PC 1963-1964-1169:,~ ~~=
,
~ ~ ~ '~ ~ ~r,. ~ i , I
,.4 } ':Y
•"
~
i~!
~
~ t
RESOLUTION N0. 11 SERIES 19 3- 4
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 1637 BE DENIED
WHEREAS, the City Plenning Commisr,ion of the City of Aneheim did receive a ve:ified Petition for Ve:ience from
M. No LILES, 500 South Citron~ Anaheim, California, Owner; M. E. KOFFORD, JRo, Frank Curran
Lumber Company, Incorporated, 1003 East'Fourth Street, Santa Ana, Cal~ifornia, Agent of
certain real property situa±ed in the City of Anaheim, County of ~range, State of California,
described as Lot No. 1 of Tract No. 217
; and
WHEREAS, the City Plenning Commission did hold e public headng et the City Hall in the City of Aneheim on
May 25~ 1964~ et 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of said public hearing having been duly glven us required by
law and in acrnrdence wlth the provisions of the Aneheim Municipel Code, Chepter 18.68, to hear and consider evidence for
and agair.st said proposed varience and to investigate end make finding's end cecommendetions in connectlon therewith;
and
WHEREAS, seid Commission, efter due inspection, investigation, and study made by itself and in its behelf,
and after due consideration of ell evidence and reports otfered es seid hearing, does find and detennine the following
fects:
1. Thet the petitioner requests a variance fcom the Anaheim Municipel Code: Section 1~a04o050~ to permit
the.expansion of a non-conforming grocery store on subject propertyo
2< That the proposed expansion would be incompatible with and detrimental to the
existing single family •residential environment in which subject property is located„
3. That ther.e are no.exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the property ?nvolv2d or to the intended use of the property that do not
apply generall~~ to the property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone.
4o That the requested variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment ,~-~•i
of a substantiai property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and ~'
zone, and denied to the property in questiona
5o That the requested variance v~il'1 be materially detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which this
property is locatedo
6a That adequate parking was not being provided for the existing use as well as the
proposed expansiono ~
7a That one person appeared representing six persons present in the Council Chamber,
and 15 persons residing in ciose proximity to subject property wl~o signed a petition in
opposition to subject petition~
y. ~
, ~, _
4 ` ~ s :~ ~ ~~ f
i - _ ;I
. - ~ , !~ t _~
- :. -
.~
r_
~
`; i
`~ ~
:
Y.
.~_~ ~
~i%~t
~i.11
~
1.'. I
;.' ~
., ,I
~!~
~~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thet the Anaheim City Plenning Commission does hereby deny subject
Petition far Varience on the basis of the afocementioned findings.
', ~
(
' THE FOREGOING RESOLUTIOAT is signed and eppcoved by me this 4th day of June, 19640 ~
~
;
; •
:~ , ' ,
~ CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY P N ING COMMISSION
i
'i ATTEST: •
:i
~ ,
~ /
!) SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
',i STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
~ COUNTY OF ORANGF ) ss.
_.i CITY OF ANAHEIM )
+ I~ Ann Krebs f, Secretary of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Aneheim, do hereby certify thet the fore-
i going resolution was pessed end edopted at a meeting of the City Planning Commission ofthe City of Aneheim, held on
~ May 25~ 1964~ at 2:00 o'clock p.M., by the following vote of the members thereof:
i
~
;;; AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Allredy Camp, Chavos, Gauery Mungall, Perry9 Rowlando
;~~ NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Noneo
j ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Pebleyo
:~
;~ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 4th day of June~ 19640
~
y . !
'' 1 ~.~1/v(/W `JZ~lif/'~/
`. ~ SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
'?
~J RESOLUTION NO. 1169
,~ 1 •
V2-D -2-
-!.+.~ ,
4.
_ .~._¢.:.,