Loading...
PC 74-136~ ' ~. ~ ~ RESOLUTION N0. PC74-136 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING C0:~1MISS10N OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THAT PETITIJN FOR VARIANCE N0. 2612 BE DENIED WNEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anahcim did recei~•e a verified Petition for Variance from THE WILLIAM LYON COMPANY, 366 San Pliguel Drive, Suite 201, Newport Beach, California 92660 (Owner) of certain real property situated in tne City of Anaheim, Lounty of Orange, State of California, as described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and referred to herein as though set forth in full WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Hall in the City of Maheim on .J u 1 y 8 1974, at 2:00 o'clock p.m., noticc of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Mahcim iNunicipal Code, Chapter 18.68, to hear and consider evidencr. for and against said , proposed variance and to investigate and mlke findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after duc inspection, investigation, and study made by itself and in its bchalf, and after due consideration of all evidence ard reports offered at said hearing, docs find and determine the following facts: . 1. Thatthepetitionerrequests the following variances from the Anaheim Municipal Code, to construct a 26-ur.it RS-5000 zoned single-family residential development on Portion A (approximately 5.72 acres) and a 17U-unit multiple-family residential development on Portion B(approximately 17.81 acres), said waivers being applicable to Portion B only: a, SECTIGN 18.28.0 0 5-b) - Maximum permitted hAiqht within 150 feet of an R-A Zone. (One-sto~ permitted; two-storY proposed) b. SECTION 18.28.0~0 ll - RecLuired masonrv wall abutting an R-A Zone. (Six-foot - high masonry wall required; none proposed) 2. That sincetf~e,Planr.ing Commission has recommended disapproval of the reclass- ification of subject property, the proposed development could not be accomplished within the site development standards of the zoning on subject property. 3, That there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to the property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone. 4. That the requested variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other propecty in the same vici~ity and zone, and denied to the property in question. 5. That the requested vaciance ~Nill be materia3ly detrimental to the pubiic welfare or inJuriaus to the property or improveT<:nts in such •vicinity and zone in which thP nronerty is located. 6. That two (2) persons were present at said public hearing in opposition to subject petition. V1-D _~ _ RESO!UTION N0. Pc74-136 p~V-66•E • ~ ~ - ~: , _ ~ T[iACT ~:0. 35.1r~ ~',1~.C~F~~j, C ~~ cc~~~ LECAL DESCRZPTIUN ~ 17.806 ACRGS li, That portion of 2nd class land allotte~ to "1. Yorba, in 2 the Decree af Partition of the Rancha Canon de 9anta Ana, '!' ~ Case No. 1978 0£ the Distract ~,. renc.ered February 3, 1fl74 in 4~' Court of Los Angeles County, California, together with that 5~ portion of th~ land allottPd to Prudencio Yorba according to 6 a map attached to and made a part of the Decree of Partition 7~! of the Rancho Canon de Santa Ana, in the County ot Orange, 8; State o£ California, rendered in said Case yo. 1978 of the 9: 17th Judicial District C~urt of California s certi£ied copy 10~ of which is xecorded in IIook 28, Page 158 of Deeds, in the I 11~ Office of the County Recorder of Los Angeles County, located 12I in the County of Orange, State of California together with 13i that portion of Lot 53, Tract No. 4693 in the C~ty of Anahein, I 1~! County of Orange as recorded in Book 313, Pages 49 and 50, 15~ Miscellaneous t~iaps.8n £ile in the Office of the County 16' Recorder of Orange County~ described as a whole as fallows: 1 c~::.::.::::c-.q ' Beginning at the most easterly L~orth corner. of Tract 1 P1o. 7416 in the City of Anaheim, recorded,~.n Baok 311, Pages 1 37 to 42 inclusive of Miscellaneous,Maps in the Office of 2 the County Recorder of Orange County; said northeasterly 2~ corner being also in the northeasterly bound~ry of said City 22 of Anaheim; thence along saici nartheasterly boundary and 2~ Tract line, North 73°42°35" West 10.62 feet to the beginning 2~ of a tangent curve, concave northeasterly and having a 25 radius of 867.88 feet; thence northwesterly along said 2~ boundary line and curve through a central angYe of 49°23'21" 27 and an arc distance of 746.11 £eet to the end of said curve, d 2 ~ thence tangent ko said curve, along said boundary, North l:~ ,,~,;,=,r, _, /~ 11„ ^•;;\ 2~ 24°19'14" ~4ESt 846.1h f:eet to the nost northerly corne~!^of I PdAY 1974 ~" 3~I said Tract No. 7416; bcing also an angle point in said~ RECEI~'ED ~ ~ ZUNING c,` 31~ ~ nWi3iUN ~~ ~' boundary; th~nce contit;uing alon9 said houndary, North•~`~ ti..~. ~~ 3~~~I 51°2a'17" ~7est 534.22 :Eeet to an angle point therein, }~Elfa~~~}`~:~ ~tit~. '~ ~r:,,~l, l..~ - Vlii~inir'ui- .'.. _ - 1. ~ ~ Z~.also the southeasterly corner of said Lot 53; thence leaving i~ z,4said City boundary, along the southwesterly line of said Lot 3i 53, idorth 51°36'21" Sti'est 30.72 feet; thence leavin~7 said 4 westerly line, l~orth 38°23'39" East 34.08 feet to an angle 5~~oir~t in the southeast~rly l:ine of said Lot 53, being also 6.~a~~ angle point in said City boundary; thence along the ~ 7~southeasterly line of said T.ract No. 9693 and said boundary, giNorth 45°09'44" East 995.79 feet to that course described as g~having a bearing and length of South 53°07'47" ~ast, 384.00 l0,lfeek in Parcel 2 oi deed (5tate Parcel 135) recorded in sook lll 5705, Page 531 of Official R~corcls in said Office; thence •12ileaving said City boundary along the lines of said P3rce1 2, 7,~ South 53°56' 08" East 172.98 feet to.an angle point therein and continuing, South 54°23'S0" East 256.Ol/feet and Soutr 14 15 53°32'25" East 280:01 feet and South 71°1B' 22" East 16.82 16 feet and South 15°36'45" West 23.39 feet and South 37°21'14" 17~West 172.50 feet and South 5°09'O1" East 145.00 feet and 18 South 29°02'O1" East 285.00 feet anci Soutt~ 34°27'31" East 19 314.20 feet and South 56°14'S1" East 305.00 feet and South 20 74°09'll" East 100.00 feet and South 0°09'll" East 58.02 2], feet to the South line of said M. Yorba al].c+tment, being 22 also the North line of said P. Yorba'allots~ent; thence South 23 2p' 26'29" West 520.84 feet to the point of beginning. 24~ ~XCEPT THER~FROt4, any portion lying northwesterly of 25j the following described line: e6 27 28 29 30 31 32 Beginning at a poi.nt in that certain r.ourse described above as having a bearing and length of South 54°23'S0" East ~ 256.01 feet, distant southeasterly thereon 143. 19 feet fror'i'{~ !~'~;^, I^\ ~ ~'.,..• , the northwesterly terminus thereof; thence leaving said~ Mqy~9~4 ~~ ~~~ RECEIV;:n ; bour,dary of Parccl 2 South 45°09'9h" Saest 224.00 feett;end zur~~r,.^, ;; UIYIS!:1;7 y~ South 37°55'S8" East 29.00 fcet and ~outh 51°'l8'17" ~asti• .`~`~,~~% 253.00 feet and South 45°09'44" ~aest 115.00 feet and westerly~ r:~~ .~~lM . _ , ~AiZ1i;l.vL li~• ` ~ ~ • w f 1 ~ ~~ ~ ;~j~:lvng a curve having a radius of 20.00 feet through an arc ~ 2~.?en.gth of 34.00 feet and South 53°23'45" West 20.00 feet and 3~North 56°28'17" West 20.00 feet and South 38°31'43" IJest ~. 4~~1G0.00 feet to the northwesterly terminus of that certain ~ course described above as having a beaxing and length of ., t h« North 24°].9'14" SVest 846.14 feet. `•, 7~ The above described parcel contains an area of 17.806 8 ~ acres. 9I . 10 5/24/74 11 JER:rks 12 J.N. 464-004 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2~ 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3a 31 32 i' -~ . ~,2~~~'~,>> i ~`,1 ~ ~i ~'~; ,. s ' L MAY 1974 ~ I~ REGEIVLn ~ ' ~' ZONIhG cv; ~~ ' ` ~WISIUM ~ ~, ~, "~ l ",.a _ ~`tr~J.{gl`+ti~~ , ., ~; ~. ._.---;:= . 1~ia~tlA;yGt t~U. 3 ^ 7 .~ ~ ~ I ENVIRONMEN7AL IMPACT REPORT FINDING: That Environmental Impact Report No. 107, Revi~ion l, supplementing Master EIR No. 107, having been considered this date by the City P~anning Lommission and evidence both written anc ora~ having been presented to suppiement said -draft EIR No. 107, Revision 1, the Planning Commission believes that said dra~r. EIR No. 107, Revision 1, does conform to the City and State Guidelines and the State of Calif•ornia Environmental Quality Act and, based upon such i~formation, does hereby recommend to the City Council that they certify said ElR No. 107, Revision 1, is in compliance a~ith said Environmental ~ualitv Act. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thac the Maheim City Planning Commissien does hereby deny subject Petition for Variance on the basis of the aforcmentioned findn. THE FOREGOING RES6LUTION is signed and approved by me this ~ 8th day of Ju 1 y, 197~. ~ i~i~ ~/ti..sL_./1 ~~~1J~~ Ctlp1RMAN pNAHEIM C(TY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTE~T: ~~~~,~ SECRETARY ANAHBIM CITY PLANNiNG COMMISSION STATE OF CALIEORNIA ) COUN'fY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM1I ) I, Pat r i e i a B. Sean 1 an , Secretary of the City Ylanning Commiuion of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing reselution was passed and adopted at a mecting of the City Planning Commicsion of the City of Anaheim, held on J u i y 8, 1974 ~ at 2:00 o'clock p.m., by the foliowing vote o[ the members thereof: pYES: COIdMISSIONERS: ~OHNSON, ~ClNG, MORLEY, GAUER NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT' COMMISSIONERS: FARANO, IIERBST ICI WITNESS WHERE~bF, l have hereunto set my hand this 8th day of J u 1 y, 1974. " / ~J/ / .( / / / N / ~ {NfflYY 1j1 SECR£TARY ANAi1G1A! CITY PLANNING COMMISSION V2-D _2- RESOLUTIUN I~O. PC/4-136