2000-229for rehearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public
hearing to consider said variance application on October 24, 2000,
did received testimony and evidence concerning said variance
application, and as a result thereof the City Council does hereby
make the following findings with regard to the requested waiver(s)
of Anaheim Municipal Code requirements:
2. That waiver (a), minimum number of parking spaces, is
hereby denied on the basis that approval would cause fewer off-
street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the
number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles
attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably
foreseeable conditions of operation of such use; that approval
would increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon
the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use;
that approval would increase the demand and competition for parking
spaces upon adjacent private property in the inunediate vicinity of
the proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as
parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with Section
18.06.010.020 of the Anaheim Municipal Code); that approval would
increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or
lots provided for such use; and that approval would impede
vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the
public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use.
3. That waivers (b), (c) and (d), required screening of
parking areas, minimum building site area per dwelling unit and
design of vehicular parking areas, are hereby denied on the basis
that there are no special circumstances applicable to the property
consisting of size, topography, surroundings and building location,
which do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the
vicinity to justify these waivers; and that strict application of
the zoning code does not deprive the property of privileges enjoyed
by other property under identical zoning classification in the
vicinity, and denied to the property in question.
4. That waiver (c), minimum site area per dwelling unit, is
further denied on the basis that the proposed density exceeds the
allowable density set forth in the General Plan; that the General
Plan designates the entire block, including subject property, for
Low-Medium Density Residential units which allows a maximum of 3
units for this entire property and, therefore, the 4-unit proposal
exceeds the density permitted by the General Plan by 33%.
5. That the waivers are further denied on that basis that
the project, as proposed, does not "blend-in" with the neighborhood
with regard to density, scale and character; that many of the lots
surrounding this property are developed with single-family
residences even though the area is zoned RM-2400; and that the
plain architecture of this complex would not be compatible with 12
homes on the same block which are listed as ~qualified historic
-2-
structures" in the City's Preservation Plan.
6. That the proposal is located within the boundaries of the
Anaheim Colony Historic District; and that the Preservation Plan
(adopted by the City Council in 1999) sets forth guidelines which
encourage investment and construction of new buildings which are
compatible with the scale, style and character of the surrounding
historic neighborhood; and, further, that the Preservation Plan
encourages infill development to carefully assess the following:
· The architectural design of the proposed buildings to ensure
compatibility in elements such as style, height, proportion and
materials of surrounding neighborhoods.
The relationship of houses to each other, to the surrounding
open spaces, and to the street.
The functional and aesthetic design of open space; and
The distribution, layout and character of parking.
7. That said application to permit an additional two-unit
apartment building in conjunction with an existing duplex on the
subject property conflicts with and is not in conformity with the
Land Use Element of the General Plan of the City of Anaheim which
would permit a maximum density of three units on the subject
property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Anaheim that said Variance be No. 2000-04401, and the same
is hereby, denied.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the time within which
rehearings must be sought is governed by the provisions of Section
1.12.100 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and the time within which
judicial review of final decisions must be sought is governed by
Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Anaheim City
Council Resolution No. 79R-524.
THE
City Council
ATTEST:
FOREGOING RESOLUTION is approved and adopted by the
of the City of Anaheim this 24th day of October, 2000.
MAYOR OF T~E CITY OF KNAHEIM
C[T% CL~K OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
36934.1
-3-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, SHERYLL SCHROEDER, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2000R-229 was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting provided by law, of
the Anaheim City Council held on the 24th day of October, 2000, by the following vote of the
members thereof:
AYES:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kring, Tait, McCracken, Daly
NOES:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of
Anaheim this 24th day of October, 2000.
c~r~' CL~'RK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
(SEAL)
I, SHERYLL SCHROEDER, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing
is the original of Resolution No. 2000R-229 was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of
the City of Anaheim on October 24th, 2000.
CI]~Y'CLER~ OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM