PC 77-118~ESC~urior+ t~o. ~c77->>u
A RESOLUTIUN OF THE At~AHEiM CITY PLAt~t~11JG COPIMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR VAR~AtdCE rJO. 294t BE GRANTED
WtiEREA~, the Anaheim City Planning Comnission did receive a verified
Peti tion for Uariance from LANA COFP0~,1TIOtl, 93~+ Chestnut Street, Escondido,
California 92Q25, o~m er, and LYt~f~ E. Thil115E1~, 710 tlorth Euclid Street, i/222, Anaheim,
California )2801, ayen,, uf certain real property situated in the City of Anaf:eim,
County of Orange, Statc of California, described as:
That portion of Lot 40 of thc Anahein Extension, as shown an a Map
af a Survey by William Fiamel •,n Uecember 1&6~ and filed in the
Office of ChL County Recoruer of Los Anr~eles County, Lalifornia,
and [hat portion of [he Y.oerfler Tract, as shown on a Hap recorded
in Book j0, paye 17 of Miscellaneous Records of said Los Angeles
County, described as that certain 1.34 acre parcel, as shaan on a
Nap filed in aook 39, Page 20 of Record of Surveys in the Office
of the County Recorder of Orange County, Galifornia. Excep[ing
therefrom the 17ortherly 20.00 feet. Also excepting therefrom that
por[ion d~scribed in Parcel One in Ueed to American tlational
Properties, recorded February 1J, 1977 in E3ook 12073, pagc 91i6 of
Official Recurds; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Cornnission did hold a pubiic hearing at the City
Hall in the City of Anaheim on June 6, 1977, at 1:3~ p.m., notice of said public
hearing haviny been duly given as required by law and i~ accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Codc, Chap[er 18.03, to near and consider
evidence `or and agains[ said proposed variance and to investigate and make findings
and recommendations in connection there~:tt~; and
WIIERE-AS, said ~ommission, af[er due inspection, investigation and study rade
by i[self and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence ano reports
offered at said hcariny, does fi~~d an~1 deterr~ine the following facts:
building:
1. Petitioner requests waiver uf Cf~e following to construct a commercial
S[CTION 13.44.~i63.04q - hiinimum strur:tural setback.
10 ~et required; none prop~sed)
2, That the ~roposed waiver is hereby gran[ed on the basis that [he parcel
is irreg~larly shaped and the setback for which ehe waiver is requested abuts
residentially-zone~i property developeci with an elementary sctiool rrhich is a non-
residentisl use.
3. That there are excep[ional or extraordinary circumstances or conditiors
applicable tu the property in~olved or to the intended use of the property that do
not apply y~nerally to Che property or class of use in tiie same vicinity and zone.
4. That the requested variance is necessary for the preserva[ion and
enjoyment of a su5stantial property rignt passessed by other ~roperty in the same
vicinity ?nd zon~, ar.d denied to thc property in question.
PC7)-115
5. That the requested variance will not be materia!ly Jetrimenial to tha
pubiic welfare or iniurious to the properLy or improvements in such vicinity and zone
in which the property is located.
G. That no one indica~ed ttieir presence a[ said public hearing in
opposition; and that no corresoondence rlas receiveJ in opposition to the subject
petition.
E~IVIRJWP!EN7Al IHPACT FINDIt~G: That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has
reviewed the subject proposal consisting of a:lassification to [he CL (Commercial,
Limited) Zone to construct a co~runercial bui!:~ing with r~aiver of ninimum structural
setsback on a 1.0 acre parccl locate~7 south and west of the south~oes[ corner of La
Paima Avenue an~ Has-`~r E1oulevard anJ does he~ehy recorm~end to the City Council of
[he City of Anahein that a Negative Declaration firom the requirement to prepare an
environmental impact. report be approved for tiie subjec[ project on the ~asis that
tfiere woulci be no significant adverse environn~ental impacts since [he subject
property is adjacen[ to cvmmercially zoned property and will not cause harm to
adjoining property; that ttiere woul~i be no individual ar cunuiative adverse impacts
o~ the environmcn[ due to the approval of this Negative DeclaraLion since the Anaheim
General Plan designates ttie s~bject property for general commercial land uses
corrriensurate with the proposal; an;1 that the Initiai Study submitted by the
petition~r indicaCes no significant adverse impacts. The Negatir•e Declara[ion is on
file in tne ofrice of the Planninc DeparuaenC.
t701~, TIiEREFORE, BE IT RESOL\~ED that [he Anaheim City Planni~g Commission
does hereby grant subject Pet~tion for `:ariance, upon the fo1lo~Jing cunditions which
are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite [o the proposed use of [he subject
property in order [o preserve the safety ~nd general welfarc of the Citizens of the
City of l~nahcim:
1. That this Variance is granted subject to the w mpletion of
Reclassifica[ion No. JG-77-;7, now pending.
2. That subject property stiall i~e de~eloped subs[antially in accordance
with plans and specif;,:~tions on filc wi[h the City of Anahein marF:ed Exhibii Nos, 1
through 3.
1977 •
THE FOKEGOIIlG RESOLUTIOt~ is signed and approved by me this 6th day of June,
!~~-l~~'1~" ~~ ~G~
CIiA1RMAi~ PRO TEMPORE
AIlAtiLIM CITY PL~Nt~ING C~'MMISSION
RTTEST:
~df.l-~!i_ ~J__~Z_._~.a.i
SECRETARY. Al1AHEIN CITY PLAtIIlIE~G COPIMISSION
STATE JF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss•
CI7Y OF AtIAHEIM )
-2- PC77-118
I, Edith L. Harris, Secretary of the Anahcim City Planning Commission, do
hereby certify that tha foregoing resolu[ion ~ias passed and adopted at a mecting of
the Anaheim C+ty Planning Commission held on June 6, 1y77, at 1:30 p.m., by the
fotlawing vote of the members thereof:
AYES: CQMMISSION[RS: i3ARtlES, DAVID, HERUST, Y.I~IG, TOLAR
NOES: COMMISSIOI~ERS: NOiIE
At35ENT: CONMISSIONERS: JOhNSOti, LiIIN
II! WITtJE55 WIiEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this Gth day of June, 1977.
~ ~ ~ !'b`~a'
SECRETARY, At1ANElhi CITY PLANyING COMI115SION
-3- Pc~7~tt8