PC 75-6aESO~iov no. °c75-6 ~ --__-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNiNG COhiMISStON OP THB CITY OF ANAI:GIM1f
THAT PETITION FOR \'ARIANCE N0. 2665 aE GR.ANTED I N PART
WHEREAS, thc City Yl~nning Cor+mission of thc City of Analieim did reccivc a~'criticd Petition fo: Vari;mcc (ram
LAWRENCE A. MiJCKENTHALER et al, 153~ Avolencia Drive, Fu!lerton, California 9z632 (Oaner);
GREAT OAK WESTERN CORPORATION, Attn: Robert Anderson, 912 Park Circle, Anaheim,
~alifor~ia 92804 and STEPHEN GALLAGHER, lOb North Claudi~a Street, ;l305, Anahcim,
California 9z8~5 (Agents) of certain real property situaled En the City of Anaheim, County
of Orange, State of California, described as THAT PORTION OF THE SGUTH HALF OF THE SOUTN-
WEST QUARTER OF THE PIORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST IN
THE RANCHO SAN JUAN CAJON DE SANTA ANA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51 PAGE 10 OF
MISCELLANEOUS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THC COUNTY RECORDER OF SA10 COUtdTY, DESCRIBED FS
FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTH HALF; THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LIt~E OF
SAID SOUTH HALF TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO N. LEROY IiALL
ET UX., RECORDED MARCH 13, 1930 IN BOOK 360 PAGE 385 OF OFF~CIAL RECORDS; 'fHENCE NONTH
ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF HALL AND ALONG THE EAST LINC OF PARLEL 1 OF THE LAIJU
DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO FLOYD M. HATFIELD ET UX., RECORDED APRIL 25, ~q35 IPJ BOOi: 71~5
PAGE 446, OFFICIAL RECORDS TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH HALF; THENCE EAST ALGNG 5/+IU
NORTH LINE TO TfIE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTH HALF; T~IENCE SOU7H A~ONG THE EAST L~NE Gr
~~ID SOUTH HALF TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPT THE NORTH 230.00 FEET THEREOF.
AL50 EXCEPT THAT POR7IUIJ THEREOF DESGRIBED IN A DEED TO LAWRENCE A MUCKENTHALER, JR„ ET
AL., RECORDED DECEMBEP. 3~~ ~968 IN BOOK 8834 PAGc 117 OF OFFIf,IAL RfCORDS; and
WHC•REAS, thc ~ity Planning Commission did hold a public hcaring at thc City li~ll m thc ~~ty of Anahciin ~m
January 6, 1975 , at 2:00 0'~:lock p.m., noticc of said public hcaring having ~cen duly gi~~cn as rcquired by law aod
in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Cha~~:cr 18,(~j, lo hear und considcr cvidcncc f,ir and against s;iid
proposed variancc and to investigate and makc findings and recommcndations in connection thcrcwith;:mJ
WHBREAS, said Commission, after due inspcction, invcstigation, and study made by itulf and in its behxlf, :md :iiu~r duc
consideration of all evidence and repor:s offered at s~id hcaring, docs find and determine the foilowing facts:
I. Thattl~cpctitionerrcqucsts the following waivers from the Anaheim Mun(cipal Codc, to
construct a 13U-unit apartment complex:
a. SECTICN 18.34.062.012 - Maximum bui~dinq hei4ht within 150 fcet of an ac~i-
cultural z~ne. (1-storY required; 2-scorics propo•se~l)
b. SECTION 18.34.062.032 - Minimum floor area, (700 square feet requ?red; ~+17
square feet proposed)
2, That Wai~~er 1-a, above-mentioned, was determined to be unnecessary since the
adjacent R-A zoned property is developed with a public school.
3, That Waiver 1-b, above-mentioned, was granted for a minimum floor area or 47.~
square Teet, as stipulated to by tiie petir,ioner, on the basis [hat the Planning Commi;r,fon
has previousl~ granted said waiver for bachelor units not smaller than 47.5 square fcet
and not exceeding 25% of the total number of apartment units.
4. That the petitioner stipulated that a six-f~ot ~6') high masonry wall oiill be
constructed along the entire westerly boundary of the subject property and along the
rroperty line abutting the westerly and northeriy boundaries of che adjacent service
station site located at the southeast corner of the subJect property.
5, That there are e.xceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applic-Lle
to the property involved or to the intended use, as granted, of the property that do r.ot
apply generally to the property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone,
6. That the variaece, as granted, is necessary for the preservation and enjayment of
substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinily and zonc, and
denied to the property in question.
7, That the variance, as granted, will not be materiaily detrimental Co the public
welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which
the property is located.
3. That no one indicated thelr presence at said public hearing in oppo5ition ar,d ~io
correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FINDING:
T'hat the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that the subject project be
exempt from the requirement to prepare an Environmental Impact Report pursuant ta tl,~•
provisionc of the :alifornia Environmental Quality Act.
~ _ ~ _ RESOLUT ION N0. I•C7! ~%
DEV-66•E
- ' . ~ . . . .. ~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City F~lanning Commtssion does hereby gcant subject
Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which are hereby Eound to be a necessary prerequisite to the pro-
posed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety end genecel welface ofthe Citizens oEthe City of
Anaheim: ,
1. That this variance is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification No.
74-75-19. -
2. That subject property shall be deoeloped substantially in accordance with plans
and sFecifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. l, 2 and 3;
provided, however, that a six-Foot (6~) high masonry wall shall be constructed along the
entire westerly property line and along the property line abutting the westerly and
northerly boundaries of the adjacent service station site located at the southeast
corner of the subject property; and that the minimum floor area for the bachelor units
shall be not less than four hundred twenty-five (425) squarz feet and the number of said
bachelor ur;ts shall not exceed twenty-six (26), as shown on the submitted plans, all
as stipulated to by the petitioner.
THE FOR~GOING RESOLUTION is signed end approved by me this 6th day of January, 1975.
CH P.MAN ANA I CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~~~~
SECFETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) se.
CITY OF ANAHEYM )
I,Patricia B.Scanlan, Seccetary of the City Flanning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certiiy tl~ut
the foregoing resalution was passed end edopr,ed et a meeting of the City Planning Commission oE the (:ity of Anaheim,
held on January 6, t 975, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote oE the nembers thereof:
AYES: COMM1tISSIONGRS: FARANO, GAUER, JOHNSON, KING, MORLEY, 70LAR, HERBST
NOES: COMMISSIONER5: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I heve hereunto set my hand this 6th day of January, 1975.
~ ~ ~ ~ c~'LQ~t~
~ECRETARl ANAI-iEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
V2-G "2"
. ~ESOLUTION N0. PC75-6