PC 85-87~ p
RESOLUTION N0. PC85-87
A RESOLU~IO[J OF THE ANAtIEIM CITY PLANNING COMt1ISSION
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N~. 3472 BE GRANTED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Plannin9 Commission did receive a verified
Petition for Variance from WILLIAM R. HUFFSTUTTER S PAMELA E. BUFFSTUTT^cR,
1745 North Woodwind Lane, Anaheim, California 92807, owners of certain real
property situated in the City uf Anaheim, County of Oranye, State of
California described as:
LOT 22 OF TF2ACT 5989 AS PGR MA° RECORDED IN BOOK 230, PAGES 37
AND 38 OF FIISCELLANEOUS PfAPS RECORDS OF SAID CUUNTY.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Comm:ssion did hold a public hearing at
the Civic Center in the Ci*.y of Anaheim on April 1, 1985, at 1:30 •~.m., notice
of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law ar.d in
accordance with the provisions of the Anahei.m Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03,
to hear and consider evidence for and against said prooosed variance and to
inve~tigate and make findinys and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and
study made by itself and in its behalf, and a£ter due consideration of all
evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the
following facts;
1. That the petitioner proposes waivers of the fo2lowing to
construct a room addition to a singie-family residence:
SECTION 18.27.062.020 - Maximum lot coveraoe.
(353 permitted; 508 proposed)
2. That the above-mentioned waiver is hereby granted on the basis
that there are special circumstances applicable to the proper.ty such as size,
shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply to other
identica2ly zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict aonlication
cE t}~e Zcning cuu~ aeprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other
preperties in the identical zone and classifi.cation in the vicinity.
3. That there are exceptional oc extraordinary r_ircumstanr_ac o~
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 vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in question.
5. That the requested variance will not be materially deti:imental to
the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements ir such
vicinity and zone in which the properl•y is locared.
6. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in
opposition; and that no correspondence was receivEd in opposition to subject
petition.
~0485r PC85-87
r. ~
ENViRONF1ENTAL IbiPACT FINDING: The Planning Directar or his
authoeized representative has determined that the proposed project falls
within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 5, as defined in the
State EIR Guidalines and is, tnerefore, cateyorical.ly exempt from the
requirement to prepare an EIR.
IdOW, THEREFORE, 8E 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 ocder to preserve the safety and
genecal welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That subject propecty shall be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on £ile with the City of Anaheim marked
Exhibit Nos. 1 through 3.
2. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 1,
above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
BE IT FURTH~R RESOLVEU that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
heceby 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 Ei:al judgment of any court o~
competent jurisdiction, then this Resoluti~~n, ar.d any approvals herein
contained, shall be deemed null and void.
THE YOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and a~proved by me this lst day of
April, 1985. ~ ~ / --,'
-f . ~_, ~` i
~~: ~ ~(;'~i:-> i~;~i : ~i~ I ~ .
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM~CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~.~. ~ ~~.
SECRETARY, ANAHEIPI CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATF. OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANIHEIM )
i, Edith L. Harcis, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning
Commission, do hereby cectify that the foregoiiig resolution was passed and
adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Plenning Commission held on April 1,
1985, by the following vote of the members theceof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOUAS, BUSHORE~ FRY~ HERBST~ KING, MC BURNEY
NOES: COMMZSSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: LA CLAIRE
ItJ WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunlo set my hand this lst day of
April, 1985.
`~~, r_ ~...~.:
SECRETARY~ ANAHEZM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-2- PC85-87