Loading...
PC 74-79~ ~ ~ PC74-79 RESOLUTION ~10. A kESOLUTION OF TI-iE CITY PLANNING COM258IgON nF TH~ CITY OF ANAHEiM THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. BE GRANTED WHEI2EAS, tha City Plenaing Commission of the City of Aneheim did receive e verified Petition for Variance from 1~RRELL and R05E ANN AMENT, 1414 Glen Drive, Anaheim, California 92801, Owners, of certain real pzoperty situeted ~.n the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as Tract No. 1859 and Lot No. 54 ; and WHEREAS, the City Plannirg Commission did hold a public headng a4 the City Hall in the City oE Anaheim on April 15, 1974, et 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of seid public hearing having been duly giveu es cequired by law end in accordence'with the pmvisions of the Meheim Municipal Code, ChepEer 18.68,to hear and wnsider evi~'.; dence for and egainst said proposed variance and to investigate end meke findings end recommendations in connecHon therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, eft~r due inspection, investigation, end study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of a!1 evidence and reports offered at said he~dng, doas find and detecmine the following facts: , 1. Tha't the pcutioner requests a varience from the Maheim Munioipel Code to constzuct e two-car carport: SECTION 1_ 8.24.~9U 5) - Raquirement thettwo parking apaces be provided in a garage 2. That the abpve-mentioned waiver is hereby granted ~lue to the unuaual size and snape of the subject prop~zty. 3. Thet thece ate exceptionel or extreordinnry circumstences oc conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended uce of thz property that do not apply generaliy to tit:o praperty or class of usce In the same vicinity and zone. 4. That the requested va:iance is aeces3ery foc the Qceservution and enjoyrnent of a substantiel property right possessed by other propecty iri the same vicinity end zone, end denied to th~ property in question. 5., That the cequested varience will not be meterielly detrimental to the public welEace or injurious to Uie prop- e~ty or improvements in such vicinity end zone in which the property is located.. ENVTRON!4ENTAL IMPACT REPORT FINDING: That the Director of Development Services has determined L-hat the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01, Class i of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the Requirements for an Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement tq file ~n EIR. V~ZG -1< RESOLUTION N0. PC?4-79 ~ ~ ~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESO'LVED that the Anaheim CiCy Plenning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Varience, upon the following conditio~s which ere here'by found to be a necessery prerequisite to the pro- posed use oE the subject property in order to prese:ve th~ safety end general welEace of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: . 1. That subject property shall be developed substar.tially in accordance with plans and snecifica~ions on file with the City oi Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2. ~ .~ THE FOR£GO1NG RESOI.UTIQN is ai6ned ~nd appmvx~l by me thie 15th dr~y of April, 1974. ~~. -~ " iE~clE".~_ CHA~RMAN ANhf~k"~~-C:'~"."< PY.A.~INYNG COMMISSIOs~~ ATTEST: /l ~ • /~, lf~~f'~t.R/ S~CRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFARNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ae• CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, PaCricia B. Scanlan, Secretary oE the City Plenn'sng Commission oE the City oE Anaheim, do heceby cectify that the fo=egoing resolution was passed and edopted at a meetir.g of the City Planning Commission oEthe City o: Anaheim, held on Aptil 15 ~ 1974, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the members thereof: • AYES: COMMISSIONERS: COMPTON, FARANO, JOHNSON, KING, MORLEY, GAUER NOES: COMMISSIONEt2S: HERBST ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hexeunfo aet my hend this 15th day of April, 1974. ~ , ~ v SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMR'IIa"SION V2•G -2- RESOLUTION N0. PC74-79