PC 84-33RESOLUTIUN N~. PC84-3:3
A RES~I,U`rIUld OF TH~ ANAHETM CTTY PLAIVNING COMMTSSION
'1'HA'i' PBTTTION b'Oft VhRIANCE NOo 33"/4 BE DGNIED
WEiEREAS, the Anah~im City Planning c:ommissi.on did receit~;: a verified
Petition for V~riance troni RE'i'TFtEMENT FUND Z~kUS'1~ Ci1 THE PLUMBING, HEATiNG &
PIF~ING INUUSTRY OF ~OiJT[iCRN CALII'l~RidIA, 50~ Shatlo P1ace, Fifth Floor, Los
Angel~~, Calif.orn.ia, 90U20, owcier, ~n:~ 13ROWN DEVELQPMEiVT CORPOR~,TTON, 3595
PrPsley Avenue, HivR~rside, California 9'2507, agent of certain real property
situated in the Ci.ty of: D,n~.heim, County of Ur.angP, St~t~ o:f California
described as:
F~ARCEL 3 O1~ PARCEL MAP N0. 79••2.79 AS SH(?WN UN A MRP REC~RDED '2N
BOOK 143, PRGFS 34 AND 35 ~JF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE pFFICE OF Z'h~
COUN~'Y RFCORDER.
WHEREAS, the City Flanning Cornm~ssion did holci a pub].ic hearing at
~he Civic CenteX in th~ City of Anaheim on Febru~ry 22, t,904, at 1:30 p.m.,
n4tir.e oF said public hcaring having been duly given as reguired by law an~ iri
accurdance w~.th the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code~ Chapter 18.Q3,
to hear and consic:~r evidc~nce ~'or and against said proposec! v~riance and ~o
investigate and make findings nnd recomm~ndations i~i connec~ion thexewith; and
WHEREAS, s~id Commission, after due inspection, invest:~~ation and
study made by itself and in its behalF, arid after due cansideration of a:ti
evic]ence ~~nd xeports ~ffered at sazc! hearing, does find and determine the
followzny facts:
1. That the petition~r ~rop~~ses waivers of. the foll~wi,ng ta
~onstruct a 25i)-~unit apartment cc:nple:c:
(a) SLC'1'ION 18.34.062.U1i - Maximum srructural hei~ht
~ (o_ne storv germi.tL•ed within 150 feet of
single-f.ami'ly zo~aing; two stori.c~
proposed) ~r
(b) SECTION 18.34.062.03Z
(c) SECTION 18.34.065.011
(d) SECTION 18.34.066.020
AND 18.06.0_40_.U20
Minimum £loor area of dwellinq units
Minimum distance between bui..lciinqs
(~1 to 29 f:eet required; 15 _feet ~+r•oposed)
Minirtium di.mensions of parlcinq ~Aace~
(10 _feet bv 20 .feet coverF~d spaces
required; 9 feet b,~9 feet proposed)
(~) a^ECTION 18.34.066.02U - RequirPd enclosure of carpurt~
AND 18_06.040.025 (rriinimum 50$ s~lid enclosure on 3 sides
required; unenc:Loscd ~roposed)
2. That thc~ above-mentioned waive:s are hereby denied on the basis
*_hat there are no special circum~tanc:~s applicable to th~: prop~rty such as
size, shape, to~ography, location or surcoundings, which do not appiy to other.
identically zoned pxoperties in the viciniky; that scrict aFplication af the
#0158r PC84-33
Zoninc,~ Co~le does not deprive the pruperty o~ ~r.ivilzg~s en;joyed by other
p,:oper.ties ~n identical zoning classif.i.c~tion in L-h~ vici.nity; and that the
conjunctive ::eclassifica~.ion lo RM~:I?.00 Zoning way denied.
3. `.Ch~t +.:her~ are no txception~al or extraordinary c:ircumstances or
conr~itions applicab~.e to the property involved or to the intended ttse of the
property that. do not apply gpnerall~• i:o the properl.y oY~ class of. use in L•he
same vicinity a;zc~ zone.
4. `i'hat the rEqu~::~ted variance is not necessar~y for lhe
preserval:ion ~znd enjoyment of a suustantial property right poGSess~d by other
properi:y in Ltle same vicinity and zone, and ~eni~cl to the propert:y in question~
5. That tt~e requested variance will I~e rnaterially detrimentaZ to
the ~ubl.ic welfar~ or injurious to the p*_'opnrt~ or improvemerits in such
vicinity an.d aone in whirh the property is located.
5. That 25 pcr:;c~ns 1RC~1CatC..'Cj their presence at said public h~aring
in opposil•ion; anci that a~etition containing ~pproximately 184 signatures was
r.'eceived in opposition to subject pEtitian.
EtdVTRONMENTAL IMPAC:' FINDING: That the Anahei~~ City planning
Commission has reviewed the prc~posa.l to chann~ the current los~-medium density
residential designation to medium derisity resid~ntial and to reclassify
sul~ject property from ~he CG (Commer.r.ial, Gen~ral) Zone to the RM-1200
(Resi~ential, Mu1ti;~le Family) lone to canstruc.t a 2~0-uni.t apartment complex
with waivers ~f maximum structural height, minimum distance between buildings,
minimum dimensions of parki.ng s~aces and required enc].osure of c,arports on an
irregularly--shaped parcel of ].and ~cansisting of appruximately 9.6 acres having
a~ron~age of appr.oximat~ly 920 feet on the south side of Plilken Way, and
being located approximately 615 teet east of tr~e centPrlinP of Harhor
Boulevard; ~nd does hereby disapprove the Negative Declara~ion upon khe
findin~,~ that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any
comments received during the public review ~rocess and further £inding on the
basis of the initial sti.~dy arid any comments recei.ved that there is no
substantial evi.dence that ::he project wi11 have a significant ~ffect on tk~e
environment.
NOW, THEREFURE, k3E IT I2ESOLVED that the Anaheim City Ylannin~
Commission does h~reby d~ny sub~ect Petition for Variance on tt~e basis of the
aforementionecl findings.
'~ilE FUREGOING RF,SOI~U'r.tOtv is signed and approve~~ by me this FPbruary
al, i9a~~
~/ Ll,c.c. ~ ~~c.,rC.--~.i
CfIAIRWOMA[~,,~ AHEIM CITY PT,ANNING CUI~IMISSION
~
ATTFST:
v ~it~t.e^~'
c:;CRE`PARY~ ANAHCIM CI'1'Y PI~RNNIT1Ci COMMISSION
~
_2_ PC84-33
~^
STA`rG CF' C:ALI['ORNIA )
COUNZ'Y OF QRANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Edith L. Harris, ~Secr.etary of ~he Anaheim Ci~y Planning
Cammission, do hereby certify L-hat the foregai.ng resolution was passed and
adopteii at a meetinc~ of the Anaheim Ci.i:y Plannirig Commis~ion held cn February
'l?. 1984, by the fo].lowi-1g vote ~f th~ members therEO£:
, AYES: COMMISSIQNERS: AOUAS, BUSH~RE, F'RY, K~NG, MC BURNEY
iaOES: COMMISSIONPItS: ~dONE;
ABSENT: COMMISSIONE.RS: HE12BS'i'
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: LA CLATRE
IN Y~IITDIESS WHGHEOF, z have hereunto se~ my hand this 22nd day ai
Fe}aruary, 1984.
~ ~'~__~..._
:~ECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMI~SION
,.~
_3_ PCt34-33