PC 77-149RESOLUT10~1 N0. PC77-149
A RESOLUTION OF TtiE AIdRHEIH CITY PLAI~P;ING COMMISSION
TNAT PETITIUN FOR V~iRlAtJCE t10. 2951 BE GP,AlaTEU, It7 PARi
WHEREAS, [he ilnaheim City Planning Commissian did reteive a verified
Petition for Varia~cc from RONALD K. At~D JOA!! N. RIRIE At4D LYtlt! E. TNOt!SEII, 710 tlorth
Euclid Street, r,'222, Anaheim, Calirornia 92b~~1, owners, and JP,MES L. I3ARISlC, 484C
Lakeview, r;20;, Yorba Linda, California ,2~SG, agent, of cer[ain real property
situa[ed in the City of Anaheim, County of Oranye, State of California, described as:
Lots 27, 2~ and 2y uf Tract No. ~+b3, as shown on a map [hereof
recorded in book 17, page 20, rliscellaneous Maps, records of said
Oranye County; and
41HER~AS, the City Planning Commission did schedule a public t~earing at the
City Hall in thc City of Anaheim on July 6, 1977, at 1:30 p.m., noticc of said public
hearing haviny been duly yiven as required by law and in accordance wi[h the
provisions of the Anaheim t1unicipal G~de, Chap[er 15.0;, to hear and consider
evitience for and against said proposed variance and [o investigate and make findings
and recommendations in connection [herewith; said public hearing having been
continued to the Plannin9 Comnission mectinq of July ilt, 1y77; and
NN[{iEf15, said Commission, a`tcr due inspec[ion, investigation and study made
b•~ iYself and ;n its bchalf, and af[er duc consiJcr~tion of ail evidence and reports
offered at said iieariny, does rinJ and determine the fulla~ing facts:
1. That the petitioner proposes a waiver of [hc following to cons[ruct
three (3} duplexes:
(a) SECTIUN 1L.32.oG1.020 - Hinimum buildinr sitc width.
70 feet reguired; 5J eet existing)
(b) SECTIO~! 1G.32.062.J2D - filaximum si[c covcrage.
(c) 5[GTIOf~ 1~.32.Oo3•02~ - Minimum s[ruc[ural 5e[bat~n.
ly ce[ rcquired; 5 ect proposed}
2. That waiver (a) pertaining to minimum bui9ding site width was granted
on tlie basis [hat the lots are existiny, nonconforming lo[s of record.
3. That waiver (b) pertaininy to n~aximum site coverage was deleted by the
revised plans.
4. That waiver (c) per[aining to minimum struct~ral setback was gran[ed on
the basis that the existiny nonconforrning widtli of su'bjeci property makes it
difficuli to develop and the subject property is surrcxunded by a variety of uses,
Including rnultiple-family residential.
5. That there are er.ceptional or extraordin3ry cdreumstances or conditions
applicable to the property involved or to the intend~d use, as granted, of the
property that do not apply generally to the prontrty or class of use in the same
vicintty and zone.
PC77-t49
6. That th~ requested variance, as granted, is nec~ssary for [he
preservatiun and enjoyment of a substantial propcrYy rigfi[ poss~ssed by other
properfy in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to the property ir. question.
7. That the reguested variance, as gra~tcd, will noi be mazerially
detrimental to Chc public welfare or injurious [o the property or improvements in
such vicinity and zone in ~•~hich tiie property is tocateJ.
8. 7hat no one indicated Cheir pres.r.nce at said pu~lic tiearing in
opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subiect
petition.
Et1ViRONr1ENTAL IMPACT fIN~ING: That thc Anaheim City Plan~ing Commissio~e.f-ias
reviewed the su ject proposa tu rec assi`y [tie zoning from P,esiJential/Agricultural
to Residential, Multiple-Family on property consisting of 0.4 acre fiaving a fronLage
of approxirnatcly 150 feet on [he north side of l.a Palma Avenue and being located
approximately a9 fcet wes[ o` the centerline o` Onondaga Avenwe, with saaivers of
min(mum building si[e width and minimum structural setbac{:, to construct three (3)
duplexes; and does hereby .~rant approval of a Ncyative Declaration from the
requirement to prepare a~ environmental impact repor[ on thc basis [ha[ there would
be no signi`ican[ individual or cur~ulative adverse environmental impact due to the
approval of [his Neyative Declaration since [hc Anaheim General Plan dcsignates the
subjec[ proper[y for e,eneral commercial and mediw;;-density resirie~tial land uses
corrrnensurate ~~i[h the pro~osal; that similar multi~~lc-family residential proprrty is
developed in the area; that no sensitive environmental impacts arc involved in the
proposal; tha[ the Initial Study submitted by the petitioner indicates no siynificant
individual or cunuiative adverse environrr~ental impact; and that the Negative
Declaration substantia[ing ttie fore9oing fi~~linys is on file in the City of Anaheim
Planning Departrx:nt.
NOII, i'HEREFORE, BE IT RESOIVEb tha[ thc Anaheim City Planning Commission
does hereby grant, in par[, subject Petition for Variance, upon the follo~.ri~y
conditions wfiich are fiereby found to br a nccessary prerequisite to the p~O~OSCd use
of the subject propcrty in order to prescrvc the safcty and yeneral v~lfare of the
Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That this Variance is yranted subjeci to the completion of
Reclassificatio~ lao, 76-77-64, now pending.
2. That subject property shall be developed substantiaily in accordance
with plans and specifications on filc with [hc City of Anahcim mar.ked Revision No. 1
of Exhibit Nos. i, 2 anJ 3.
TH[ FOREG01!~G R[SOLUTIOtJ is signed and approved by mc this i8th day of July,
1977.
~ ~~
~
CtAIRMAN AtlAtiEltl CITY PLAt~t~I11G C0111115SIOt~
ATTEST:
~ dL~-G5. /a~
SECRETA , AllAHEIM CITY PLA1illING COMMISSION
-2- PC77-t49
STATE OF CALIFOFI~lA )
COtiNIY OF OR!!I~GE ) ss.
C~TY ~F AIINiEit1 )
I, Edith L. Harris, Secretary of the Anaheim City Plan~ing Cammission, do
hereby certify that Lhe foregaing resolutian was ~assed and adopted :+t a meeting of
the Anaheim CiLy Planning Comrnission held c~n July 18, 1977, a= ~:3~ P.~•, by the
following vote of the mertt~ers thereof:
AtES: LOMMISSIONERS: S~ARNES, DAVID. KING, LIt~N, JOHt~SOt{
N0~5: CONMISSIO~IERS: I~t1t7E
ABSTAII~: COhMlSSIOIIERS: 70LAP,
ABSENT: COHHISSIOt1ER5: NER[3ST
It1 WITtJESS Wt1ERE0f, i have fiereunto set my hard this 18th day of Ju~y, 1977•
~~ ~ ~~
S[LRL'TARY, A,IAN~tN CITY PLANI~ING COMMISSION
-3- ~'C77-149