PC 74-74. . - ~ ~
RESOLUTION NO. PC74-74
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
TKAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 2585 BE GRANTED
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission o!' the Clty of Aneheim did receive a verified Petition for Variance
from PAUL KATZ, 231 South Gain Street, Anaheim, California 92804, Owner; and NELSON-DYE
CONSTRUCTION, INC., 1b64 West Broadway, Anaheim, California 92802, Agent, of certain
real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State o£ California,
described as Lot 2 of Tract No. 6691 as per map recorded in book 250, pages 20 and 21 of
Miscellaneous Maps, in theoffice of the county recorder of said county~
, ~.1d
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission di3 hold a public hearing at the City Hall in the City of Aneheim
on April 15, 1974, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as cequired
bp law and 'sn accordance witli the provisions of the Meheim Municipnl Code, ChaFEer 18.68, to hear and consider evi-
dence for and egainst said proposed variance end to investigate end meke findings and rernmmendations in connection
therewith; ead
WHEREAS, seid Cemmission, after due inspection, investigation, and study mede by itself and in its behalf,
end afte: due consideration of all evidence and reports offeced et said hearing, does find and detecmine !he following
facts:
1. Thet the petitionec requests a variance fmm the Aneheim Municipel Code to eonstruct a room addition
to an existing single-family residence:
(a) SECTION 18.26.050(3) - Maximurn lot coveraRe (35% permitted; 43.6% proposed)
2. That thece ere exceptional or extreordinery circumstences or conditions eppliceble to the property involved
or to the intended use of the property thet do not apply generally to the property or class of use in the same vlcinity end
zone.
3. That the requested varience is necessery for the preservetion and ertjoymenk of a substantial property right
possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in question.
4, That the requested veriance will not be materially detrimentel to the public welfare or injurious to the prop-
erty or improvemc~ts in such vicinity and zone in which the property is Ioceted.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FINBING:
That the Director of DevelopmenC Services has determined that the proposed activity falls
within the definition of Section 3.01, Class 1 of the City of Anahei~a Guidelines to the
Requirements for an Enviranmental Impact Report end is, therefore, categorically exempt from
the requirement to file an EIR.
V1-G -1- RESOLUTION N0. PC74-74
. ~ • ~ ~ `
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thet the Aneheim City Planning Commission does heceby gcant subject
Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which are heceby found to be a necessery prerequisite to the pro-
posed use of the subjer_t pcoperty in order to pceserve the. safety and genecal welface of the Citizens of the City of
Anaheim: .
1. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with
plans and specifications on file w~ith the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION ia signed and eppmved bp me this 15th day of April, 1974.
~~;~~~~ ~~~ ~~~
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~Y",~:~.~r~ ~~~a.~.~.~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM C1TY PLANNING ~OMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) g~•
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Patricia B. Scanlan,Secretary of the City Plenning Commission of the ~+ty of Anoheim, do hereby cectify that
the foregoing resalution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the City Plcnning Commission oE the City of Aneheim,
held an April 15, 1974, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: COMPTON, FARANO, HERSST, JOHNSON, KIN(~, MORLEY, GAIJER
NOES: COMMISSIONER9: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 15th day of April, 1974.
.~ ~, ,~.~~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COAIMISSION
V2-G -2- RESOLUTION N0. PC74-74