PC 74-89~~
~
0
RESOLUTION NO. PC74-89
A RESOLUTION OF T!iE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 2592 _ BE GRANTED
WHEREAS, the City Plenning Commission of tho City of Aneheim did receive a verified Petition for Varience
from JERRY D. NII,SSON, 1720 idest Ba11 Road, Anaheim, California 92804, Owner; and
WARMINGTON DEVELOPMENT, INC,,, 1752 Langely Avenue, Irvine, California 92725, Agent, of
certain real property situaeed in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
as described in ~xhibit "A" attached hereto and referred to herein as though set forth in
full
; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at thc City Hall in the City of Anaheim
on April 29~ 1974~ at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required
by law and in accocden,ce.tvith th= provisions of the Maheim Municipel Code, Chap6er 18.68,to hear and wnsider evi-
dence for and agriinst said:proposed variance and to investigate and meke findings and recommendations in connection
thecewith; and
~4HEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation, and study made by itself and in its behalf,
and after due considecation of all evidence and reports offeced at said heacing, does find end detennine the following
facts:
1. That the petitioner requests a variance from the Anaheim Municipal Code to establish a 108-ur.it
apartment project:
a. SEC. 18.28.OSu(3)(a) - M;.:iimum floor area (700 square feet required;
489 square"feet proposed)
b, SEC. 18.28.050(5)(b) - Maximum building height within 150 feet of an
R-A zone (One=.sl•ory permitted; two-story
proposed) °
c, SEC. 18.25.050(10)(dj - Requirement that carports be enclosed on three
sides
2. That there are exceptional or extraordinery circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved
o: to the intended use of the pr~perty thet do not apply generally to the property or class of use in the same vicinity and "
zone.
3. Thet the requested variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial propert•; right
possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to the ptoperty in question.
4. That the cequested variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the prop-
erty o: imptovements in such vicinity and zone in which the piopecty is located.
5. A letter received in opposition was withilrawn when petitioner stipulated to
consCruction of an 8-foot wall on the west praperty line,
6. Pe[itioner stipiilated to dedication and improvements on R-A zoned property to Che
south which has frontage on Maonolia Avenue. Waivers were granted because:
a. Petit;.oner demonstrated p,ood space utilization and that the percent of units
proposed for bachelor units was not in excess of Comraission policy permitting no more than
3U% of units as bachelcr units, no smaller than 425 square feet.
V1-G -1- RESOLUTTON N0, PC74-89
~. -- -. . ~ .
~ •'.. ~ . ~ . '
.~
. . . : . , • . ~ ;
. . ..
~ , : .. ,
r , . __._.~ . _. . _. . • . , ' _._".._ _ . . . . . , ~ . . . ~ . ~ .i .
SI83d l8•77) ~ • , , • . -
CJ ~P ~ l.E.~V1/~~t~r~'~L. ~Cs ~.. . . . . ...
.. f . . . . 1J~~~.IIJ~. 1 , f t~79 ~ ~. .
~~sc~iP7ior~: ~ . ~ ~ . _ .
TN.A7 POF7I4h OF TF:~ ~!OR7FiEA5T QUART£R CF TFi'~ !+tORT~i~AST QUARTER OF
TH~ FtCn71-t~AST tZUART~R CF 5~CTIC`N 24 70t:ht5liZP 4 SCU7y~ RA~iGE 12 NEST~
IV 7fic f.A?~CiiO LOS C01fUT~S~ CITY CF A~`~A~1SI~1~ CQU,ji'Y aF ORAtiGE' STATE ~,
~F, C~.LIFGRt~IA~ AS SHCtidti Ot. A fSAF R~WRJED i:~ H00l: 51 PkC:E II OF
-MI•SCiLLAt;_OUS 1~~i:PS~ Ic~ 7hic OFFICE OF YHE COU~JIY R~COFD~R OF SAIfl :
COUf:7Y~ DFSCRIt3E0 A5 FOLLLI,S: ' ~
~ B~GE~cl:Ii`~G ~`.'i' 'CH~ kOP.TN'r1EST COF,ti~R GF 7't-1~ EAS'!' 26^c.30 F°_ET OF SAID
l1~RY~;F..AST qv„R7ER; T~1~i.Cc SCUT:-t 332.00 F~~T F,LChr, '~'!t~ t~rcST LIt.c OF ';~
KAi,D. Er1~T 252.30 F_~T iv^ 7H~ fs^vr,TH LIl,~ OP T:~F Sa:1TH 328.00 F~=T i'
~JF .Yil~ i~JP.TNEAST QUARTcR t3F Tii= !iORTHEASY QUARTcR OF SAID hlOnlfi-1`.=A5T ~
CUARF=.•^,; 1'H~;tC'~ ~AST 262.30 F~~T ".LOt:G SAID ~:CR7ri LINc 70 Tii~ ~AST 1
LZ':: UF S;ID t!L'?TH=AST QU:~RT~R; TN[flCr SOU'1'~i 264.OU FtiET AL4.`:G SAIB 1
EAST. lI:~~ TO T}i: SOU?`is_,~ST• CO~i•;~P. ~F 7HE PdQ~tTH 164.00 ~~ET L'F 7H= ~
SCUTt1 323.0~ P~~•7' OF SAID ;iORTI!~AS7 rUAR7zR; 7NEivC~ tdE57 23p.OD Fci:'i ~
AL~;:f 7N' SOJ7H LIEi~ OF SAID ~<O.^•,T!-~ 164.00 F~ET 7~ 7f1E EAST LItv~ OF
TH~ t:_,T 400.00 F~E7 OF SAID !a~RTtt~AST QUAnT=Rj T4KNCc•SGUTti L2.p0 •-~
FE~T ALGt:G SAIII i:AST LIR;_° OF Tti~ !'.EST A00.00 FE£7 TO Ti£ SOUTH L.IFaE OF' ~
7Hc. P,r,r.TN HAi.P uF 7H~ S~UTH 164.00 F~~T 4F. SAID ?~OR7NEAST ~UA~T~Rj
i'Hc~~iC~ tl~ST 298.00 F,=.~T ~+LOA'G '~AjD SOU7N tIFt= TQ 1'~~lE EAST LI;~_ OF ~
TH= DlcST 132.00 F~~T Cr= SHID F~EGFTH~~,ST CUART~R;, 7Nc;:CE t~:OR7ti 4g6.00
FcE'C i+L~P:G SAT7 FAST LItdL TO 7td~ ~:OR7H LIF:c•OF SA7D SECTI0~3; 'i'tI~,;CE .~
~AS'T 26ao70 F::wT ALG`G S~ED l:OR7H LINc TO TtiE POIi~t7 OF .4EGI.,lvItdG.
~ ..~ .. ~
, ' . .~~.._ . . . • I
~
.. .. _ _.. . .
~~6~89f3 i1 ~ ~ ~ .. ..__-.-' _ ' '.. ~
~ ~ .. . . .._.... ..
. ti PpR ~91A ~ '
~~. ~10 .
m ~j~~ ~, ~~~,n ~tcC nCnn~iT n.!r~ 2~aq°'L
R~'~p`~'A ~ ~'°~-
' ° ~,r,~~" ,~~ '. y • .
~ ~`29~sz v2~~~o- ~ , .
' ... . • ' ~ . . • • ' ••-
. . • ~ .~ . .
. .. : • . , ,
~5. ~
~ . _ . . i .
~ .~ ~ ~
^' ~ b, That the R-A zoned property was shown on the General Plan as suitable fer
multiple-family deveYopment and that the single-family propertie~ to the south in the City
o~ Stanton were more than 50 feet away which is the City of Stanton requiremeat regarding
two-story apsrtment construction.
c. That the carport ~oas lacated in the interior of the property and would
demonstrate better aesthetics and permit view of proposed landscaping.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Aaaheim City Planning Cormnission does hereby
grant subject Petitioci for Variance, upon the following conditions which are hereby found
to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to
preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That this variance is granted subject to the completion of Reclassificab.'on
No. 73-74-51, now pending.
2. That.subjecc property shali be developed substantially in accardance with plans
and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, and 3; Qrovide~
however, that an eight ($) Fout wall wou'Ld be constructed aYong the west property line
separating subject pro~perty from the R-1 to the west,
THE POREGOING RESOLUTION is signed &nd approved by me this 29th day of 9pri1 1974.
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANIvING COMMISSION
ATTE S1' ;
SECRETARY PRO TEMPU1tE~1T~lAHEIM CITY PLANNING CONE•tISSION
v
STATE OF CALIPORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss
CITY OP AN?,HEIM )
I, a. Burgess, Secretary Pro Tempore of the Cic~ Planning Commission of the City of
Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregcing resoluti.on was passed and adopted at a
meeting. of the City Planning Co~nission of the City of Anah~im, heYd on 1pri1 29, 1974,
at 2:00 o'clock p.m,, by the f'allowing vote of the members thereof:
9YES; COMMISSIONr;RS: JUHNSON, FARANO, COM?TON, KING, riORLEY, HERBST,
GAUER
NGc;:: COMMISSIOI~ERS: NON~
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNESS W[IEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 29th day of April 1974.
~~Le! `%~C .(,~d' -
SECRETARY PRO TL'~IPORE HEIM CITY PLANNING
COMMISS
V2-G -2- RESOLUTION N0, PC74-89