Loading...
PC 83-226T. RESOLUTIOid N0. P~83-226 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION THAm pETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 3364 BE GRANTED WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Variance from PHILLIP ALAN TUTTLE AND KAREN RAE TUTTLE, 2633 East Strong Place, Anaheim, California 92806, owners of certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California described as: LOT 68 OF TRACT N0. 4030 AS PER MAP THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK 150~ PAGES 48 TO 50 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS~ RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on November 28, 1983, at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearinq having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed variance and to investigate and make findings anC recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts; 1. That the petitioner proposes a waiver of the following to construct a room addition. SECTION 18.26.063.030 - Minimum rear vard setback (10 feet required; 5 feet proposed) 2. That the requested waiver is hereby granted subject to the petitioner's stipulation at the public hearing that no construction shall encroach into the six (6) foot wide public utility easement on the northerly ptoperty line. 3. That the above-mentioned waivec is hereby granted on the basis that the petitioner demonstrated that a hardship exists in that there are special circumstances appliceble to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity; and that strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the same zaning classification in the vicinity. 4. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not app~y generally to the property or class of ase in the same vicinity and 2one. 5, That the requested variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment oE a substantial property riqht possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in question. #0098r pC83-226 6. That the requested variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. 7. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was ceceived in opposition to subject petition. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FINDING: The Planning Director o~ his authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 5, as defined in the State EIR Guidelines and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which 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 the Citizens of the City of Ansheim: 1. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2; provided, however, that no consttuction (including eaves and footings) shall encroach into the six (6) foot wide publia utility easement on the northern property line. 2. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 1, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. BE IT EURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expres~ly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such cond=tion, 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. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 28th day of November, 1983. u~L` u% ) ~Z"~-r~~. CHAIRWOMAN, A~1 EIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: L'~ O~ ' L~Ul~i~c. SECRETARY~ ANAHEIM CITY 2LANNING COMMISSION -2- PC83-226 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Sg, CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Edith L. Harris, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on November 28, 1983, by the foilowing vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONEP,S: BOUAS~ BUSHORE~ FRY~ HERBST, KING~ LA CLAIRE~ NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT; COMMISSIONERS: MC BURNEY IN WITNESS i~HEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 28th day of No~•ember, 1983. ~~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ . SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC83-226