PC 76-26~
.,
~
~ ~
RESOLUTIOi~ tJO. PC7F-26
A RESOLUTI0~1 OF THE CITY PLAt~t~If~r, CQI1"1TSISOt1 OF TIIE CITY OF A,~AHEItt
THAT PETITIOPd FOR UARIAiJCE N0. 2777 DE GRANTE~, I(J PAR7.
4JIIEREAS, the City Planninn Commissinn of t!ie City of Anaheim ~1id receivP a
verified Petition for Variance from t4ARIE A. AfJUROUS, 1023 Fain~iay Drive, Oran~P,
California 9266G (Qwner); JACY. S. UAVIS, 1345 td. Grand Avenue, Santa Ana, California
92701 (Aaent) ~f certain real ~roperty situated in the City ofi Anaheim, County of
l~ranqe, State of California, described as:
Those aortions of the IJortheast quarter of the tdortliwest yuarter nfi Section 13,
Township 4 Sou:li, Ran9e 11 West, in tlie City of Anaheim, County of Oran~e, State
of California, as said section is sho~rn on a ma~ recorded in book 51, ~a~e 1],
itiscellaneous ttaps, records of said Oran9e County, described as follows:
PARCEL 1:
Tlie 4Jest 272.62 feet of tiie East 1,0!10.53 feet of the Plorth 27.G feet o` the
(~ortheast quarter of the Idortliwest quarter n1` said Section 13.
EXCEPTIP~G THEREFR0;4 the P~orth G6 feet.
ALSO EXCEPTIWG THEP.EFR0;1 that porti~n lying within the t•lest 60 feet nf the East
894.22 feet of said Nortlieast quarter~ of the Northv!est auarter.
PARCEL 2:
An easement for road and utility purposes over the West 6~ feet of tlie East
C94.22 feet of the North 22G feet of tlie Northeast ~uarter of the (~lnrthoiest
quarter of said Section 13,
EXCEPTItdG THEREFROt1 the Plu ~th G6 feet.
l~lHEREAS, the City Plannin~l Commission did hold a puUlic hearinn at the City
i~all in the City of Anahein on February 2, 197fi, at 1:30 P.m., notice of said miblic
hea~ing having been duly given as required by la~v and in accordance ~~~ith the
provisions of the Anaheim t•iunicinal Code, Claanter 1;.Q3. ta hear and consider
evidence for and against said proposed variance and to investigate and mak~ findinns
and recommendations in connection ther•ewith; sa9d public hearinn havinq t~een
con`inued to the Planning Commission meeting of february 1P,, 1976; ~nd
WNE~EAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investiqation and studv r~ade
by itself atid in ~its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and re~orts
offered at said hearing, does find and determine the follo~•iing facts:
1, Tiiat the petitioner requests the folloriin~ waivers frnm the AnaheiM
ilunicipal Code, to construct a 16-unit apartment complex on four lots:
a. S[CTIO~~ 13.O.1.130 - Re uirement tliat al' lots abut a rivate street
2 lots to abut a ~rivate street
b. SECTIOtJ 1~.04.045.014 - ~linimum front setback. (35 feet
requ red; 10 eet propnsed
c. SECTIOf~ 18.34.OG3.0322 - Re uired recreation area screenin~l
no screen nq proposed~i
2, Tiiat 4laiver 1-a~ above-mentioned, is hereby granted on the hasis that
the Plannin9 Corunission has nreviously 9ranted similar requests v~hen a private street
is provided.
3. That 4laiver 1-h, above-mentioned, is hereby granted to enal,le thc
developer to construct a wall and berm to serve as a sound-att2nuation device to
protect the living environment of the ~rooosed resi~iential use of the nronertY.
h. That l•laiver 1-c~ above-mentioned~ is viithdrawn by tlie netitioner nn tlie
basis of tlie revised plans which indicate comnliance with said Code re~uirement.
5. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or condit9nns
applicable to the proper•ty involveci nr to the intende~l use, as ~ranted, nf the
property that do not apply generally to the pronerty or class of use in .the S~mr
vicinity and zone.
RESOLUTIOf~ (J0. P~7f-?.6
I t
~ ~
6. That the requested variance, as granted, is necessary fnr the
preservation and enjoyment of a substant3al prooerty right possessed b,y otfier
property in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to the propert,y in question.
7. That the requested variance, as granted, will noi be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or in~urious to ihe property or improvements in
such vi ci ni ty and zone i n tahi cfi tiie property i s 1 ocated.
g, That one (1) person appeared at said public hearing in onposition; and
no correspondence was received in opposition to sub~ect netit9on.
ENUJRONPIEP~TAL Ii~1PACT REPORT FIi~DI~~G:
That the Anaheim City Plannin9 Commission does hereby recorrtnend to the City
Council that the subject project be e::empt from the requirement to orepare an
environmental impact report, pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
NOW, THEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED tliat ti~e Anaheim City Plannin~ Commission
does hereby arant subject Petition for Vafiance, unon the following conditions ti•,hich
are hereby found to be a necessary nrerequisite to tlie proposed use of the subject
property in order to preserve the safety and general ~:+elfare of the Citizens of the
City of Anaheim:
1. That this Variance is qranted subject to the completion of
Reclassification tJo. 75-76-18, n~w pending.
2. Tliat subject property shall be developed substantiallY in accordance
with plans and specifications on file t~ith tiie City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1
(Revision No. 1), 7., 3, 4, 5, and 6.
TIIE FOREGOIIJG RESOLUTIOIV is signed and apnroved by me'this l~th day of
February, 1976.
. ~~ '~
~ ~, ~ IJ i ~, ~ i~
ATTEST:
. ~ ~~ .
, ~ ~ ~ i~ ~~`~(T
STATE OF CALIFORPIIA )
COU(JTY OF Of2AtJGE )ss.
CITY OF ANAHEI'4 )
I, Patricia 4. Scanlan, Secretary of the City Planninn Commis~ion of the
City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passect and
February 18,a1976t~at 1f30hp.m~,Ybyltheifollowingsvote ofttheCmembersAthereof;helci on
AYES: COMPIISSIOtJERS: BARI4ES, HERaST, JQIfNSON~ KI(IG, t•10(tLEY, TOLAR, FARA1~0
NOES: C0~•111ISSIONERS: tJ01JE
ABSEI~T: COt•44ISSIO~lERS: N01IE
IP~IJITNESS W}lEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 13th day of Fehruary~
1976.
~/~R~~~!-r~a~ /~• ~C GLx~a~-~-~
SECRETARY, ANAHEII1 CITY PLAN(J117f, CO~F~tISSIf1Fi
_Z_ R[SOLUTIOtJ N0. PC76-?.fi