Loading...
Resolution-PC 2007-48_ ~ ~ ; RESOLUTION N0. PC2007-48 ARESOLUTION OF THEANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 2007-04721 BE GRANTED WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Variance for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Qrange, State of California described as: PARCEL A: _ PARCEL NO. 1, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 9, PAGE 32 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OFTHE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold,a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on May 14, 2007, at 2:00 p.m.; notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by iaw and in accordance'with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60 °Procedures", to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed variance and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study madeby itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the applicant proposes waivers ofthe following provisions to retain a 6-foot highfence and permit additional parking in the front yard setback: (a} SECTION NO. 18.46. 110.030 Maximum fence heiqht (3 feet permitted within the required front yard setback; 6 feetproposed) (b) SECTION NO. 18.42.030.040.0402 Location of permitted parkinq (parking not permitted in front setback when not tandem to garage; parking in front setback proposed) 2. That the above-mentioned waiver (a) is hereby approved on basis that there are special circumstances applicable to the property because it includes a slope that rises from Cerro Vista Drive up to the existing driveway of the residence. The location of the house is much higher than the proposed location for the fence; therefore a lower fence would seem out of scale to the house. Numerous residences in the area also enjoy a six foot high fence in the front setback; therefore strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the identical zone and classification in the vicinity. 3. That the above-mentioned waiver (b) is hereby approved on the basis that the property is - constrained by a storm drain easement that limits the ability for guests to park on the street. The intent of the code will be met as conditioned because the landscaping proposed will be significant and will screen a large portion of the paved surface. In addition, the fence will also provide some screening of the driveway. 4. That the requested variance for the fence height and parking location are 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. CR\PC2007-48 =1- _ 'PC2007-48 ~ ~ 5. That the requested fence height and parking location waivers will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is Jocated. 6. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to'subject petition. _ CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDfNG: Planning staff has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines'and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation. NOW; THEREFORE; BE IT RESOLVED that#he Anaheim 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 ofthe subject property in order topreserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: Prior to final buildinq and zoninq inspections or within a period of one (1) vear from the date of this resolution the followina conditions shall be complied with: 1. That the parking area in the front setback shall be screened from viewfrom the adjacent street with landscaping to the greatest extent possible and the drivewayshall include opportunities #or ' percolation to the extent feasible. A plan indicating the proposed landscaping shall be submitted forreview and approval by the Planning Services Division and installed prior to final inspections. 2. That all structures shall be located outside of the right-of-way. 3. The developer shall obtain a Right of Way Construction Permit from the Public Works Department, ' Engineering Division, Development Services to construct driveway approach per city standard 114-A. The improvements shall be constructed prior to final zoning and building inspection. 4. That within a period of sixty (60) days, a building permit shall be obtained for the fence and pilasters. 5. That subject property shafl be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit No. 1, and as conditioned herein. General Conditions: 6. That timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Anaheim Municipal Code and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. 7. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, Sfate and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. 8. Extensions for further time to complete conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. -2- PC2007-48 : • ~ BE 1T FURTHERRESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Gommission does hereby 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 anypart thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. BE JT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying al( charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FQREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of May 14, 2007. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Gode pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced b a Cit Council , Resolution in the event of an appeaL ~ ~ .- CHAI AN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION , ATTEST: , ~~...,.._- SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on May 14, 2007, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BUFFA, EASTMAN, FAESSEL, FLORES, ROMERO, VELASQUEZ NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: KARAKI -(' IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ~~ day of cJ v b, ~ , 2007. ~ SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION