Loading...
PC 79-64RESOLUTIOtI N0. PC73-64 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEI,4 CITY PLANNIN~ CONNISSION TNAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N~. 1954 BE DEHIED WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planninq Commission did receive a verTfled Pettt(on for Conditional Use Permit fram ERPIEST AND ELtSA STEPHENS, 6~5 North Narbor Boulevard, Anahe(m, California 92805, oo-mers of certain real property situated in the City of Anahefm, County of Orange, S[ate of Caltfornta, descrlbed as: LOT 6 OF TRACT N0. 2237, tN Tf;E CITY OF AGAHEIH, LOUtJTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIfOR!~IA, AS PER HAP RECOROED IN BOOK 61 PAGES 35, 36 AND 37 OF MISCELLANFOUS M~PS, IN THE OFFILE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. WHEREAS, the C(cy Plannfng Lommission dtd hold a public hearing at the City Hali in the City of Anaheim on March 2G, 197~, at 1:30 e.m,, notice of sald public hear(ng having been duly gtven as required by lar~ and in accordance wlth the provisions of the Anaheim Muntcipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use an•i to investiaate and make ftndfngs and recommendations in connection therewith; and NHEREAS, said Commission, after due lnspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf~ and after due consideration of all evldence and reports offered at said hearfng, does find and determine the following fac[s: 1. That the proposed use Es properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anahetm Municipal Code Sec[ion 1A.25.~5~.~2~ to wit: to re[aln a chtld day care center in an existing resfdence wi[h rraivers of: (a) SECTION 18,25,063.02Q - Hintmum side ard. 7-1 2 eet re uired• nore existing (b) SECTION 18,25,OE7.010 - Permit[ed t oe and size of slqn. onc 1 s uare oo[ name-plate permitted; one, square oot Iden[Ificatlon sign permitted) 2. That the requested use is hereby denicd on the basTs tha[ the subject property has a very )imited and hazardous access from Harbor Boulevard (an arterial Highway)and that inadequate parktng is available and because of high spced [raffic volumes on Harbor Boulevard. 3. Tha[ the requested walvers are hereby dented on the basis that no hardship was demonstrated by the petttioner applicable to the property~ inc)udtng size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do noc apply to other property under identical zoning classlflcation Tn the vicinity; and because the use is denled and the walvers are, therefore. unnecessary. 4. That thc proposed use wiil adversely affect the adJolning land uses and the growth and developmen[ of the area tn Nhich it is p~oposed to 6e located. PC79-61+ 5. That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is not adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not ~etrimental to the particular area nor to the peace, health, safety, and general welfare of the Citizens of the Ci[y of Anaheim. 6. That the granting of the Condittonal Use Pernit will be detrlmental to the peace, healih, safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim. 7. That 12 persons indicated [heir presence at satd public heartng in opposttion; that no correspondence was received in opposiiton to the subJect petition; anJ that a petition with 17~ signatures was received. ENVIRONHENTAL IMPACT FII~DING: Tha[ the Anahcim City Piannina Lamisston has reviewed the proposal to retain a child day care center in an existing residence with waivers of minlmum side yard and pernitted tyDe and s:ze of slan on a rectangularly- shaped parcel of land consisting of approxfma[ely ?~00 square feet, having a frontage of approximately 76 feet on the west side of Harbor Boulevard, having a naximum depth of approximately 119 feet. being located approximatcly h08 feet north of the ce~terline of Sycamore Street; and do~s hereby apnrove the Ilegative Declaration from the requirement to prepare an environmentai inpac[ report on the basis that there would be no stgntficant indfvidual or cumulative adverse environmental impact due to the approval of this Negative Declaration since the Anaheim ~eneral Plan designates the subject property for low density restdentia! land uses camensurate with the proposal; that no sensittve environmental lmpacis are involved fn the proposal; [hat the initfal 5[udy submitted by the oetiiioner indicates no signiflcant Indivldual or cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and that [he Negative Declaration substan[tating the foregoing findings is on file in the Lity of Anaheim Planning Department. NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED that the Anahelm City Planning Commission does hereby deny subJect Petition for Conditional Use Permii on the basis of the aforementioned findings. TNE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 26th day of March, 1?79. r AI AN, LI PLANNING COMMISSIOH ATTEST: _ ECRETARY~-ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION _2_ PC79-64 STATE OF CALIfORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I. Edith L. Harris. Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commisslo^+ do theeAnaheimiClty~Planning~Geommissionsheldion Marcha26ed1°79,abypthe followingtv te of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ~979. BARNES, BUSHORE, DAVID, HERBST, .iOHtISO~J, KING, TOLAR NONE NONE IN WITNE55 41HEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ~6th day of March, ~n ~~ ,,~ 'A! A.1 w . ~" SECRETAR.Y, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ~ -3- PC73-6'~