PC 79-53RESOLUTIO~t N0. PC 79-53
A RESOlUTION OF Tt!E AIIAHF.IM CITY PLANNINf, LOH4ISSION
TNAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 308~ BE DENIED
Wt~EREAS, [he Anaheim City Planning Commts;ion did receive a verifled
Peticion for Varfance fror.i PNYLLIS J. DON, 1173 West Locust Avenue, Anahetm,
California 928~2, owner of certain real property situatecl in the Ctty of Anaheim,
County of Orange, State of Californla described as:
Lot 27 in Tract No. 13?4, as per map recorded in Boo~ i~+, Pages
l~7-49 inclusive of maps, in the office of the County Recorder of
Orange County.
NHEREAS. the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearin~ at the City
Hall in the Ctty of Anafieim on Narch 12, 1~74, at 1:30 p,n.~ notice of said puAllc
hearing havtng been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the
provisions of the Rnaheim Municipal Lode, Chapter 19.p3, to h~ar and conslder
evidence for and against sa(d proposed variance and to investiga[e and make findin95
and recommendations in connection therewtth; and
NHEREAS, sald Commission, after due inspection, fnves[19ation and study made
by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports
offcred at said hearing, docs find and determine the following fac[s:
1. Tha[ thc petitioner nroposes a waiver of the follrnring to retain an
existing garagc convcrsion:
SECTIOH 18.26.066.011 - Mtnimum number and cy e of parkin spaces.
2 s aces tn a ara~e requlred;
none er. sLir.^
2. That the above waiver Is hereby denied on the basls that the pett[loner
did not demonstrate that a hardship exists and that approval ovould be settin9 an
undesirable precedent.
3. That there are no exceptional or extraordinary clrcums~ances or
condltions appltcable to [he property Involved or to the intended use of the property
that do not apply generally to [ht propcrty or class of use in the same vitlnity and
zone.
4. That the requested vartance Is not necessary for the preservatton and
enJoynent of a substantlal property right possessed by other property in the same
vicinity and zon~. and denied to the property in questton,
5. That the requested variance will be ma[erlally detrimental to the
publlc welfare or inJurtous to che property or Improvements In such victntty and zone
In wfiich the property is located,
PC79-53
6. That no one Indtcated [heir presence at sald publtc hearing in
opposition; and that no correspondence was received tn oppositlon to the subJect
petitton.
ENVIRONHEt~TAL IMPACT FINDING: The Planning Director or his authorized
representai ve has determ ned that the proposed proJect falis Nithin the deflnition
of Categorical Exemptions, Classes 1 and 5, as defined in Paragraph 2 of the City of
Anahetm Environmental Impact Report Guidelines and is, [herefore, categorlcally
exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR.
NOU, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anahcim Ctty Planninq Commission
does hereby deny subject Petition for Vartance on the basis of the aforementioned
findinys.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUT101~ is signed and approved by me this 12th day of
March, 197?.
LH ~N~ AN `1 IT LANNING C0~1.`115510N
ATTEST:
~~. ~ ~~~
SECRETARY, AttAHElr, CITY LAIJNING CDy!115510l:
STATE OF CALIFOP,NIA )
COUNTY OF ORA~JGE ) ss.
CITY OF AIlAHEIN )
i. Edith L. Narris, Secretary of che Anaheim City Planning Camission~ do
hereby certify tha[ thc foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of
ihe Anahclm Ltty Planning Commisston held on March 12, 1a74, by the following vote of
the maabcrs thcreof:
AYES: COM!tISSIONERS: BUSHORE, DAVID, HERBSY, JOH~ISON, Y.ING
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSI~NERS: BARNES, TOL~R
IN kIT~~ESS IJHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 12th day of March~
1979.
~~ z.' ~~,
SECRET/1RY~ AN.AHEIM CITY PLANNING :ONMISSION
-2- Pt79-53