PC 77-37RESOLU7104 N0. ?C?7-j7
A RESOLU71 C~1 OF T}~E A,~AHF I"~ ~ I T1' ? ~~'~~N i t~~: COH~t I~ S i 0N
THFi' PE7I7(ON FOR VARIAt~CE t~C, ~591 ~~ u[`~i't^.
WHEREAS, [he Anaheiri City °lanninq Cr~r,r~ission dicl reccivc a verified
°etition for Variance ~ror^• PEt;;CN~ ENTEfiPR'SES, t!~C., dh•i THE liA~i STL~tiE COr1PA'dY, 'O51
~lorth Grove Street, Anahein, Cai i~o~ nia "2t~~F (pwner) and GEORGE PEtJIC~f~, i^~1 North
Grove Street, Anaheim, California ~i28~%.: ;Agent) of ccrtair, roal property sit~a~eu in
the City of Anahcim, County of Oran,^,e, State o; :.~lifori~i:, described as:
l"hat porCion of Lot .. ot' Orangr. ~rovr Aerrs, in }:nc City n` Anahein, Cour.*y o`
Orarae, State of Cal ifun,ia, as satd I_ot is show,~ on a r:ap of said trac: r~:corded
in 6ook G pa9e -'s?. of Miscellaneous Maps, in the effice af the County Recorder of
s. '' cuur,ty, described as ~oi lc~ws:
Eeqinninn at [he Nortneast corner of s~i~: Lot said corner beinq on C~e
centerline of La Palma Avenue as shown an a parce' ma,^. `i1eJ in Bopi; 2%i ~~qr_ jl
of Pa~cel Maps, records o` shic Ornnoe Coun:y; [her.ce Souch 73° ~+~' ~'1" Wes[
203,5~ feet alonq ,afd cent.erlice to the :ter;,ieast cnrner of khe lard described
ln a Deed to General Pire and Supply Company, inc., rec~rdcd i+ugus[ Zh, 1'~64 in
8ook 7~i97, Page )h3 of Offltial Records; thence leaviny the said centerline
South Oj~ 4~' 36" Eas2 37l+.Z`) feet alonci Che Eastcrly line of said land of
General Pipc and Suppiy Cqr~~;any, Inc „ to tne crue poinc of becinnin~; Chence
'torth $6° 1~;' ?0" East 11~F.,";j0 fr_e[; thenc.c South n3~ ~~S' ;!1"' East 1~~8.6~ feet;
Lhence 5outh ~6° 14' 30" ~iest 11~;.7a feec to a peint on said Easterly linc th~t
is South l~?~ 4;' 3~" East i4A.00 fee[ from the 'rue point of beqtnning; thence
North ~13~ 1iS~ ;6~~ WeSt lt~n.~~ fee[ Co the truc poin[ cf be^yinninr,.
11}1[.°.EAS, t!-~e Cicy Planning Comr;ission did scheciule a publie hearir.g at the
City Hall ln thc Ci[y of Anahcim on Jani~ary 3, 19i7, aC i:3~~ p.r~., nocice of said
pubiic hearing having beer duly aiven as reGuired by law and in accord~r,ce 4rith the
provlsions of tnr_ Anahein Municipal Cnde, Chantcr 18.~~, .o hcar and ronslder
evidence for and agalrs[ said proposeu variance and ,o investinate and make find(n9s
and rr_cormendation, In connection iiierewi[h, said public hearirg having been
continued to [~~ ?lanning Cenmission meetinq of February 11+, 1o77; and
WiiEREAS, said Cormiss{on, after due inspec[lon, investigtf*ion and study mad~
by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideratlon of all evidence and repor[s
of`ered aC said hearina, does find and determine the `o1lowing facts:
~, rhnt the petitioner pre~oses che folla.y~n~ :+afve~5 !'rom t,h~ AnaheEm
Manlcipel Code, to permlt outdoor wooa starnye ir, [he HL (!~IDUSTRf/~!, LIMiI'ED) ZONE:
(a) S('CTif1N 1E1,Of,,06(:,031 - Hlnlmum numbcr of park,lnc~ specee.
(b) SCC?ION iA,F,1,Ob6,030 - fie ulred enclosurc of outdoor uses.
ence ~e g ts not u y enc os~n,
proposed wood storage)
plans.
Z, That the petitioncr dcle[ed Waiv~r i-a, ahove-~enti-"ed, by rev~ cd
RESOLUTIQN K0. PC77-37
3, 7hat Waiver 1-6, above-mentlon~d, is hereby denied on thc basis that
approval of said walver would set an undesirab1e precedert for future similar•
requests ir the ML Zone; and, furthermore, the petitioner dld not demonstrate that a
hardship would "oe created if said waiver was not granted,
4, That there are no exceptional or extraordinary circums[ances or
conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property
that do not apply gen~rally to the property or class of use in the same vicinity and
zone.
$. That the requested variance is not necessary for the preservation and
enJoyment of a substantlat property right possessed by other property in the same
vicinity and zone, and Jenied to the property in question.
6. Tha[ the requesteJ variance will be materlally detrimental to the
public welfare or inJurtous to th_ property or imorovements in such vicinity and zone
(n wh`-` ti,e property is located.
7. 1'hat no one fndica[ed their presence aC said public hearing In
oppositlon; and that r,o correspondence was received in oppositicn to the subJect
petltion.
ENV~RONMENTAL IMP~CT REPORT FIt~Dlt~G: That the D(rector of [he Planning
Department has eterm ned that t e proposed activity falis within the definfLion of
Section 3.01, Class 1, of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the Requirements for an
Environmental impact Report and is, therefore, csCegorically exempt from the
requirement to file an EIR.
NOW, TIfEREFOR[, BE IT RESOLVf.D that the Anaheim Cf[y Planning Comm(ssion
does hereby deny subJect Pe[ition for Vartance on the basis of the aforementioned
findlnqs.
T11E fOREG01tl"u RESOLUT10~7 is slgned and approved by me this 14th day of
February~ 1977.
,..
,/~ ,,; ~; .
~AATR `~'. .%~ i~ / ~ --~
~
ANAHEIM CITY PLAN~IING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
. ~
-2-
RESOLU710N N0. PC77-37
ST.0.TE OF CALIFORf~IA )
CQUNTY OF ORANGE )ss,
CITY OF ANAFiFiM )
(, Patrlcia E1. Scanlan, Secretary of the Anaheim CiLY °lanninn ~c,mrniss~on,
do hereby certify that the foregoing resolutlon was passed and a~'opted at a neeting
of the Anahcim City Planning Commission held or February 1i~, 1977, at 1:30 p.n., by
the fallowing vote of the i~emb~rs ~hercof;
AYES: COMMISSIOMERS: BARNES, FttR3ST, h;1~2G, TOLAR
NOES: COMHISSIONEP.S: NONE
At35E~~T: LOMM{SSIONERS: ~SORLEY, JOHNSON
ABS7AIH; COHMISSIONEP,S: UA~?li,
I"7 WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereun[o set ry nand this 14,h day of ~ebruary,
t977.
~ ~~
SECRE~AR , ANANEIH C17Y PLAPIFIiNG COMMISSI~t~
-3- RE50LUTION N0. Pc77-37