Loading...
PC 75-154,.~L __ w ~ ~ RF•.SOLUTION I10. PC75-154 A RRSOLUTI01~ OF T}~F. CITY PLANNIP~G COP4IISSIOPT OF TiiE CITY ~F ANAHEIM TL~1T PIiTITION POR VM.IANCfi N0. 2715 BE GRANTED. lJliERr.AS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receice a verified Petition for Variance from .TAAIES VERNOti HOOPS, 1101 King:t Ci2cle, Anaheim Ca. 92305 (Owner) of certain real property situated in the City o1: Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California described as: Lot 67 IIlock -0- Tract 6812 as per map recorded in Eook 253 Pages 18-20 of :tiscellaneous ;taps of the office of the County Recorder of said County; and TJIiEREe1S, the City Plann:ng Cownission did hold a puulic hearing at the City liall in the City of Anaheim on July 7, 1975, at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public '.~.earing having been duly ~iven as required by law and in accordance wi.th the provi- . sions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 1L'.03, to hear and consider evictence for and against said proposed variance and to investigate and m.qke findings and recommen~?ations in connection therewith; and {~IiEREAS~ said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following fa~cts: . 1. That the petitioner requests the following waiver from the Anaheim t•tunicipal Code, to construct a family room addition in the RS-5000 Zone: SHC'SION 18.27.062.020 - Maximum site coverage. 35% permitted; 4hY, propo~ed) 2. That the above-menti~ned waiver is hereby ~ranted un the basis that the peCitioner demonstrated tl~at a hardship would be created if said waiver were not granted, since the sub~ect property has an unusual si~ape~ and other lots in the sub~ect tract with larger areas have made similar room additions; and, additionally, that the subject proposal does not encroach into any of the required setbacks or casements. 9. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicahle to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply ~enerally to tlie property ox class of use in the same vicinity and zone. 4.. That the requested variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a snbstantial property right possessed by other property i.n the same vicinity and zone, and denied Co the property in question. • 5. That the requested vari~:nce will not be muterially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. 6. That no one indicated their pr~esence at said public hearing in opposition; and no correspondence was received in o`position to subject petition. ~P~VIRO,I~tENTAL IMPACT REPORT .FINDING: That tlie Director of the llevelopment Services Department has determined that the proposed activity falls f;~!'hi?~:.:'he definition of Section 3.01, Class 1~ of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to tis~- t;~r.scicements for an Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an EIR. NOW, THEREFORE~ II~ IT RESOLV~D that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does heteby grant sub~ect Petition fo= Vaziance, upon the following conditiona which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the prqposed use of the sub~ect property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: 1. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications on file witli the City ~f Anaheim marked Exhibit No. 1. RE.°,~L•?iTION N0. PC75-154 ~~ .~.. . . ~ ~ 2. That Condition Iio. 1, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final buildin~ and zonin~ inspections. THE FORGGOIVG RGSOLUTI01~ is signed and approved by me this 7th day of July, 1975. ATTI:ST: ~~"~~+~`G~u~J,O y~~t'~.,r.~.~.+~ SECR~TARY~ A.yAHtiII~[ CITY PLANIIING CO?4•fISSI(tTI STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUIITY OF ORA~IGE )ss. CITY OF A;~AFIEIAi ) //C ~'..l-; ,~.; ~ ~f/ //-l i -~' = ~AIR,~fA?7 PRO T~tiP(1RE At7AHEP.t CITY PJ.A'It]I;:G CO'r,ISSIn?I I, Patricia B. Scanlan, Secretary of. thr_ City Planning Cocnmies3on of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the fore~oing resolution was passed ancl aclopte~l ~t a meetinF of the City Planninr Commission of the City of Anaheim, helh on July 7, 1975, at 1:30 p.m., by Che fol,'•,owing vote of the members thr_reof: AYLS: COW~tISSIOVGRS: nnr.raes, IICRIIST, JOIINSO:i, I:ING, TOLAR, PIQRLEY NOES: CO:L~fISSIOidERS: WONR AL'SRYT: CO^t~tISSION~RS: FARANO IN WITIIF.SS WlI~REOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 7th day of July, 1475. .~~~,~ SECRETARY, A:IAHI:I;f CITY PLA;I;II;lG CO)PdISSIDv -'l- RESOLUTION N6. PC75-154