PC 66-77. r
PCb6-77
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING CONiMISSiON OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 1R~4 gE DENIED
WNEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive a verified Petition tor Variance from
HE~dRY LESTh1AN, 93ii Hill~•ie~~ Roan, Ananeim, :alifornia. Owner; DONHLD BROW;1, i7;0 West La Palr,a,
Anaheim, California, Agent of certaln re~l oro~erty situated in ±he City of hnahei~n, Countv of
Orange. State of California, describe~ as the north 2'~7 feet of tne East 316.50 :eet of the
northeast one-quarter of the southeast one-quar~er of the Section ]3, Toti:~nship ~ South, Range 11
• West in ttie Ranc.~o Los Coyotes, ~s pe° r,:~p ,ecorded ;n book ~1 paqe 11 of h:isceilaneous hiaps,
.--~ in the office of tt;e county recorder of sa:d O:anqe Cou~ty
(
i
1f
~
~ ; and
~ WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold e publ~c hearing et the City Hell in the City of Anaheim on
~ ' September 12, 1966, at 2:00 o'dock P.M., notice of said public hearing heving been duly given as required by
law end in accordeace with the provisions ot the Aneheim Municipel Code, Chepte~ 1A.68, to hear and consider evidence for
i and against said proposed variance and to investigete end make findings and recommendetions in connection therewith;
and
~
i ~4'HEREAS, said Commission, after due inspecticn, investigetion, and study mede by itsel( and in its behalf,
~ and after due consideration o[ all evidence and reports otfered ~t seid hearing, does find and determine the (ollowing
I fects:
; 1. Thet the petitioner requests a variance from the Aneheim Municipal Code: to perrnit construction o` a
; retail shopping facility on subject property.
SECTION 1p~40.070(2-a-i) - r?ouired fror.t setback - 10 `oot sethack reouired - ~ fHet
i C i~;cnes propesed.
~ SECTION 18~40 070('~-a) -,v;ilding height in relat.ion to setFack - setk~ac'r. re•quired
I
~ to l.e twice tha heiqnt o,` the bu;ldinq (24 foot snt'rack
j r?quired -.''or a i2 foot huilding height '0' foot setF:ack
- proposed)
~ _ 2~ That therr are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or co^ditions applicaflc
~ to the property involved or to the intended use of the
propo:ty that do not appl~,~ g~~nerally to the
property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone~
~ 3~ That. the requc•sted variance is not ^ecessary .`or the preservat.on and e~,;oyTent of a
substantial p:operty right possessed by other propert, in the saT,n vici~ity and zone, ar,d denied
to the property in question.
' 4, That the requested variance wiii be ~aterially detr:rnnntal to the public welfare or
injurious to the property or :mprovements in such vicinity~ and zone ~n which t!;,• property is
' lOCdt~d~
j _~. That sir. persons aporared represonting 12 parso~s prosent in the Coi,nci! ~ha~n:~or in
~ opposition to sul;'ect petition,
~
I I~
; ;1
'i
,1
~
V1~~' -1-
i~
*
~
, ~
-~~.:~
R. ` C
_ qY
~i S
. i r:
: l
' I
' I
~'. ,
~' j .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED ti:at the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby deny subject
Petition for Variance on the basis of the aforementioned :`indings.
'fHE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 22nd day of September, 19ti6~
_,
~ , ( -.~vi ~
AIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLA NING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
( _iG.-:%.'~ ^: i ~...._/ 1' C,r //''-~-% ,
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISS[ON~
STATE OF CALIFORNiA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I9 Ann Kxebgo,.., Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hexeby certify that the fore-
going resolutzon wes passed a~d edopted at a meeting of the City Plenning Commission ofthe City oE Anaheim, held on
September 1?~ i966y at 2:00 o'clock p,M,~ by the Eollowing vcte ot the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONER,i: Allred, Fara~o, uauer, Herbst, Mungall, Rowland, Campo
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ^lonea
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nonea
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hove hereunto set my hand this Z~nd day of ~eptember, 1966.
../ ~
L- "2' :''G :' ~ (_ % ~2 <_-~2-_i
SECR$TARX ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIOIQ
RESOLUTION NO. '7
V2-D
-~-
.~ _
P 1 I~ '
~ { "'sx ~
;i
~
..u.~
~