PC 1961-1962-84'' .~ `~
-.o.-~-~::~~.
.~- ~ ~ ~
. ~:~~
RBSOLUTION N0. $4, SHRIBS 1961-62
A RH$OLSITION OP 1HH CITY Y~IANN+NG CQ~O~IISSI~i OF THB CITY OP ANAtIBIM
THAT PB1`TTION POR VARIANCB N0. 1406 BB GRANTBD.
iVfiBR8A3, the City Planning Coe~ission of the City of Anaheim di1 receive a vcrified
petition f i nc g n WILLIAM D. GRINROD,].663 West Buena Vista,Anaheim,Cslifornia and
LLOYD R. PH~~L~, 1e56~QTonia Lane•,Anaheim,Cal~fornia,Owners; Rothman-Steen & Assaciates,
2~3 So th Claudina §treet, A aheim C ligorni A ts
of cer~aia real, property s~taated ~a fhe C~t~y ~~Ana'heim, Countq of Orange~ State of
California~ as deacribed in Bxhibit "A" or as followa: Legal description, Bxhibit "A", on
file in the office of the Planning Department
; and
Wf~1tBA8, the City Planning Commisaion did hold a public hearing at the City Hali in
the City of Anaheim on 9eptember 18, 1961 at 2:00 o'clock P.M., aotice of said
public heariug having been duly given as sequired by]aw and in accordaace with the provi-
aions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.68, to hear and conaider evidence for aad
agsiaet said propoaeA veriance and to investigate and make findinga and recommeadatioas
3n connection therewith; and
{Vt~tBA3, said Commission, after due inapectioa, investigatioa,and studq made by it-
aelf and in ita behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered
as said hearing~ does find and determine the following facta:
•1. That the petitioner requests a vctriance from the Anaheim Muuicipal Code:
Section 18, 16.030 (4-b) to permit the split of subject property into five (5) parcels;
and Section 18.24.030 (4-a) to permit the minimum width of sixty (60) feet and a minimum
lot area of b,~~b s9uare feet for property classified in the R-1, One Family kesidential,
2one,
2. That there ~e exceptionai or extraordiaary circumstaacea or conditions
applicable to the p=operty iavolved or to the intended uae of ttte ~:roperty that do not
apply generally to the propertq or class of uae in the same vicinity and zone.
3. That the req,uested variance is aecesasry for the pres~svation aad ea,~oyeeat
of a aubataatisl prupe:ty right possesaed by other property in thz same vicinity and
zone, and denied to the property in questioa. •
4. That the requeated variance ~ill not be materisilq detriraeatal to the pubiic
welfare or in3urious to the property or improvements in auch vicinitq and zone in wh9.ch
the property is located.
S. That the requested variaace will not adversely affec4 4he Conpsehensive
Geaerai Plan.
6. That the petitioners have indicated willingaess to establish an architectural
control upon the development of subject property and that the residential lots be deed
restricted, licuitiag the mi~}imum liveable fioor area to be constructed to 1500 square
feet.
9. That verbal opposition, in addition to two petitions of protest, was recorded
against subject petition,
v-x -1-
,.,
.. O..T ~ ~ <~ ..~ ~
.
_ ~ , . ~. - ;~ "~}
". r.
Na11, 1~iBRHPORB, ~R IT RSSfu.VHD that the Anaheim City Plann9,a~g Commiasion herery
approves Variance No. 1406 , upon •~he folioMing conditions which
are herebq found to be a necessary prerequisite to the p.r:,posed uae of the sub,ject pro-
perty in order to preaerve the safety and geaera2 xelfr.rc oi the Citizeae of Aaaheim:
~ 1. Dedication of 53 feet from the monumented tenterli:~.: of Euclid Avenue (30 feet
existing).
2. Preparation of street improvement plans and i~ista~lation of all improvements foz Buclid
Avenue, in accordance with the approved standard plans on file in the Office of the
City Hngineer. '
-~ 3. Provision of utili.ty easeu~ents along exterior boundaries as determined to be necessary
?. by the Director of Public IItilities to adequately serve the subject property and other
' property.
~ 4. Recordation oi a Record of Survey of subjecti property.
E 5. Subject to the approval of Petition for Reclassification No. 61-62-26.
i 6. Recordation of deed restrictions limiting minimum liveable floor area per residence
r to 1,500 se,uare feet.
~; 7. Developmen'; plans to be submitted to and subject to the approval of the Architectural
f review c~crmitte'e.
! 8. Time limi+:ation~of one hundred eighty (180) days for the accomplishment of Item Nos.
„ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.
Tf~ PatBGOING RESOLUTI0~1 ie aiaaed aad approved by ae this 18th day of September,1961.
,
1
`' I
i
'~
I ~
r;:l J
S
l
i
,
,
"~
'r~? '
;i i
:- jT~
AT'1~8T:
$BCR~BT~Y ANAHHYH CITY PIANp6dNG C@04ISSIQN
//! (/
B~~OP CJILIPORNTA )
COt1NTY OP ORANGB ) ea.
CYTY OP ANAtIDIM )
!~w '_"
CHAI iHIN CIt"'at PL1NlIfNG C01~lI8$ ~'.;
~, JBAN PAGE ~ 8eeretary af the City PYaaa3a~ Co~iesion of the Citp of
Maheim~ do hc;:aby certi4'q that :he foregoing reaoiution xaa pnesed ~nd adopted at ~
aeeting of the City Pianniag Co~mieaion of 8he City oF Aasheia~ heid on September 18,1961.
at 2;00 o~clock P.M.~ bp the foilowiag wte of the ae~bera thereof:
AYBB: COMA4I~3I~1ffit8: Alired, Gauer, Hapgood, Mungall, pebley,Perry and Summers.
NOH3: C~hAlI33IOI~t3; Marcoux.
AHSENT: 001~A4I9SI~IIDtB: Morris.
IN WITN~YS 1~iBREOP, I have hereunto aet ay htarithis 18th day of September,1961.
~
~.ti~~
MiAFiBIl1 CTZY P NG C~0IISSI~I
VC?rA
92-
RESOLUTIGid N0. 84