PC 80-33r,ESO~uTior~ r~o. Pc 80-33
A RESOUJTIOFI OF TFIE APlAHEIM CITY PLANNING C0~1~11SSIOt1
THAT PETITIOPJ FOR VARIANCE W0. 31;~ BE GRAPITED
IJNEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a ver~fied
Petttion for Vari&nce from DUAFlE D. fiLAVPJICKA AMD MARGARITA L. HLAVNICKA, 2648
Russell Avenue, Anaheim, California 928Q1, o~~m ers of certain real property situated
in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California described as:
Lot 21, uf Tract No. 3007, as per map recorded in Book ?~9, Pages
33 and 34 of Mlscellaneous Maps in the ofFice of the Recorder of
said County.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did schedule a public hearing at the
City Ha11 in the City of Anaheim on February y1, 1980, at 1:3~ p.m., notice of s<~!d
public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim Munlcipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and consider
evidence for and against said proposed variance and to investigate and make findings
and recommendattons in connection therewith; seid public hearing having bee~
continued to the Pianning Commission meeting of February 25, 1q80, and
4IHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made
by itself and iri its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports
offered at said hearing~ does find and dete~mine the follo~~ing facts:
t. That the petitioner proposes a waiver of the folloi•~ing to construct a
room addit?on:
SFCT10^! 18.'lC.Q64.p2Q - tlinimum side yard setback.
5 feet required;
~eet proposed)
L, That the above-mentioned waiver is hereby granted cn the basis that the
petitioner demonstrated that a hardship exists due to the minimal width of subject
property.
3. That there are excepttonal or extraordtnary cfrcumstances or condltions
applicable to the property involved or to the intendad use of the property that do
not apply generally to the property or class of use ir. the same vicini*_y and zone.
4. That the requested variance is necessary for the preservatior and
enjoyment of a substanttal property right possessed by other property in the same
vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in question.
5. That the requested variance arill not be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or inJurious to the aroperty or imi~rovements tn such vicini*y and zone
in which the property is located.
6. That no one indicated their presence ~t saicl public hearing in
ooQosition; artd that no correspondence was rec~ived in uppositton to the subject
petition.
!'~~~-33
ENVIROPIMEtJTAI_ IPiPACT FIPIDI~lG: The Planning Director or his authorized
representative has determined that the proposed project falls a~ithin the definition
of Categorical Exemptions, Class ~, as defined in Paragraph 2 of the City of Anaheim
Cnvironmental Impact Report Guidelines and is, therefore, categoricaliy exempt from
the requiremer~t to prepare an EIR.
NOW, THEREFOP.E, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission
does hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the follawing conJittons which
are hereby found to be a ~ecessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject
property in order to preserve the safety and general o-~~lfare of the Citizens of the
City of Anaheim:
1. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file ~~ith the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. t
through 6.
2. Plans shall be submitte~i to the Building Division showing compliance
wlth the minimum standards of the City ot Anaheim, including the UniPorm Buliding,
Plumbing, Electrical, Housing, Mechanical and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of
Anaheim. The appropriate permits shall be obtained for any necessary Urork.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does liereby
find and determine that adoption of this Resolution ts expressly predicated upon
applicant's compliance a~ith each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth.
Should any such co~ditionY or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable
by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution,
and any approvals herein contained, shall 6e deemed null and voTd.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 25th day of
February~ 1980,
ATTEST:
C~~~ / . ,~.~iL...r.a-~
CHAIR410MAN, APIAhIEIP1 CITY PLAPJNING COMMISSION
(D ~~ ~ i~l~(i~~
SECRETARY, ANAHE i M C I TY PLAWP~ I PJ~ COMt1 I SS I OPJ
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Edith L. Harris, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do
hereby certify that the fo-egoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meettng of
the Anaheim City Plar~ning Commission held on February 25, 1930, by the following vote
of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES, BUSHOftE, DP,VID, FRY, HFP,?ST, Y,ING, TOLAR
NOES: COt1MISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: CQ11F11SSi0NERS~ tJOtIE
~N WITNESS 41HEREOF, I have hereunt~ set my hand this 25th day of February,
1980.
~ ~ -° ~~,
s , ~ , TT~C'f1?~i13'S?7~J
-z- ~c8o-33