 7.35 Nor.th .Vine Street, Anaheim, California, Owner of certain real property
situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as followss Lot No. 6
in Tract No, 1618, and further described as 735 North Vine Street, Anaheim,~California
; end
WHEREAS, the City Plenning Commission did hold a publlc headng at the City Hell in the City of Aneheim
on August 20~ 1962, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of said publie hearing heving been duly given as cequiced
by lew end in accocdance with the pmvisione of the Anaheim Municipel Code, Chapter 18.68, to hear and cansider
evidence for end against seid ptoposed va:iance and to investigete and meke findings and cecommendations in connec-
tion tharewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, efter due in4pection, investigetlon, aad atudy made by itself and in its behalE,
and after due conside:ation of ell evidence aad reports offe~d es seid heacing does find 3nd detecmine the following
facta:
1. Thet tte petitioner requests a varience from the Meheim Municipal Code: SeCtion 18 0 240 030 (3) to
construct an addition to an existing single family residencee
2. Thet there ere eaceptional oc extreo:dinery citcumstences oc conditione appliceble to the propecty involved
or to the intended uae of the property that do not epply generelly to the pmperty or claes of use in the seme vicinity
and zone.
3. That the requested variance is necessury fo~ the peeservation nnd enJoymzat of a aubetenUel property right
possessed by other propecty in the seme viciniry end zene, and denied to the ptoperty in question.
4. fhet the request~d vadence wiil not be matedelly detrimeatal to the public welfate or injurious to the pmp-
erty or impmvemen3s in such vicinity end zone in which the pmperty ie Ioceted.
~ 5. That the cequested vedence will nrc edversely aKect the ~ompcoheaeive General Plae.
C,, That no one appeared in opposition to subject petitio~a
Vi-G "1'
~ ~- ' . ~ ' ~il _ ..~ ..___ ~1
I
I
I
3
~~. ::,~......,,,, -...~_,~_
• ~ ~
,. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thet the Anaheim City Planning'~~Ommission does heceby grant subject
Petltion for Varience, upon the following conditions whlch are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to Lhe pro-
posed use o£ the subject ptoperty in order to preserve the sefEty and genecal welface of the Citizens of the City of
Anaheim.
1. Development substantially in accordance with Exhibit No, 1.
TAE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and spptoved by me this 20th day of August~ 1902.
j
~p //~.~~.~., a_ ~~t~.._e~
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
~~
~
ATTEST:
f
~a~~~~ ~
~ ~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION t
STA i E OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM ) _
;
I~ Ann Kxebs~ Se~etery of the Ciry Plenning Commission of the City of Anaheim, dn heceby cedify that the foce- ',
going reaolution wes pessed and adopted at a meeting of the City Planning Commission of the City of Aneheim, held on
August 20~ 1962~ at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the members theceof:
AYES: COMMISSYONERS: Camp, Chavos, Gauer,,Marcoux, Mungall, Pebley, Perry.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ~
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Hapgood.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have he:eunto set my hand thzs 20th day of August~ 1962.
RESOLUTION 1V0. 460
V2-G
~Z~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY P?.ANNTLVG COMMISSION
~
_ . ---- -------~ ----- -
%