PC 83-7. - ,,...,.
F2ESOLUTION NO. PC83-7
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 3314 BE GRAi~TED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified
Petition £or Variance f.rom RONALD K. AND MARY J. MOEN, 1723 Rutherford Street,
Anaheim, California 92806, owners of certain real property situated in the
City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California described as:
LOT 74, pF TRACT 5389~ AS PER MAP I2ECORDED IN BOOK 245~
PAGES 44 TO 46 OF MAPS, IN 'i'HE OFFICE Oi THE COUNTY
RECORpER OF SAID COUNTY.
~+1HEREAS, the City Planning Commission 3id hold a public hearing at
the City Hall in the City of Anaheim on January 10, 1983, at 1:30 p.m „ notice
of said public hearing 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 and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHERRAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and
study made by itsel£ 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 t.he petitioner proposes waivers of the following to
construct an addition ~.o a single-fzmily residence:
(a) SEC.TION 18.27.062.020 - Maximum site coverage
(358 permitted; 468 proposed)
(b) SECTION 18.27.063.020 - Minimum side yard .;etback
(5 ft. req~ired; 4 ft. 3 in. proposed)
z• That the above-mentioned waivers are hereby granted on the basis
that the petitioner demonstrated that a hardship exists in that denial would
deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the same
zone and vicinity.
3• 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 apply generally to the property or class of use in the
same vicinity and zone.
4• That the requested variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in
the same vic4nity and zone, and denied to the property in question.
5• 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.
G• That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in
opposition; and that nu correspondence wa~ received in opposition to subject
petition.
0417I PC83-7
~~~. ~"'\
ENVIRONM~NTAL IMPAC4' FINDING: It was noted the Planning Director or
his authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls
withi.n the definition of Categorical Exemptions. Class 5, as defined in the
State ~IR Guidelines and is, tlierefore, categorically exempt from the
requirement to prepare an EIR.
NOW, THER~FORE, HE 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 necesaary prerequisite to the
proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the sa£ety and
general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That the owner of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim
the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be
appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the
building permit is issued.
2• That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay the traffic signal
assessment fee (Ordinance No. 3896), in an amount as determined by
the City Council, for each new dwelling unit prior to the issuance of
a building permit.
3. 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.
4. That Condition No. 3, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior
to final building and zoning inspections.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly
predicated upon applicant'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
conpetent jurisdiction, then tnis Resolution, and any approvals herein
cont.ained, shall be deemed null and void.
THE FOREGOING REgOLUTION is signed and approved by me this lOth day
of January, 1983.
~
H N, ANAHEIM CITY PLA COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~~.~, ,t° ~.~ ~_
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
'2" PC83-7
-~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CZTY 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 January
10, 1983, by the fallowing vote of the members there of:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOUAS, BUSHORE, FRY, HERBST, KING, LA CLAIRE,
MC BURNEY
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this lOth day of January,
1983.
~~ ^. " ~Kl61.t~.4.
SECF2ETARY, ANAKEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSICN
-3- PC83-7