PC 69-76. ~ I
RESOLUT?ON N0. pC69-76
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETiTION FOR VARIANCE N0. 2070 BE DENIED
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive a verified Petition for Variance from
TAYLOR-DUNN MANUFAGTURING OJMPANY, 2114 VJest Ball Road, Anaheim, California 92804, Owner of
certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
described as Lot Nos. 4 and 5 of Tract No, 162.
'-~=~;~ .
., .I~ _
.,~~ i .
,.1` ~ ' ~~
it
; and
WHEREAS, the City Plenning Commission did hold a puLlic hearing at the City Hall in the City of Anaheim. on
April 7, 1969, at 7:30 o'clock P.M., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by
law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.68, to hear and consider evidence for
and aga9nst said proposed variance and to investigate end make findings and recommendations in connection therewith;
and
~VHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation, and study made by itself and in its behalf,
and after due consideretion of all evidence and reports offered at suid hearing, does find and determine the following
facts:
1. That the petitioner requests a variance from the Anaheim Municipel Code as follows, to permit the
expansion of an existing, non-conforming industrial use:
(a) SECfION 18.52.060(2-a-1) - Structural setback from an arterial street. (50
feet required; 38 feet, 6 inches proposed).
(b) S~CTION 18.52.060(2-a-1-bi - Minimum re4uired front landscapinq. (10 feet reo~~ired;
:i f eet propos ed) ~
2. That the requested waivers [(a) and (b) abov ~ are hereby denied on the bas:s that the
Commission has recommended that the M-1 Zoning be disapproved and C-? Zoning be allovaed together
with the expansion of an existing non-conforming use. Further, ±he requested waivers from
Code would not be required from the site development standards or the C-1, Zone.
3. That under the authority of Section 18.68.060 waivers o: the fcllov~ing Code p:ovisions
are hereby granted to permit the expansion of an existing non-conforming use:
(a) S~CT10N 18.04.050(2-b) - Non-conformino use of a non-cc,nformina buildinp.
(Petitioner proposes to expand an existing non-
conforming use).
~~) SECTION 18,40.0?0(6-a) - Walls. (6-foo+ maconrv wall required where C-1
property abut, R-A Zone; no wall proposed).
4. That the Commission fi~ds that the existing use had been established prior to the
annexation of subject and abutting properties inio the City of Anah~im and that the nature of
this specific existing manufacturing use is such that it has not been incompatible with other
uses in the surrounding area; that since no changes are proposed in the nature of the manufactur-
irg activity, the expansion of this non-conforming use would not be detrimental to the surround-
ing area.
5. That waiver of the requi.red masonry vaall along the ~vest property line is recommended on
the basis that although the adjacent property i=_ presently zoned R-A, the commercial trend alo~g
Ball Road will probably influence the development of that parcel for some use other than
residential.
6. That there are exceotionai or extraordiiiary circumstances or conditions applicable to
ihe property involved or ±o the intended use of the prop?rty that do not apply generally to the
preperty e:- class of use in the same vicini.ty and zone.
t~~ R
t,~ ~
_ '' ' ' _~ -___~__"'~"'°^ _ . _ ..... -„ . . ,._ - . _ .., _..
~
7. That the requested varience is necessary f'or the p~ese°vation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right possessed by other property in tn~ same •~icini.ty aid zone,and
denied to the property in question.
8. That the requested variance wil? not be materially detrimental to the puplic ~Nelfare
or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone, in which the nroperty
is located.
'~ 9. That no one appeared in opposition to the proposed request.
F
~ NOW, THEREFURE, B£ IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
' deny subject Petition for Variance for waivers of the sper,ified sections on the basis o: the
aforementioned findings.
BE IT FURTH£R RE9JLVED that the City Planning Comr~ission does hereby grant a Petition
for Variance for the specified waivers as stated in the afo:ementioned finding „ to permit an
~.', expansion of a non-conforming use in the R-A, Zone, upon the :ollowing conditions which are
~;°~ hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the propose~ use of subject property in order
to preserve the safety and generai. welfara of the Ci~~zens of the City of Anaheim.
1. That this variance is granted subj=ct to the coTpietion of Reclassification No.
~ 68-69-81.
2. That subject property shal? be developed substantially in accordance with plans and
specificaticns on file with the City of ~4naheim, marked Exhibit Nos. i and 2.
THE FUREGOI~~G RE£ULUTION is signed and approved by me this 17th day of April, 1969.
i
:rti~~ !/~ ~y0 P~/l
`CFI I~ RMAN',4NAHEIA7 CITY PLANNItv'G QJNMISSI01'
ATI'EST:
C~s~`~J~,
SECRF_I'ARY ANAHEIM CIS PLANNING Q~MMISSION
STATE OF CALINURNIA )
~UMY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
r- I, Ann Krebs, Secretary of the City Plann`~ng Commission of the City of Anaheim, do
_ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeeting of the
City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on April ?, 1969, at 7:30 o'clock P~M,.,
by the following vote of the members thereof:
'j
' AYES: ~MMISSIONERS: Allred, Camp, Farano, Gauer, Herbst, Rowland, Thom.
;'~ N~ES: OJMMISSIONERS: Dlone.
ABSENT: O~MN,ISSIONFRS: None.
~' IN WITNESS WHERB~F, I nave hereunto s?t my hand this 17th day of April, ~969.
~~~ Lz! ~J~~ G~_
SECRETARY ANAHEIA~~CITY PLANNING ~MMISSTON
Res. No. 76
~~
~