PC 85-188: . , ,. , ,. .. , ,
. . t. ,:,
RESOLUTLON NO. PC65-168
A RESOLUTION OF 2'HE ANAF!EIh1 CITY PLANNING CGMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NU. 3503 BE GRANTED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified
Petition tor Variance fcom LLOYD A. RO6k AND SANDRA ROHR, 1136 South Ambridge
Street, Anaheim, CA 92806, owner ot certain real property situated in the City
oP Anahe~m, County of Oranye, State of California described as:
LOT 1& OF TRACT NO. 6512, AS PER hiAP RECORDED IN BOOK 249~
PAGES 34 AND 35 OF 6:ISCELLANEOUS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RBCORDER OE SAID COUNTY.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at
the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on A~gust 5, 1985, at 1:30 p.m.,
notice o.E said public I~earing 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
WEIEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and
seudy made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all
evidence and reports offered at said heaiing, does find and determine the
tollowing facts:
1. That the petitioner proposes waivers of thF following to
construct a family roam addition to a single-fam-ly residence:
SECTION 18.27.U62.02U - Maximum lot coveraqe.
(358 permitted; 448 oroposed)
2. That the above-mentioned waiver is hereby grant^d on the basis
that there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size,
shape, tocoaraphy, tor>~;nr ~;~ ~~~rcurdinys wi,icii uo noc apply to oth~r
identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict application
of the 2oning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity.
3. That there ace exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
cunditiocis applicable tc r.he 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 vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in queation.
5. That the requested variance will not be materially detrimental
to the public welfare or injurious to the property or i.mprovements in such
vicinity and zone in which the property is located.
6, That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in
opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to subject
petition.
U591r
PC85-188
ENVIRONMENTAL LMPACT FINDING: The Planning Director ot his
authorizec. representative has detecmined tha~ the proposed project falls
within the definition of Categorical Ex?mptions, Class 5, as defined in the
State EiR Guidelines and is, therefoce, categoricall.y exempt from the
requicement to prepace an EIR.
NUW, THERBFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City ~lanning
Conunission does hereby grant subject Petition for Va~riance, upon the following
conditions whi.ch are hereby found ta be a nece:>sary prerequisite to the
proposed use of the subject property in ordec to preserve the safety and
general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That subject pr~perty shall be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim
marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2.
BE Im FURTt1ER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Cit~~ Planning Commission
due=~ hereby find and determine that adoFtion of this Resolution is expressly
piedicated up~n applicant's cumpliance 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 judg~~ent of any ccurt of
competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein
contained, shall •~e deemed null and void.
THE FOREGUING RESCLUTION is signed and appcoved by me this Sth day
of Auyust, 1°85.
~
c.~~cz,t~l-t~--~- ii~ (.~C. ~~--~-
CHAIRWOMAN, AHAHEiM CITY PLANNING COMDfISSION
ATTEST: •
C-o ,~..,/r~(. -^/~ ~..~~U-~tra
SECRETARY~ ANAHBIM CITY FLANNING COPIMISSLON
STATE OE' CALIEORNIA )
COUNiY OF UNANGR 1 :.,.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Edith L. Har.cis, Secretary of ttie Anaheim City Planning
Commission, do hereby certify that the furegoing resolution was passed and
adopced ac a meeL•ing of the Anaheim City Plan~ing Commission held on August 5,
1985, by the following vote of the members th=reof:
AYES: COMMISSIU~ERS: BOUAS, FRY, HERBST, LA CLAIRE, MC BURNEY
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: CUM[4ISSIONERS: LAWICFI, MESSE
IN wITN~SS WHEREOF, I have heteunto set my hand this Sth day of
August, 1985. ~/~
~~.~.L=~ .~ // /c,Cu.t < '
SECRE'PARY~ ANtiHEi61 CITY PLANNING COPIMISSION
-2- PC85-188