Loading...
Resolution-PC 2007-67~ ~ RESOLUTION NO. PC2007-67 I A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 2007-04728 BE pENIED ; (1774 SOUTH CANTERBURY CIRCLE) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified petition for Variance for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange; State'of California described as follows: LOT 18, TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF LOT 17 O~ TRACT NO. 2181, W THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, `COUNTY OF ROANGE,S TATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 62, PAGE(S) 40 AND 41 INCLUSIVE DF' MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, AS SHOWN AS LOT 1 ON CERTAW LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LL 466 RECORDEp : MARCH 7; 2001, AS 1NSTRUMENT N0. 01-127638 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. WMEREAS, the Planning:Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 25, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as xequired by law 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 made by 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 petitioner proposes waivers of the following to construct a single-family residence: (a) SECTION NO. 18:04.040.010 Minimum lot size. 7 200 square feet required; 4.534 square feet proposed) (b) SECTION NO. 18.04.060.010 Minimum lot width. . (70 feet required; 59.8 feet proposed) (c) SECTION NO: 18.04.060 Minimum lot depth adiacent to an arterial hiqhwav. 120 feet required; 54 feet proposed) (d) SECTION NO. 18.04.100.010.0101 Minimum front vard setback. 20 feet required; 18-20 feet proposed) (e) SECTION NO. 18.04.100.010.0103 Minimum dimension of tandem qarkinct s aces. 20 foot length required; 17.5 feet proposed) 2. That there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or 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. CR\PC2007-67 -1- PC2007-67 ~ ~ 3. That the requested variance is not 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. 4. That the requested variance will be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to , the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. 5. That the requested lot size, lot width, lot depth, setback, and parking space dimension waivers would not be consistentwith the character of the surrounding neighborhood. 6. A person spoke in #avor of the request, and four people indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition. Two letters were received in opposition to subject petition, along with a photograph submitted. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That#he AnaheimPlanning Commission has reviewed the proposal and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of thelead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effecf on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby deny subject Petition for Variance on the basis of the aforementioned findings. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 25, 2007. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and y b placed by City Council Resolution in the event of an appeaL CHAIRMA , 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 June 25, 2007, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BUFFA, EASTMAN, FAESSEL, ROMERO NOES: COMMISSIONERS: FLORES ABSTAINED: COMMISSIONERS: KARAKI ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VELASQUEZ J, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ~ Q~ day of , 2007. ~.f'... -~ J SENIOR SECRETARY,'ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION _ -2- PC2007-67