PC 77-127~h
RE54LU710;1 N0. PL77-127
A RESOLUTION OF THE At~AtiEl!1 CITY PLANt~It~G COMI11551011
THAT PETITIOt~ FOR VARIANCE N0. 2935 OE GRAHTED
WI~EREAS. the ~anatieim Ci[y Planning Commission Jid reccive a verif(ed
Petition for Variance from YORf3l1 GRAVEL i.OMPAtlY, 1531 Nest El Seyundo 8oulevard,
Gardena, California 90249, owner, and T A DEVELOP11E1lT CORPORATI01l, 1875 South Lewis
Street, Anaheim, California 92305, agent, of certain rcal propcr[y siiu~ted in tfie
Lity of Anaheim, Coun[y of Orange, Statc of California, described as:
Thai portion of Lot 5 Block 24 of thc Yorba Linda Tract, as shown
on a map recorded in bool: 5, pages 17 and 18 of Miscellaneous
Maps, records of said Orange County, lying Southerly anJ Eastcrly
of the follc3wing described line: l3eginning at a~+oint in the
centerline of :he di[ch shown on a map filed in book 3, page 48 of
Recor~ of Surveys in the office cf the County Recorder, with the
Easterly [erminus of the course described ~~orth 56° OS' 11" West
409.25 feet in the decd to the StaCe of California recorded
Octobcr 22, 19G2 in Bool; 6291 pagc 635 af Official Racords;
thence along said course North 56a 05' 11" West 409.25 fee~;
thence North 65° 43' S0" West 299.5~+ feet; [hience South 72~ l~t' 13"
West 29.G6 feet; thence 5outh 14° 53' 03" West 132.41~ feGt; thence
South 4° lJ' 30" ucst 9G1.79 fcet to a point on thc East linc of
Orchard Drive, GO feet in width, as shown on a map recorded ln
book 53, paye 44 of Record of Surveys; thence Southerly, along
said Easterly line, [o [hc centerline of said ditch.
The trianglc portion of the parcel t~o. 5 of ttia[ portion of lot 5
Block 24 of Yort~a Linda Tract, shown on the at[achcd map. 5tart
from the last mentioned poin[ on tfi~ centerline of said ditch
wescerly having a li~e cuncaved northerly witfi a radius of 350
feet and an arc distance of 9.>5 feet, then continu~d westerly
follaainy [he course of Plorth S3° 5z' 3a" East 23.31 fcet, then
Northerly concentric with che center line of Kellogg Drive and
having a radius of 957.12 feet vr(th an arc distance of ~1.4G feet.
Then back Southeasterly with a line concaved easterly wie`~ a
radius of 345 feet anJ an arc distance of 8ti.8G feet to the point
of beginning. This portion of ttie property has a to[al area of
13~+9 sq. ft.
EXCEPTING ThitRF:FRdN that portio~n described in Parcel No. 105.1 in
the deed [o tlie County of Orange recorded tlovember 9, 1965 in book
J734, page 226 of Of`~ci,:! ~tec~ords; and
WIIEREAS, the City Planning Commission did schedule a public hearing at the
City tlall in thc City of Rriaheirn on F1ay 23, 1977, at 1:30 p.m., ~oticc of said public
hearing havi~g been duly given ~~s required by law anJ in accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and consider
evidence for and against said proposed varlance and to investigate and make find(ng5
a~d reconmendations in <Pn~ection therewith; said public hearing having been
continued to the Planniny Corernission meeting of June 20, 1977; anJ
PC77-127
~
WHEREAS. said Comnission, after due inspection, investigation and study made
by itself and in its behalf, and after due considEracien of all evidence and reports
;+.'fered at said hearing, does find and determine the `ollowiny f~3cis:
t. That thc pe[itioner proposus a waiver of the followin~ to establish a
six-lot, RS-50U0 (RESIDEtIT1AL, SINGI.E-FAMtLY) ZOIIE subdivision:
SELTIOH 18.27.061.020 - Ninimum lot width.
50 cet required; 25 feet proposed)
2. Tliat the above-mentioned waiver is hereby granted on the basis that the
~etitioner demonstrated that a harJship existed in that the terrafn of the
trianyularly-shaped proper[y and the decreasing width necessitate one "flag" lot
having a 25-foot wide panhan~lle driveway, anJ that such a"flag" lot is a privilege
enjoyed by other property owners in the fiill and Canyon areas.
3. That the pe[itioner stipulated to placiny the residential structure an
Lot No. 6 a minimum of thirty (30) fcet from ttie south property line.
4. That [here are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the property involved or to [he intcnded usc of the property that do
not apply yenerally to the property or class ~f use in [he same vicinity and zone.
5. Tha[ the reyues[ed variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property riyht possessed by o[her property in the same
vicinity and zane, and denied to thc property in question.
6.. Tha[ the reques[ed variance will not be n~terially det ~~acnt~l to the
public ,~elf~re or injurious [o the property or i~nprovements in such viclnity and =:,~.e
in which thc propcrty is loca[ed.
7, That Lhree (3) persons indicaced [heir presence aC said publlc hearing
in oppositlon, and that no correspondence was received in oppositio~ to thc subject
petition.
EIbV!RONNENTAL IIIPACT FINOING: That thc Anaheim City Planniny Commission has
rev[cWes ~the subject proposal to recl~ssify the zoning from RS-A-43~000
~RESIDENTIAL/AGRICULTURAL) ZOlIE to RS-5000 (RESIUENI'IAL, S~tIGLF-FAMtLY) ZONE for
subject property consisting of a proposed six (6) lot, RS-5000 subdivision on
approximately 1.9 acres located souttieast of the intersec[ion of rhe Richard i1. t~ixon
freeway on-ramp and Kelloyy Drive, and does hereby recommend tt~ the City Council of
the City of Anaheim [hat a I~r_yative Declaration from the requirement to prepare an
environmen[al lmpact report be approved for the ,ubject property on the basis that
ihere woulJ be no signific~nt individual or cumulative adverse environmental impact
Jue to the approval of this tJeyative Declaratiun since the Anaheim General Plan
desiynates the subject proper[y for low-medium density land uses commensurate wi[h
the proposal; tfiat no sensitive environmental elements are involved in the proposal,
and the Init(al Study submi[ted by the pe[itioncr indicates no significant or
cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and that the Negative Declaration
substantiatiny [he foregoing fi~dings is on file in the City of Anaheim Planning
Department.
t~OW, Tf1EREFOR[, !tE IT R[SOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Cortmission
does hcreby 9rant subject Petition for Variance, upon the following condltians which
are hereby found to be a necessary prerequlsite to the proposed use of the subject
property in ordcr to preserve the safety and general wclfare of the Citizens of the
City of Anaheim:
-2- PC77-127
0
1. That this Variancc is granted subjcct to thc conpletion of
Reclassifica[ion Mo. 76-77-53, ~ow pending.
2. That subjec[ property shail be devetoped substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on fiie with tt~e City of Anaheim marked Exhibit No. 1;
provided, hawever, that the residential structure on L~~t t~o. G shall be located a
minimum o'F thirty (30) feet from the south property linc.
1977
ATTEST:
TNE FOREGOING RESOLUTI01~ is signed and approved by nc this 20th day of June,
' C~~.;~- ,~ ` ~!~ ~~.~~
s~~~AR~, untiEin i rTS~. ~nri~~ ur onni ~'fo;i
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY Of ORAtIGE ) ss.
CITY OF htJA11EIM )
i, Edith L. liarris, Secretary of the Anahcim City Pianning Lommission, do
hereby certify that the foregoi~g resolution was passed and adopted at -;9 meeting of
the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on June 20, 1977, at 1:3~ p.m., by the
following vote of thc members thercof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARtJLS, DAVID, HERO~T, KING, LI~~N, TOLAR, JOHNSON
NOES: COMNISSIOt~[RS: NOI~E
AHSEN7: GOMMi5Si01~ERS: t~01iE
IN WITNESS UHEREOF, 1 havc hcreunto set my hand this 20th day of June, 1977.
C~ dl<..~-G~ ~S./ ~.~cC~Li~
G R , 1 M ~I t~ OMH
-3- PC77-127