PC 67-101PC67-101
RESOLUTIUN N0.
A RESOI.UTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 1874 gE bENYEb
, WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission oE the City oE Anaheim did receive a verified Petition foc Variance from
FULLERTON fv1~RTGAGE AP!D ESCROVJ COMPANY, 513 South Euclid Avenue, Fullerton, California 92632,
Owners; ROBERT S. BORDON, 513 South Euclid Avenue, Fulierton, California 92632, Aoent of certain
i~~~ real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State o: California, described
; as the South 140 feet oi the East or.e-half of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter oE
~s ~ Section 14, in Townshio 4 South, Range 11 West, in the Rancho Los Ccyotes, as shown on a map
~f thereof recorded in book 51, page 7, et seq., Miscellaneous Maps, records of said Orange County;
ir EXCEPTING THEREFROM the Easterly 40 feet of said land, as conveyed ~o the State of Caliiornia,
by deed recorded hlarcn 5, 1951, in boo'r. 2153, pace 254, Official Records, and by deed recorded
, March i, 1951, in book 2151, oaae 400, Official Records.
; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public heering at the City Hell in the City of Anaheim an
May 89 19679 at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of said public hearing heving been duly given es required by
lew and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.68, to hear and consider evidence for
and against said proposed variance and to investigate and meke findings and recommendations in eonneation therewith;
and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation, and study mede by itself and in its behalf,
and after due consideration of all evidence and reports oifered dt said hearing, does find end determine the following
fects:
1. That the petitioner requests e variance Erom the Anaheim Municipal Code: t0 permit the establishment of
45-unit apartrr.ent complex with waivers o`:
SECTION 18~28.050(5-b) - Maximum oermitted buildinq heiqht (!-story permitted
within 150 feet of an R-1 Zone; 2-story construct~on
proposed within 55 `eet of a developed R-1 suboivisioni.
SECTION 18.28.050(E-b-2) - Buildino setbac4s lpedestrian accessways reouirzo
to have an 3-foot minimum width; 5 feet proposeo).
SECTIOi~ 18.28.050~9-b) - Vehicular accesswavs (all multiple-iamily units
must be located no furth~r than 200 ieet :rom a
standar~ street having an overal! dimension o~
60 feet. and a curb-to-curb measurement of 40 feet:
zn overall width o.` 44 ;eet with a curb-to-curb
width of GO ;eet is proposeo).
SECTIOIJ 18e28.050(11) - Walls (a 6 foot masonry ~.va11 a1on9 the north, west,
and south oroperty lines required; none propo=ed)•
2. That the petitioner withdrew v~aiver of the masonry wall, statinq this was inadvertently
omitted on the plans subrtiitted and that the required wall would be constructedo
3. That two-story multiole-family residential construction in close proximity to a
single family subdivision deve!opment would 'nave a adverse ef:ect on the residential integrity
of the =_ingle family area.
4, That ~~vhen the single family residential tract immediately to the south vaas develooed
less than two years ago, a decision was made for the ultimate extension oi Hayward Avenue
northeriy and Halliday Avenue to th2 west so that the existing and .`uture single .`amily
residential development in this area would have odequate access and circulation.
5. That the permanent stubbing o.° Hayward Avenue and the south prooerty line w~t~~d
affect the circulation of the large single family residential development to the so~th, as well
as create poor vehicular circulation `or the undevelooed parcels to the west and north of
subject property.
6. That 3 persons appeared, one of whom r~presented 20 persons present in the Council
Chamber, and who also presented oetitions signed ~y 142 property owners a11 in opposition
to subject petitiona
V 1-D -1-
~
1
;
~
i _.
l~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby deny subject
Petition for Varience on the basis of the eforementioned findings.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTIOI3 is signed a~d approved by me this 18th day of Mayi 1967,
~ .%~~~
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNI G COMMIS ON
ATTEST:
~~~,~_ ~ ~ -~~ .~ . ,.
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
i, Ann K_ ~ os 9•, Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby cedify thet the foce-
going resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Cih• Planning Commission ofthe City of Anaheim, held on
May 89 19~?, at 2:00 o'clock P,M„ by the foilowing vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ALLRED, FARANO, GAUER, HERBST, MUNGALL, R06VLAND, CAMP.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE~
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE..
IN WITIvESS 1VHEREOF, I have hereunta ~et my hand this 18th oay of Mayy 1967~
/ ,-f ,'
C~ '~= J z / l- '
~
SECRETARY Ai•:'~U~IM CI1 . PLANNING COMAIISSION
1 RESOLUTION NO. 101
°; ~ ~ I vz-o -2-
~~i ~xA
t