PC 67-284RESOLUTION NO
PC67-284
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 193 ~ BE DENIED
Y .-_ a~i.~
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the C:ty of Anaheim did receive a verified Petition for Varience irom
FRA;dK HOR~Y9 353 South La Brea Street, Los Ang2lesy Ca:ifornia 9Q036y Owner; DR~ riChARD
BATES, % DRo W. Co BRYAUI, 1408 South Euciid Street, Anaheim9 Caiifo~nia 928029 A~ent o;
certzin re~l property situat?d in the Cit~ o: Ar.aheims County or" Orar.ges State oi Cali:orni
described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto ano refe::ed t.o herein as thouoh set forth ;n `ul'.
; and
WHEREAS, the City Pianning Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Hall in the City of Anaheim on
December 18, 19679 at 2:00 o'clock F.hi., ~iotice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by
lew and in accordance u~th the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.68, to hear and consider evidence for
and against said proposed variance and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith;
and
1VHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspect:on, investigetion, and study made by itself and in its behelf,
and after due consideration of a11 evidence and reports otfered at said hearing, does find and det~rmine the following
facts:
1. That the petitioner requests a variance from the Aneheim Municipal Code, as : o? lo•,~.s, ~o permi`. tit~
establishment o: a iA-story, 125-:oot ~~ion senior cit.izens' apartment de~,~~iopment~
SECiI0i~1 18.28,050(3-a) - Minimum fioor area of dwellina units. ('00 s~uar~ Qpe~ ~e-
quired for one and two-room d~vellinos and R25 souare : eet
required for two-bedroom units, 407 square :eet, 502 square
.`@B~ d~: ~~~~'~ 5^yi,3l .: t_ r .~:ODOSr.. (0' t~:. ::< 1.: n:
or..-k,~,:oo~~. uni?s, =n:; ~~_< _ .. ... .. ~, .iits n~
.~.._oon: ur,_,~!. soua: _ . . cronos:~~.o: _..__ t,•roc
SECTIOV 1bo28.030(5-a) - Buiidina and structural heioht limitations,. (T,~~o sto:ies
permitted; :4 stories oroposed .
SECTIOhi i8,28o050(i0-a1- O;f-street ca.b;inc reauirement~~ (i91 covered saaces, at 1~
spaces per dweliina ur.it, reeuired; 70 uncovered =oaces pro-
posed).
SECTI0~9 i8,28~050(11) - Required wai:so (o-foot r.;asonry wali required lahere R-3 zoned
property abuts tne R-A zoned eropert;; to the east; no t^:ail
proposed)~
SECTION i8~32o050(2) - Buildino site area oer dweliina unit. (1^_00 square .`eet r~-
quired; 293 souare feet proposed .
2a That the petitioner has not demonstrated that there are exc=ptional or extraordirarv
circumstances or conditions apolicab~e to the p:operty invo:ved oi to tne intended use o`
the property that do no: .3poly gene:a;ly to the proozrty or ciass o: use in the same vicinity
and zoneo
3o That the petitioner has not demonstrated that the variance is necessary ~or the
preservation and enjoyment of a substanti2'i prop_rty rioht possessed by other property ir.
the same vicinity and zone, and der.ied to the property in question.
4. That the granting of s~bjert variance viould set an undesirable precedent for similar
requests on the remaining vacant parceis in the area which couid result in the possible
development of between 300 and 900 apartments on approximately 6.6 acres.
5. That the R-3 Zone requiree singie story construction within 150 feet o: any =inqle
family residential zone; tnerefor2, the fnrmula .or c~istance rrom R-0 ur R-1 would reauir=
a distance of i000 feet frorn such high rise uses.
V 1-D,
-1-
~
.-
,;
; _
.. ._
•
,
---- -- ~
,
--- ~., ... . - . . .., _ , ~
; , , ~
- -
' ' ~~ ~
--_~, _ ~_~~:-: ;- _,.,:, :.. .: ::_. .. , ::-: ;; ...~~;a 'c_ _ ,. :=e~..
_ "
...~.. :~
~
.
--. .,.._ .._
_
,_ ...__.: C=.1~ ---"`- --• ~JO.i
~ , ,;`' :~ - = G~O_•G
._ „
- _:. ...'.c --=Cc 'v_' ~:iC vC~'^.~~ c^.CC=C.c:'P 0~ v_•~:'i_.., i.:.i~.°.~J,
-- ~~
~ _,.. .._ ..._---"-••- . Gc3C:"_JCG ...~ IO__G::~:
F I I
~ ~ __ __:.:.
- _: _ _ , ..._.. _..:.~:: ~c~ "...J° G_' ,. :i: __ ;"~~:':1~ __ :c 0= T - .._.,
~ , -0 " ''
~
, . _ ~ . .
_ - -
.._..,. _ G . . ~~~ _ .. G ~ _ '_C. ,.,0 ~ . c;::GJI•L1'
~
,
I ~ ~ :~
_ v .Jj' ~i
.."_.u ... l.~'~~ ....`.4 ~J ~,' ,..~-
y)
- ~ .. ~ ~ . ) v".. ..v~ .. ..~~ V~ ~~.VV ~ ..~ V l. _
~
~
i
: .__ ~
_'
'
. ._._ -- ~~ - ~
~~ :'. ..
.
'
-
.
.. ...... ._
~
-~.r ~- ..::~ - .. ~uC
I '~~' JJ~.'. O.. C _
~
~
~ - . V
.~ - V
.,. -~ _
., _. „ _......
..
'~` ^ i C~l' .~.c.~'. .
~ ~ _ _.. .._~ '_ ~_ ~ _ _...._ C= ...._l: G::.`~~i: ~ ~ v VV
J
j - .._ ._~... ~ . v_ .. V
_ 7 _ ~I ...v _ __`_«~:_ .. . ~::c: uv~__~~ __ :t.
J
V
. - _. ~ „ ~ . ,__~ tio~~::~,__.-.~~_-
J __::e -_ -._- _~.:
::~c~_~_~c;: ;n -:_~
,
i __..__ , „..: _,_._ ,^.- vGi...:~~ _'~.00., VG:".v_~V'
_Svi^:.~,., "^~~0="'u~C: ~:_Jv~:^':Uc_'
0
,
i ~ i . _~ ~`
...~ ~J4.,,G' "~ G~
~.'. .`:~.~ `I.VO~~Q~ 0: .,~~i. COu: i.y';
, .,_._.:_._ ..,,_ .,.._,~,,,; _ _~ a=o .~ sa_c ~c.~c:_~:c_s~e-- ;;; ~ _r.e ,;o a ~o~;:~„ o::
~
~ V ~' __':,; ^v_'
c: _Q cOT' GG „00 ~i~J - ~
O~
..c::Q ~ Gi.; 'i.:i :'.'?C
` =
v
V
`
1
(
j
-"'-
. ,.:
---. _
:
'
-~i
~'G
,~::i. 210"!;; S`1~. .-`,'Ci~'~
il'::e
'~1.2~ ie~~ LO _~
~.
_
-
-
~,.
~ _-. .._-~
---~_------ •~.--.,.__
--
~ i „ ~ , ~ :i: i~ ^ Co~- ~~~L'r ' ~= = ..'~f':C:: ~ 3::C~ :.S S :O:i:': 01; 2 .'.:~.'_J
V
- ~- -• ~ • -oc ; :, , ;~ _ o=
~~_•eel ,~:aps, in ;.ne o~~ ic~ ci ~:~e
- ~~-._: _ .:~c~_acr c_° s~._u Gra :~c Cou .~y.
R ~
~',I ~
i
f
~ ~
i,
,,r
`t
~ ~
r
~:.o,,._..M.....,r,,,>:: ~ .
,_, .
..,
- , ~ C~t. / ~ ~~ ~
,.w:.,_.-~...
. . ...,:.a. -..~..:.,~.:L~~:: ~.~. . . _._:.,.t~... ., .. _ . .
.
_ .. ..... ..:._ , ~-...,._ - _., -.:.. .. .._.
-
i ,
~ ~
~
~ _. _ . _
. .*1{f.' ` .~4 tYP~ ' ..
I~- ~
6. That present park and recreation facilities in this area would be inadequate with
residential densities projected :°or 30 units per acre, and sir.c? the area does not .",ave
sufficient land available to provide additionai facilities for ihe vast ir.crease in poou).ation
vahicn could be expected with the development of between 30G and ~00 additional units, the
impact on the existing recreationai facili±ies would be monumentalo
7. That previous zoning action uy the City Council wher~ one story R-3 was proposed
adjacent to R-0 zoned property demonstrates that heavier ~:ensities are not compatible wlth
the sinyle family residential envi:onment alrzaciy esiabtished in ±hi; yene:°ai arez~
8, That 3 persons appeared represer.ting i~ nersons present in the ~~ouncii chamber ali
in oppos;tiony and that a petition submitted by the pe±it~oner signe7 by 2U persons., and a
letter were received in favor of subje~t petition~
ei ' ~
I
I ~
- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby deny subject
Petition for Variance on the basis of the aforementioned findings.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this %'9t~' ~~y of De- ember, i96%.
i~ /' cl.c~ ~:.. /~~
~ CHAIRMAN ANAHEIAI CI'fY PLANNING CGi.1~SSION
ATTEST:
1~
~
~~~c.,~ `_~; %;
SECRETARY ANAHEI~9 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALTFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Ann fCs e'. ;,- Secretary of the City planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify thet the fore-
guinq resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting oE the City Plenning Commission ofthe City of Anaheim, held on
_ December 18, i967, at 2:00 o'clock p,M,~ by the foilowing vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: F3rano, Gau2r, Herbst, Munga~:i, Rowland~ Camp.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None,
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: A;;re~>
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this Z8~h day or DecembPrs i9b7.
RESOLUTION NO. 264
V2-D
~~t, - ~j , ~;~.
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-2-
~