PC 1962-1963-412' ~ f.~-•< ~~ r
`, R~.SOLUTION k~0. 412, SERIFS 1962-63 ~
A RESOLUTION OF TTiE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEYM •
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 1504 gE GRANTED •
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commisaion of the City of Meheim did receive e vedfied Petition for Variance
from ~SE F. and CALLIE A. PRUEPT, 311 South State College Boulevard, Anaheim, California,
Owners; Initiated k+y PLANNING OOMh7ISSI0N for CHARLES J. DUOOFF and CLARE DUO~FF~ 1430
Venedale Street, Anaheim, California; of certain real property situated in the City of
Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, descrii,ad as follows; Lot 99 in Tract 1565
and further described as 311 South State College Boulevard, Anaheim~ California
; end
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commisaion did hold e publlc hearing et the City Hell in the City of Meheim
oa Jul~j 23~ 1962~ at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of said public hearing heving been duly given es cequired
by lew and ln ecrnrdence with the Qrovieions of the Aneheim Municipel Code, Chepter 18.68,to hear end consider
eviden:e for end against seid proposed verience and to inves~igete and meke fIndings end ~ecommendations in connec-
tlon thmwith; and
9VflEREAS, said Commiaslon, efter due inspection, investigation, and study mede by itself end in ita behelf,
ead efter due conaideretloa of all ovidenca and teports oEfemd as seid hearing, does find and detecmine the followIng
fecte:
1. 'That the.petiUoner requasts e variance from the Meheim Municipel Code: SeCtion 18.24.010 to establish
a real estate office in an existing single f amily residence.
2. That Ehere are exceptionel or extreordinary ciccumstences or conditiona epplicable to the property involved
or to the intmded use of the propeety thet do not epply generally to the propecty or class of ues in the seme vicinity
and zone.
3. Thet the iequested verience is neceasary for the preservation end enjoyment of e substenUal p-csperty right
possessed by other property in the seme vicinity end zonr., an3 denied to the propedy in question.
4. That the requested varience will not be materielly detrimentel to the public welfete or injuriouu ;o the pro~
edy or improvements in such vlcinity and zone in which the property is loceted.
' 5. Tt,at tZ:e reqvested veriexce wjll not edveraely effect the Compceher,sive General Plen.
6~ That nn one appeared in opposition to subject petition.
Vl-G .1_
- :~
. -, ... ... .. ~
~-..._., .
. . ~? ~ .. ~ .:<~ ~` ~ ' '
~
, .......... .::..._~,-»;,~_...,.,.,,..„..~..M,__,..____..._.__._..~.,..._..~.__.~...,._~,~y..._.. ...,..,,~_.,.. _ ,._..,.......
_. _.~ ..:,.... . _ _.~.....~..._...v..____.._:_.._._.....,~....:.._.._.~....
-,
. ' i~~ ~ s
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED ffiet the Aneheim City Plenaing Commission does hereby grant subject ;
Petition for Verience, upon the following conditions which are heceby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the pre-
posed use of the subject propeety in crder to preserve the safety and generel welfare of the Citizens oEthe City of
Anaheim.
1. Dedication of fifty-three (53) feet from the monumented centerline of State College ~
Boulevard (50 feet existing).
2. Repair of damaged and~or hazardous sidewalks on State College Boulevard in accordance ~
with the adopted standard plans on f ile in.the office of the City Engineer.
3. Payment of $2.00 per front foot for street lighting purposes on State College
Boulevard.
4. Time limitation of one hundred and eighty (180).days for the accomplishment of Item
Nos. 1, 2, and 3.
5. Limitation of all signs to one eight (8) square foot unlighted sign and said sign
shall indicate only the specific business being operated on the subject property, and the
prohibition of all flags and banners, rotating and other lights for advertisment purposes. ;
6. Development substantially in accordance with Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2 provided that the
proposed access drive shall be posted for one-way traffic from State College Boulevard to the '.
rear of the property, with provision for egress from sub~ect property to be made by way of ~
the alley to the rear.
7. Posting of a bond to insure the installation of a six (6) foot masonry wall along ,
the north and south sides of subject property.
B. Installation of a six (6) foot masonry wall along the west side of the abutting
alley prior to issuance of a business license unless the abutting property owner to the ~•,
west specif ically waives in writing said wall construction. ;
9. Time limitation of three years, or until such further time as the Commission may grant,'
upon a written request of the property owre r. '
THE FOREGOING RESOL'JTION is signed end epproved by me this 23rd day of July~ 1962., ~
'
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMIS ~~
t
~ ATTEST: i
4
l
~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ~
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
~ CTfY OF ANAHEIM ) j
I~ Ann K'rebs~ Secretery of the City Planning Co,nmission of the Clty of Aneheim, do hereby certify that the fore- ~
going resolucion was pessed end adopted'at e meeting of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on i
July 23~ 1962~ et 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of tl;e members thereof: f
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:Allred, Camp, Ghavos~ Marcoux, Mungall, Pebley, Perry. !
. i
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Gauer. , j
ABSENT: C014iMISSIONERS: Hapgood. ~
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 23rd day of July~ 1962. '
~.~~ !~~~~l~t'iC"/~~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ~
RESOLUTION NO. 412
I
V2-G -2- i
y ~ ~ ~
. _. __ .__..., _----
--
~ ' ~