PC 73-130,~. - ..
~ ~
RESOLUTION N0. PC73-130
A RESOLUTTON OF TFiE CITY PLANNING COMMISStON OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 2502 BE GRANTED
11'HEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City oE Anaheim did receivP A vecified Petition for Verience
fcom GARY L. WILES, 414 Leonora Street, Anaheim, California 92805, Owner of cer.tain real
property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of Californ3rt, described
as L~t No. 22 of Tract 1097, as per Map recorded in Book 35, Pages 26 tc 27 inclusive, of
Misc. Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said Orange County
; and
WHGREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Hall in tlie City of f~nnheim
o~ June 11, 1973, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of said public heating having 6een duly given as requiced
by ]aw and in accordance with the provisions af the Anaheim Municipol Code, Chepter 18.68,to hear end consider
evidenc^ for and against said proposed variance and to investigate and make findings and recommendetions in connec-
tion therewith; and
1YHEREAS, said Commissi~~n, after due inspection, investigation, and study mede by itself end in its behalf,
and after due consideration of all evidence and reports ofEered at seid hearing, does find end detecmine the following
facts: ~
1. That the petitioner reauests variances from the Anaheim Municipal Code as follows in order
to construct a to+^-s'^ry addition L•o the existing single family home:
a. SECTZl1A` 18.20.030(3)(a) - riinimum rear vard setback. (25 feet required;
16 feet proposed)
b. SECTION 18.20.03Q(2)(a) - Minimum side vard setback. (7.5 feet required;
4 feet proposed)
2. That there are exceptional or extrnordinary ciccumstances or conditions epplicable to the property involved
or to the intended use of the pro~perty thaL do not Apply generally to the propecty or cless of use in the same vicinity
ond zone.
3. That the requested variance is necessery Eor the pceservation end enjoyment of a substantial property right
possessed by oiher property in the seme vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in question.
4. That the cequested variance will not be meterially detrimentel to the public welfare or injurious to the pmp-
erty or impcovements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is loceted.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FINDING:
That the Planning Co~nission, in connection with an Exemption Declaration Status requesL•, finds
and determines that the proposal would have no significant environmenCal impact and, therefore,
recommends to the City Council that no Environmental Impact Statement is neces«ary.
V1-G '1-
~
ri:i~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT R~LVED thet the Aneheim City Plenning C~ ission does lieceby grant subject
Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which are he:eby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the pro-
posed u~e of the subject property ia o:dec to pmsecve the sefety nnd genesal welface of the Citizens of the City of
Anaheim:
(1) That sub~ect property shall be developed substantially in accordanee with plans
and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and epproved by me this 2Aat dey og'7u~~, 1973.
\ 1
7
ANAHEIM CITY
ATTEST:
1 ~,~I~~v~/10~
SECRETARY A2VAHEI CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) sg•
C:CY OF ANAHEIM ) ~
I, Ann KreUs, Secretary of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do heceby certify that
the focegoing resolution was pessec~ and adopted et a meeting of the City Planning Commission oEthe City of Anaheim,
held on June 11, 1973, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the Rembers thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ALLRED, GAUEk, HERBST, KAYWOOD, ROWLAND, SEYMOUR.
NOES: COMMiSSIQNERS: NODTE.
ABSENT: COHIMISSIONERS: FARANO.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have heceunto set my l~end this 2ist dey of June, 1973.
~/Yl _ ~Yi!.Ci~/
SECRGTARY ANAHEIM CITY PLAA?NING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. PC73-130
V2-G ~2'