PC 86-22yMt41
~
. . . . ....,f.:54'}
.'4'.
,V
RESQliUTION N0, 4?
A FtESOLUTION vF '1'H[: ANAHEIM ~. ~'LANNING COMMTSSIQN
THAT ?ETITION F(ik VARIANCE ~. 3519 gF DENI~D
WHExEAS, the Anahei~n City Plar.r ,~
P~titiori Lor Variance fra Commission d:id t~eceive a ver
ified
m ARTHUR J.
,,. websl-.er Avenue, A~naheim, California 92p0; +r~J~ n,.& $~RBARA C. PQ~,~F;j,t,p
~ .
613 SOU'.PH
'; Live Qak Dr~.ve, Anaheim, Calzfor~iia 92805 a
t a
H
e
~
~U 51~ South
,
situatec3 in the City o~ Anaheim, Counc
Y g n
for
c
t
ain
rea
o£
O l
P~'operty
desrribed as• ranqe, State o.f Ca.lifornia
'PHE SUU':CHERLY 60 FGET ~E' LO`i' ~ OE
A~!AHEIM
COUNTY
' '7.'1?ACT 7~fi
~ 1N THE CI7 ,~,
.
pr
,
OI
ORANGC~ ST[A'p~
;, RECORllED IN 80UK 24 AT p~1GE, OF ~
~I
I~ .
,
23 EXC
;+ AND A1,S0 EXCEP`1'TNC; THE EAS`!'4RGY .EPTItJG
THE
WLSTERLY 95
:~0 I'EE~.1
~ PURPOSES. FEET RESEI2VEA EUF2 ROAD
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a publa.c h~aring at
the Civ~.c Center in thc City of. Anaheim on .Januzry 6, 1986, at 1:30 p.m.,
;i~tice of said pt;blic hearing hava.ng be~n duly given as required by law anc7 in
accordance with the pravisi~~ns of the Anaheim Municipa]. Cade, Chapter 18.03,
to hear and consicler evid~nce fcr .and against 3aid ,propased variance ~nd to
.i~ivestigatc anu rnake findings and recommendations in cc:nnection therewith;
said public hearing h3viny been conkinuNd ho the Planning Commission mPeting
oi: Januaty 2.Q, 1~86; and
6fHEF2EAS, said Cornmission, after due insp~ction, inveskigation and
, stur~y -nade by itself and i.n i.ts behalf, and after due consicieration of all
evidenc~ ancl re~,or~s of~ered a~ said hear`.ng, does find and determine the
fol.lo-aing fa~ts.
1. Tta~~ ~~,t~ pEt~rioner pr~poses a wa.i.ver of the foll~wing (;o
c:onstruct a three-st:ory, four-iinaL- aparL•ment complex:
(~) SL•'C?y~CNS 18.34.Q~2.011, - Maximucn ~tructural heicLt~
18.34.OG2.012 (1 stor,y within 150 teet of siric~,l_e_fami~
ANi~ 1d.34.U62.0].3 resiclen+:ial zoning and 2 stories other-
wiye permitl,ed; 3 stori.es {i4 feet f.rum
~'! nc~,Ic:-fami.,l~, resideatial zonin
9 ProPnsed)
(b? SEC't'ION 1t3.34.Ob2_~?.0 -• Maxi.mum si.te covera4e.
(~5~ pertnitted;
57~ propc+sed)
(c) SEC~._ •P10~1_ 18.34.063.012 - Minimum landscaued satback
td) SBCTION 1.6.34.063.U32 - Minimum recreatinrial-lei~ure area
1• That t:h~ above-mentioned wai.vers (a) an~ (b) ar.e hereby denied on
tt~e b,:;.is L•hat ~here are no special ci~cumskances applica~le to the property
ce.tati.ny t~ si.ze, shap~, ~opoqra~hy, locati~n or eurroundings, which do not appiy
to ather ideni:ica.ll,y ~orz~d ~~roperties in the vicinit; : ancl that ytcict
(tG54r.
PC86-22
~.~ :... ... ....... . .
. _. .
_ ,..
_..... . _.
----- ,_. ~,,...,, ....
--- - .,
~~~,~ .. .., ~:•Krtt~ _ _. _ ,. . :.... ,.., h ~o~:
~
~
application of the 2oniny Code does not deprive the property of priviteg~:s
enjoyed by other properties xn identica]. zoning classiFi.ca~ion i.n the vic:ini.ty;
and that the above-mentioned waivprs (c) and (d) were deleted in connectzor.
with th~~ submittal of revised plans.
3. 2'F~at khere are no axcepl•i~~na1 or extraordinary circumst~nces or
conclitions applic~{ble to the property involvEd ar t~ the i~~tended use of the
pro~erty t•hat do nc:t apply genezall.y to the pr~oerty or clas~ of use in the
~ ssme vicinity and zone.
9. '~hat the requested variance is not ne~essary ;.or the preservatior~
a;~d enjoymer.t of a substantial properky right nossessed by othec property in
the same vi~in~ty and z~ne, ai~d denied to the property in questione
5. '.1'hac ,`:i~~ r.equetiL•ed v~riance w9.1'1 be materially d~trimental to the
public welfare or lnjur;aus ~o the pro1~ert~l or. i.mprovements in such vi.cinity
and zanP in which ~he property is laca~~a~.
G. Thal: one person in;iicated their presence at said public hearing
in oppositiori; and that no corre,spoi;~3ence waa =„~~ived in oppositioit ta subject
petition.
~NVIRONMEN`.~'AL TMI~ACT E'INUTNG: 7~haL the ARahea.m City P.lanni.ng
Cammission has r.a~~~i.ewed the proposal to con~truct a three~s~ory, four-unit
a~artm~nt comple>; with waivers o~ maximum sGr.cctural height, maxirnum site
coveraye, minimum lan~iscaped sPtback and mi.nimum rec «ational-•leiaure area on a
rectangular.l,y-shaped parr;el of lanu cunsisting oF ap~?-oeimahely ~,31? square
Pe~t haviny a Erontage of apProxi.matcly GO feet on the wesl side oF Web,~ter
Avenue, and further descri.b~d as 613 South Webster Avenue; and does her.eby
a~~rove th~ Negative Ueclaration upon the finding tt~at it ha~ considered L•he
NegaL•ive Dec.laration L•oycther with aay commenL-s received durir,n the publ.ic
review process and further finc~ing on Che ba~is of L•he initial stu:iy ar~cl any
comments receivecl that there is nu substantial evidenc~ tha~ the pr~j~ct will
haye a signiLicant eft~ct on the environment.
NUW, THERL•'FORL, BE .C'r RGSUI~V~D that the An%th4im City Plannirlg
Commissia~ docs her:eby deny subjeaL- Peti.tior. £or V~riance on the basis af the
af:orementiur~ed fzndings.
THL FORLGOING RLSQLUTIUN i~ signnd and a~,proved by me lhis 20th day
oE January, 1986.
(~.i'~,(.Ci' ~,~~_(a'~1~~.~- ~' ~C/..!_'~
CFiAIRW014AN, RhAHETM CITY PLANNING COMMI~~SIUN
.ATTESZ':
> • / ~ 'i~~ / .
SECRLTAT2Y, ANAIi~IP1 CIT~ PLANhIN~O~$STON
-2- ~c$6-z2
.
.,~.. ................, .. ,..,.....
...,._..... .
~- ,.
Si7J,~~`~~'r~~r rr~~ !~~ 4 ~ y ~ . . . ,
~ ! -. ~ , ... ~ ~ .,~ti
~
~ .
SmATL OF CRLIFORNIA )
CO-.IN'.['Y. OF' ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM ;
I, Edith L. Hacris, Secrel:ary of the Anaheim City Planning
Commissiot~, do hereby certify thak the foreyoing resolutior~ was paased and
adopted at a meeti.ng of ~he Anaheim City Planning Commission held on January -
20, 1986, hy the fol~owing v~te af ~he mernbers t~hereoi:
AYES: COMMISSIONERSt BOUAS, FRY, HERBST, LA CLAxRP, LAWICKT, MC BUR~iE~'
I~IESSE
NUES: CUMMISSIONGRS: NUNE
A$SGN`P: CUI9MISSION~RS: NOi4G
TN W1'.CNLSS Wf~ERFUF, I Have hereuntQ set my hand this 20th day of
Jauuary, ].58E . ~
~~.~~ ,~'~~~
SECKETAR , ph1AHB1M CtTY PLA~IN:CNG COMM;[SSION
-3- PC86-22