PC 74-15~ ~
T+.ESOLr~Trn?: N~~. _.__~ PC74_15 ___,.~ _----
A RESOLUTION OF THE CiTY DLANNING COhiDiISSION OF THE Cl'CY OF ANAFIC•IA1
TIIAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0: ~ 3~73 BE : GP.AIv"lF.D Ii: FAF.T_
VIHEREAS, the City Planning Cum,nission of the City of Anaheirn did receivr u vcrifie3 F^tition for Vasiaace i!om
DONALD F. LEWIS, 2d57 WesC ftumneya ~rive, Pnsheim, California 9i~01, Oc~mer; "BUNAIti"
BOWDEN, Century 21 Real Estate, 2123 East Ball Road, Anaheim, California 92806, Agent
of certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of
California, described as L•ot 104 of Tract No. 2093 as per map recorded in book;76
pages 45, 46, 47 and 48 of Miscellaneous Maps, in the office of.the county recorder
of said county; and
WHEREAS, the City Pianning Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Hall in the City of Maheim on
January 21, 1974, at 2:00 o'clock p.m., notice of said public hcaring having been duly given as required by law and
in accordance with the provisions of the Maheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.68, to hear and consider evidence for and against said
proposed variunce and to investigate and make findings and recommendati~ns in connection therewith; and
\VHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, invcstigation, and study made by itself and in its behalf, and aCtei- due
consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and detecmine the following facts:
1. That the petitioner rcquests ~he ~#oYToi"aing' v§ria'6ces fr~om'the Anaheim Municipal Code to
permit an existing carport and semi-enclosed patio structure:
a. SECTION 18.24.Q30(1)(a) - Minimum front yard setback, (25 feet required;
18 feet 6 inches proposed)
b. SECTSON 18.24.030(2) - M3nimum side yard setback. (5 feet required;
" [s inches proposed)
c. SECTION 18.24.040 - Maximum lot coveraRe. (40% required; 42% proposed)
2. That Waiver 1-a, above-mentioned, is hereby approved on thE basis that the peti-
tioner demonstreted that a hardship would be created since the existing semi-enclosed patio
was constructed approximate'iy ten ~ears ago and the request is determined to be minimal.
3. That Waiver 1-b, above-wentioned, is hereby denied on the basis that the petitioner
did not prove a hardship would be created if said waiver was not granted.
4. That Waiver 1-c, above-mentioned, is hereby denied on the basis that the petitioner
has removed the garage carport and the waiver is no longer necessary.
5. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditiaus applicable
to the property involved or to the intended use;of•the:property,"as granted, that do not
apply generally to the property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone.
6. That the requested variance, as granted, is necessary for the preservation and en-
joyment of a subsL•antial property right possessed by other property in the same vi ~inity
and zone, and denied to the property in question.
7. That the requested variance, as granted, will not be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious Co Che property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in
which the propcrty is located.
8. That one person indicated his preaence at said public hearing in oppos3tion to sub-
ject peL•ition.
`~;::.ti.~-": - 1 -
~ . ;,~, ~;; ` RESOLUTION N0. PC74-15
~ ~
u':~;,IROt~ME1vTAL II~IF?CT RBFORT c_ 1_, tif~~rt~:
';t~ut tl:e Planr.;.ng Ccmmissi-ar„ ;.n cor.r.ection with an Exemptior Deciarstiar Sta:us reqce.st;
:Ln:ls aad dete~inee chat ::he pragcsa7. wo~il.d have no sig~niiicant er.~icor.mer~~si. i'~T,~4~4:~3adu
-:~•;::z.COre, rec~;mctz.'-s to :i:~ CiCy Ca~ncil that i~~ ~r.vi~onr..ane<i1 impsct Stacesr.enc :s -
.~Q:. ~ •
NOW, THEREFORE, B~ IT RESOLVED th~t the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
grant in patt 'sub~ett Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which are hereby
found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the sub3ect property in order
to preserve the safeCy and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
(1) That the existing strr.cture shall be brought up to the mi~imum stan3ards of the
City of Anaheim, including the Uniform Building, Plumbing, Electrical, Hoasin~, :4echaniaa~l
and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of Anaheim.
(2) That subject property chall be developed substantiL''~y in accordance with plans
and specifications on file with the City of. Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.
(3) That Condition Nos. 1 and 2, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to
final building and zoning inspections.
THE FOR~GOING RESOI.UTIOid •ls signed and approved by me this 21st day of January, 1974.
! ~ ~4/-~-~`~f~t2r~ il~/~/~!~
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY FLANNING COMMISSI J'
ATTEST:
~~u.~~/~ ,~~.~..i
SECRFTARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SB•
CITY OF ANAHE7.~i1 )
I, Patricia B. Scanlan, 5ecretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of
Anaheim, do hereby cert3fy that the foregoing resolution wes passed and adopted at a
meeting of Che City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on January 21, 1974,
at 2:00 o'clock p.m., by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: HERBST, KING, SEYMOUR, GAUER.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: :?ONE.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: FARANO.
IN WITPTESS WHEREOF, I have hereun.to set my hand this 21st day of 7anuary, 1974.
~~~~.,~~~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-2-
RESOLUTION N0. PC74-15