PC 82-74~-.
~ESO~uTio~~ r~o, rc 32-71E
/1 RE50U!T I 0!d OF THE AIJAFIE I11 C I TY PL/1NM I tdr, COPU11 SS I 0'J
TI~AT PETITI01! FOR VARi~t1CE fJO. 3z6~ ~3[ GRAr,ITED
41HEREAS, the Anafieim City Planning Commission dicl receive a verified
Petition for Variance from ~GNPaIS A. UU7T, 1005 North Whitticr Street, Anaheim,
California 92c~06, owner, of certain real property situatr.d in the City of
Analie~m, County of Orange, State of California dr_scribed as:
LOT 122 OF TRACT 3167, AS PER ~1A? RFCORDED I!! DOOIC 98, P~fES 11,
12 A"!D 13 OF ~'11SCELLAPJEOUS H/1PS, RECORDS OF SAID ORA~lGF. CQU!dTY.
WtiEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the City
Hall in the City of Anaheim on April 19, 19(32, at 1:30 p.m., notice of said pub)ic
hearing having been duly given as required by la~~~ and in accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim ~1unicipal Code, Chanter 1£i.03, to hear and consider
evidence for and against said proposed variance a~d to investigate and make findings
and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WtIEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made
by itself and in its behalf, and after due considera~ion of ail evidence and reports
offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts:
1. Tliat the petitioner pro~oses a 4raiver of the foll~~.ving to construct a
7-foot higli block wall and room addition:
(a) SECTION 1E3.04.043.101 - Maximum fence height
( 2 inches permitted in front setback;
7 feet proposed)
(b) SECTIOi~! 18.26.063.010 - Minimum landsca ed setback
25 f~et required from 4Jhittier Strect;
22 feet proposed)
2. That tfie above-mentioned waiver (a) is hereby granted on the basis that
the petitioner demonstrated that a hardship exists in ttiat subjPCt property is
located adjacent to an arterial highway (La Palma Avenue) and denial would deprive
subject property of a privilege enjoyed by other properties in the same zone and
vicinity.
3. That the above-mentioned waivcr (b) is hereby granted on the basis that
the request is minimal and denial would deprive subject pro~~rty of a privilege
enjoyed by other properties in the samP zone and vicinity.
fi. Th~.t tliere are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
appl~caule to tfie property involved or to the intended use of the property that do
not appiy generally to the property or class or use in the same vicinity and zone.
y. That the requestr_d variance is necessary for the preserv~tion and
enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same
vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in question,
PC32-74
~. That the requested v3riance taill not be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to tlie property or improvements in such vicinity and zone
in ~Nhich the property is locatecl.
7. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in
opposition; and that no correspondence was received in o~position to the subject
petition.
EIJVIR01l11EP~TAL IMPACT FINDI~~G: The Planning Dirr_ctor or his authorized
representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition
of Categorical Exemptions, Class $, as defined in the State EIR Guidelines and is,
therefore, categorically exempt from tlie requirement to prepare an EIR.
fJ0!J, TFIEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED that the /lnaheim City Planning Commission
does hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the follaaing conditions 4~hich
are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject
property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of tihe Citizens af the
City of Anaheim:
1. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with
plans and specifications on file with the City of Analieim marked Exhibit
Nos. 1 and 2; provided, however, that the location and setbacks for all new
construction shall be measured from the ultimate rights-of-way, as specified
by code.
2. That Condition iJo:. 1 , above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior
to final building and zoning inspections.
E3E IT FURTIIER RESOL~IED that the Anaheim City Planninq Commission does hereby
find and cletermine that adoptlon of this Resolution is expressly prsdicated upon
appiicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth.
Should any such condition, 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 be deemed null and void.
TNE FOREGOIi~G RE50LUTIOtd is signed and approved by me this 19th day of
Aprll, 1902.
ATTEST•
!~ ~ .~ V-~,~.,a.+s~
CHA t R~1AtJ, A!IAHE i Pt C I TY PLAN~~ I P~G COMM 1 SS I OP~
~ ~ /`YL~~iiua/
SECRETARY, AWAHEIM CITY P~AtdIJItJr, COt1MIS510N
-2- PC82-74
~
~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUt~ITY OF ORANGE ) ss.
C ITY OF {IiJAHE II~ )
/a ~ a
SECR~TARY, A!IANEIM CITY PLANNIMG COMf115SI0N
-3- PC82-74
1
~, Edith L. Harris, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do
hereby certify tiiat ttie foregoing resolution was passed and adoptr.d at a meeting of
the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on April 19, 1982, by the followtng vote of
the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: EiOUAS, f3USHORE, FR'f, H[RftST, KIN~, 11C EURNFY
NOES: COMNISSIO~IERS: IdOtdE
Af35Ei~1T: COM!115SIONERS: 13Aft~JES
lt~ WITIJESS 4JHEREQF, I liave hereunto set my han~i this 19th day of April,
1932.