PC 80-108RESOLUTIOtI tJO. PC 0~1-1~~~3
A R[SOLUT I Otl OF Tf1E l1tIAhIE U1 C ITY PLP.f7N I F~~ CQ~IM I SS I~1N
THAT PETITIOtI FOR VAP,IA(ICE PI!1, 3155 DE G2.~h!TEf1
4:HEP,EAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a veriFied
Petition for Variance from AIdTHOhIY GODUEIA ATlD LEA GOIINFIA, °37 South Reach
Boulevard, Anaheim, California ~ZJ:~If, ot•mers of certain real ~roperty sltuated in the
City of Anahein, County of Orange, State of California d~scribr_d as:
The East half of the East half of the Southeast quarter of the
Southeast quart~r and thP East 8 feet of the 41est half of tne East
half of the Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section
14, Tot~mship 4 South, Range 11 41est, in the Rancho Los Coyotes, as
shown on a map thereof recorded in ~300l; 51, page 7, et seq.,
Miscellaneous Maps, recorcis of said Orange County; EXCFPTIF.If;
THEREFROM the South 72~ feet thereof; .4LS0 EY,CEPTIDI~ the ~~orth 1tR1
feet thereof; ALSO EXCEPTIPJG TIiEREFRQ~1 the East ~!~ feet thereof.
WHEREAS, the Clty Planning Commission did hold a public hearinn at the Ctty
Hall in the City of Anaheim ~r, June 3~, 1a~0, at t:3n p,m., n~tice of said publPc
hearing having been duly given as required by la~•~ and tn accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Cha~ter 1P,03, to hear and consider
evidence for and against said proposed variance and to investi9ate and mal;e findings
and recommendations in co~nection thereo-;ith; and
b1HEP~EAS, said Commission, after due inspPCtion, inv~stigation and study made
by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideratio~ of all evidence and reports
offered at said hearing, does find and determine the folloa~ing racts:
1. That the petitioner proposes a waiver of t!~e f~llo~•~i~g to retain an
t11cg~? fencc:
SECTIOM 1~.O~t.043,102 - ~laximum fence height.
and 1 .21.0,+ eet permitted;
~feet existing )
2. That the proposed variance is hereby aranted for a period of to-~o years
on the basis that although the subject ~roperty is currently cleveloped as a single-
family d~aelling, it 1s designated on the Anaheim General Plan and will be ultimately
developed for comr~ercial uses; and that the petittoner has stinulated to removal of
the fence a~hen the property is so developed in tiao years.
3. ihat the above-mentiened ~~aiver is hereby nrante~l on the basis that the
petitioner demonstrated that a hardship exists due to surrounding commercial uses.
3. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
appli~able to the property involved or to the intended use of the nroperty that do
not apply genera~ly to the property or class of use in the same vic(nity and zone.
4. That the requested variance is necessarv for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the sam~>
vtcinity and zone, and denied to the property in question.
PC30-108
5. That the reauested variance o-~iil not ~e materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious l•o the pro~erty or improvements in siich vicinity and zone
in ~~~hich the property is located.
G. That no one indicated their presence at said puhlir hearinp in
opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject
petitione
E~dVIROMMENTAL IMPACT FINDIFIG: The Planning Director or his authorized
representative has determined that the prpposed pro_ject falls within Y.he definition
of Categorical Exemptions, Class 3, as defined in Paragraph 2 of the City of Anaheim
Environmental Impact Report Guidelines and is, therefore, categorically er.empt from
the requirement to prepare an FIR.
N01•!, TNEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Plannina Commission
does hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the follo~~ing cenditions which
are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the pronoseci use of the subject
property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the
City of Anaheim:
S, That subject property shall be developed suhstantially in accordance
taith plans and specifications on file ~-rith the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit No. 1
2, That tlie ~roposed fence is aroroved f~r a period of two (2) years at
which time the property owner may request, in t,~riting, an extension fron the Planning
Commission if the property has remained in residential use.
BE IT FURTriF.R RESOLVE~ tliat the Anaheim City Plannin~ Commissinn does herehy
find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon
applicant~s compliance with Pach and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth.
Should any such condition, or any part thereof~ he declared invalid or unenforceable
by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution,
and any approvals herein contained, shall he c1Pem~~i null a~d v~td.
THE FORESOING RESOLl1TI0Fl is signed and approved hy me this 3~th day of June,
1930.
~~ lt~,~.f:~v-~ ~ /) ~~~-
CHA RW0~IAPI, A~lAHE IM C I TY PLIINN I N~ C0~1M 1 SS I ~M
ATTEST:
SECRET- ARY,f~NAHEIM CITY PLAPININ~NISSION
-2- PC80-103
~..
~
;' : - _
:~`
;.`.
, ~:
STAT[ OF CALIFORPIIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAfiEIP1 )
~. Edith L, fiarris, Secretary of the Anahcim City Piannino Commission, do
hereby certify that the foregoing resolution a~as passed and adopted at a meeting of
the Anahelm City planning Commission held on June 3'?, 19P,0, by the follo~oing vote of
the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIOMERS: BARNES, BUSH02E, FRY, HER95T, I;ING, TOLA?
NOES: COMMISSIQNERS: NONE
ABSENT: COH!11SSIOh1ERS: NOME
VACANCY: OPlE SEAT
~FJ WITPIESS WtiEREOF, I have hereunto set ny hand this 3~th day of June, 19P,p,
~ .
SECRFTAR , AP~AHEI~1 CITY PLA^IMIMc CO`1HISSIOpI
-3- Pc3n-to3