PC 74-96~r ?~
I :
4'
P.ESOLUT~N N0. FC74-96 ~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMM[SSION OF THE CiTY OF ANAHEIM1i
THAT PET1TlON FOR VARIANCE N0. 2602 BE DENIED
NHEREAS, the City °lanr.i~; Com;nissie~ of the Ciry of AnWheim did :ecei~~e s verified Petition for Variance from
CH~IRLES A. ricI,UEN and DOYLE W. HIi.L, P.O. Box 3045, Anaheim, California 92803, Owners;
an~i DOYLG W. HILL, P.O. Box 3045, Anaheim, California 92803, Agent, of certain real
property si.tuated in the City of Anaheim, Coiinty of Orange, State of California, as
described in Exhibit "A" attached tiereto and re£erred to herein as tt~ough set forth in full
WHERL'AS, t}te Ciry Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Hall in tlre City of Anaheim on
May 13, 19 %4 , at 2:00 o'clock p.m., notice of said public l~caring having been duly given as required by law and
in accordancc witli the provisions oC the Analieiiii ~iimicipal Code, Chapter 1$.6a, tu hear and consider evidence for and against said
proposed variance and to investi;am and make findings a~d recommendations in connection therewith; and
\1't•IERLAS, said Cemmission, after due inspection, iiivestigatiw~, and study madc by itself snd in its bchslf, and aftcr duc
consicerotion of all evid~nce xnd reporls ofCered at said hearing, does find and determine tlie fallowing facts:
l. T6at the pctitioncr requests a variance from the Anal~eim Municipai Code to establi'sh a sma 11 commercial
center: •
SLCTIUN 18.40.070(2 (a % - Minimucr buiid~ sEtback from arterial hi~hway (10 feet
reyuired; G feet pr~pcsed adJa~ent to freeway oif-ramp;
2. That sin~e the "rlannir.g Comm:s~iun has retommEnded disapproval oE tne rec:iassifi-
cation of subjecc p:operey, rhe proposed deveicpmenc cu41d not be accompiished within the
site rieveiopmer.t stai~clards of tYe zonir.g on subject property.
3. ThaC tliere are r.o exerr.pticn8l or extraoz•dinary circumstances or conditions
app3icable to che property invaived or t~ Che interded use ct the property that do not
apply genera'iiy Co the property cr ciass of use in the same vicir~ity and zone.
4. That the reqnested veriaece is r.ot necessary for the preserva~ion and enjoyment
of a subs~antial prop~rty right pus5essed by ather p:operty in the sart:e vicinity and zor<,
and denierl :o the property ir, quastior..
5. That the requested v~riance wiiY be materially detrimental to the public wel.fare
or injurious to the pruperty or improvemen~s :.ri sach vicinity and zone in which the properl•y
is located.
6. That eighL (8) pcrsor:~, representi.ng approximately twelve (i2) oersons present in
opposiL•ion to s~bject petitian, appeared beLure Lhe Comm•issior,; that eighC (8) l.etters were
received i.n opposieion; ar,il tiiat a petition containing appror.imaL•ely sixty-L•hree (63)
signatur.es in opposil'iou was filed.
ENVIFONMENTAL IriPACT RfiPORT FINDING:
Thst the Planning ~ommission recommends to L•lie City Council that the subject project be
exempL• Lrom Che requirement to prepare an Environniental Impact Report pursuent to the
provi.sions of the C~lii•ornia EnvironmenL•al Quality Act.
V1-D ~ -1- R~SOLUTION r0. PC74-96
.~
~ • • nf rr~ ~~, ."in ::iJ ; •S ion
~.-:~ r~ il T~~Ir A~~+tia~ ~lo~n Pali.ry"1970
W~~h ~~"~y..A.~.~....~n . f~irn~ 1 C~vwra0~.
~ /,m.~F,.~1r-md Titt~ A~wdallon O.mi~ Poli<y
Iorm 6~1Y70
CoI ' lond Titl~ A~w~lntlan
S~andord Co•eroa~ /'oli<~•190]
'I7ic land refcrred w in chis po~~cy is described ~s follows: ~
~ TNcI~£ PGRTIO`15 OF L~T i 4 A10 5 IP? BL~L.`: 34 OF SHE "YORBA LINOA TRAC7" ~,
IN T;IE CITY QF ArtAiIF'1t7~ COUtd7Y ~F 02ANf,E~ S7ATE OF CALIfORNIp~ AS
Si!O,!-a J,~ I~ h~AP n: C~RDED Ih :~~OY, 5 PnGF.S 17. ~«D IG~ OF Mi>CE6LANE.OUS
;SAPS Itv TtIE OFFICE OF TtiG C~UNTY RECORD~R OF SAID COUNTY~ D~SCRIi3F,D
AS FOLLO:JS:
6GGIt~J':I:VG AT TfiE "~ORTHERLY TERPtI~~US OF ThfE COURSF. CITF.D 'AS "NO?TH
gc ~g+ p2~~ ~qSY~ 65.F..1 F:'cT" Ik PARC~L N0. 7 flF tiJG!IIJAY R~LiN~U15yM~~~T
iv0. ~1FO~ REC.vRD.`•:D JULY 9, 1965~ IN ~sUOK 7538 PAGF. 305 OF OFFxCIAL
RECO~.DSS TI•IcP!Cc SCUTti 43° 06' 2U'" FAST 89.38 FCFT; 7H~NCE SOIJ'P~~ 57°
12' 57" EAST 169.~1 FE=7; 7t1°~!C[ S~~UTH 10° lf,' .34" ~hST 49.18
F~ET TO, A P3IN7 O?! A F:i~~:-'fA!~G'ct3T C!lRVE CO~dCA1r' SOUTNcASTxRLY HAVING
A RA~lUS C:F ~~~•fln F°-ET ~ r~,6IF~L TQ `aID P^INT 3Ei;RS ~l~P.'~i 56° 5?.~
21~t ~!~~Tj T!-I~Mt_~ SOUTN!~F~TFRLY 39.Ci? FEE7 ALQ~~G SATD CU~?~ T}'•^~'•UfN
A C.°.!dT~2Al. ACrGLF OF 5° 5i3' 32" 7n n P'.)IyT ON Tiic: tdORTtt~RLY. LF~~c. t~F
SAtO PARCrI.. 7; rl RADIAL TO S~I~ PQI`~T F3r:~,RS hnR7;i G2° 5~~ 53" ~:r 'f; .
Tllc':C~ ~S.L.'JiiG Tti~ hiO~TI;~RLY L:~i[ OF SALD PARCFL 7 THF FaLLOt4I~~C
COURS°_r; hiCR'f!I 7fi~ 35' 43" 4f~:.5T 2Ci.89 F'iF.T~ ~'.QR7H 53° 47.~ 7.fit~ ;.)F5T •~
17F.5~ F`:i•.T, r.DRTt1 45° 37* 25" ;;,-sS7 4<<.15 FEcT, NORTH 1° 38' 5f,°
FAST 3~1.II9 CdvD WOfi.fH `1° ~3~ n'n s:AST G5.fi1 FcC~ TA TN~ PQII~Y 0~ ,~„~-
~N B:'G1*~^.I'•:G. •
~.--~
~
~
S
~~
a
.i .i ~.. `.
~, i ~ ,.
~~~~~ .
' VARIAP~C~ ~~~. ~--~-~°'"'°'~°~'~°°
! ~ .
~
Y
~ ~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that thc Maheim City Planning Commission does hereby deny subject Petition for
Variance on the basis of the aforementioned Finds.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUCION is sig~ed and approved by me this 13th day of May 1974.
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSI
ATTEST:
~- ' ~ ~ ~Q-r/
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CnMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Patricia B. Scanlan, Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of Maheim, do hereby certify tfiat tlie
foregoing resolution was passed and" adopted at a meeting of the City Planning Commission of the C'sty of Maheim, held on
May 13, 1974, at 2:00 o'clock p.m., by the following vote of the membcrs thereof:
AYES: COMMISS[OTERS: COMPTON, PARANO, HERBST, JOHNSON, KING, MORLEY, GAUER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 13th day of May 1974.
~~~i~~~~, ,. /L~~ ~iGLoLiC ~
SEC1tETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNINC COMMISSION
' . ` "ar;M,'•%'r,yV`.:'. ~ .
V2-D -Z- RESOLUfION N0. PC74-96