PC 83-93~~~.
RESOLUTION NO. PC83-93
A REF.OLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY FLANNING COMMISSION
ThilT PE'PITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 3333 BE GRANTED
WHEREA.S, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified
Petition for Variance from PE7'ER GWOSDOF, ET AL., 1695 West Crescent Avenue,
Anaheim, California 92801, owner., and TERRY MECHLING, 1172 South Coast
Highway, Laguna Beach, California 92651, agent of certain real property
sit~ated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California
described as:
THE NORTFI 60 FEET OF THAT PORTION OF LOi 9 OF A REPLAT OC iHE
"ORCHARD PARK TRACT", AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN b00K 7,
PF.r,E 6 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAIU ORANGE COUNTY,
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 9~ SAID POINT
BEING IN T:~E MONUMENTED CENTER LINE OF PALM STREET; AND
RUNNING THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT,
179.75; THENCE SOUTHERLY, PARALLEL WITH SAID CENTER LINE OF
PALM STREET, 120 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY, PARALLEL WITH SAID
NORTHERLY LINE, 174.75 FEE'1` TO SAID (;ENTER LINE; THEN(;E
NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTER LINE, 120 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at
the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on May 2, 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 heac and consider evidence for and against said groposed variance and to
investigat~ and make findings and recommpn~ations in conrec~ion ther~~~i*h;
said public hearing having been continued to the Planning Commission meeting
of May lfi, 1983; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, invest~gation and
stud_v 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 waiver of the following to
construct an office building:
SECTION 18.41.063.030 - Minimum sideyard setback
(10 feet required; 1 inch proposed)
2. That the above-mentioned waivers are hereby granted on the basis
that the petitioner demonstrated that s hardship exists due to the size,
location and surroundings of subject property; and on the basis that denial
would deprive subject property of a privilage Leing enjoyed by other
properties in the same zor.e and vicinity.
#0631I PC83-93
.~,.
~-.
3. That the requested variance is hereby granted subject to the
petitioner's stipulation at the public hearing to provide a landscape b:affer
a minimum of three (3) feet wide adjacent to the block wall along the
easterly property line; and that Cypress trees (or a similar tree as approved
by the Planning Department to provide a visual buffer above the 6-foot block
wall) shall be planted in said area on four (4) foot centers.
4. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to the property invoZved nr 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.
5. That the requested variance i~ necessaty for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in
the same vicinity und zone, and denied to the property in question.
6. T'~at the requested variance will not be materially detrimental
to the public welfare or injurious to the pro?erty or improvements in such
vicinity and zone in ,~hich the property is located.
7• That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in
opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to subject
petition.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FINDING: The Planning Director or his
authorized representative has ~etermined that the proposed project falls
within the definition of Cakegorical ExemPtions, Class 5, as defir~ed 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 gcant subject Petition for Variance, upon the following
e~nditions which arA hAr.eb! found to be a nececcsry prerequisite Cu l.i~e
proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and
general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the appropriate traffic
signal assessment fee shall be paid to the City of Anaheim in an
amount as determined by the City Council for new commercial buildings.
2. That the existing driveway on Harbor Boulevard sha]1 be removed and
replaced with a standard curb, gutter, sidewalk and land~caping.
3. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner
satisfactory to the C.ity Engineer.
4. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with
approved plans on file with the Street Maintenance and Sanitation
Division.
5. That thE owner of subject property shall submit a l~tter r:questing
t?rmination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2219 to the Planning
Department.
-2-
PC83-93
1:,... .. . ; _ .
6. That subject property shall he develo!~ed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on fi1= with the City of. Anaheim marked
Exhibit Nos. 1 thcough 5, provioed, however, that a minimum three (3)
foot wide landsc.~ped area shall be provided along the easterly
property line and said planter area shall be planted with Cypress
trees (or a similar tree as approved by the Planning Department to
provide a visual buffer above the 6-foot block wall) on four (4) foot
centers.
7. That prior to the commencement of the activity authorized under this
resolution, or prior to the~ time that a building permit is issued, or
within a period of one year from the date of this resolution,
whichever occurs first, Condition No. 5, nbove-mentioned, shall be
complied with. Extensions f~r further time to complete said
conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code.
8. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos.
2, 3, 4 and 6, above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
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 compiiance with each and al.l ~f the conditions
hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any oart thereof, be
declared invalid or unen~orc~able by the final judgment of any court of
~ompetent jurisdiction, then this Fesolution, and any approvals herein
contained, shall be deemed null and void.
THE EOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 16th day
of P1ay, 1983.
~ J ~
/ //'~~ ~~t~/
CHAiRMAN~ U '1t~MYUHE
ANAHEIM ¢ TY PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
` /'
G ~~/ .~ ~ ;~a,< ._,a
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OP CALIFORNIA )
COUNT: OF pRANVE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAFIEIM )
I, Edith L. Harris, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning
Com+~ission, do hereby certify that the fore9oing resolution was passed and
adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on Mal~ lo,
1983, by the following vote of the members there of:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOUAS, HERBST, KING, MC BURNEY
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: HONE
ABSE[IT: COP1t4ISSIONERS: BUSHORE, FRY, L11 CLAIRE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this l6th day of May,
1983.
`~~• ,G° i~~.:.
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-3- PC83-93