PC 67-116A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY ?LANNING ~COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 1882 BE GRANTED
~ .
PC67-li6
RESOLUTION NO.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Aneheim did receive a verified Petition for Verience
from OPHELIA BLEDSCE, 200 East Miiis Drive, Anaheim, Caiiforniay Owner; RAYMOND A~ NORTON, 1234
Banyan Avenue9 Anaheim, California 92805, Agent of certain real property situated in the City of
Anaheim, County of Orange9 State of California9 describe~ as Lot No. 1 of Tract No. 304
; and
,;~ -
~ *
.) ~
WHEREAS, the City Plenning Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Hall in the City of Anaheim
on ~une 5, i967 at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required
by law and in accordanc.: with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipel Code, Chapter 18.68, to hear end consider
evidence for end against said proposed variance end to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connec-
tion theeewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commissinn, effer due inspection, inve~tigation, and study made by itself and in its behalf,
and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at seid hearing, does find and determine the following
facts:
1. That the petition~r requests a varience from the Anaheim Municipel Code: to permit the construction oi an
additional sin~ie-family dwellingy with waivers of:
SECTIGN_if~,2£?.050(5-b) - Buildina heiaht. (Singie story permitted within 150 feet of an
R-1 Zone to the south and west; two story pro-
posed).
SECTION 1P.,2R.050(7-•a) - Distance between buildinas.(17 feet required; R feet prooosed).
2. That there are exceptional or extreordinery circumstances or conditions epplicable to the proper;y involved
or to th~ intended use of the property that do not apply generelly to the property or class of use in the same vicinity
and zone.
3. That the requested variance is necessery for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right
possessed by other property in the seme vicinity end zone, and denied to the property in question.
4. That the requested varience wi11 not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the pmp-
erty or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located.
~'. Tha'. :3:.Cn0ugn SUb1BCt DZ'ApPI't}' anUtS R-i zoned nrooert~'~ L',JO Si.O*Y r,onstruction 15
pe.mitted ir~ the R-1 zone, and the nature of the proposed structur2 is =ingle family residentialq
therefore th~ requested waiver of the height limitation is warranted.
6. That aithough the necessity for waiver of the distance between buildings couid be
eiiminated 'oy the construction of a smaller dweli.ing, the prooosed structure will provide a
more desirable residence; therefore the waiver of the distance between buildings is warranted.
7. That one perso~ appeared in opposition to the hei9ht waiver.
V 1-G
-1-
~
__ _ - ,
_ . ~ 1
NOW, THEREFORE, BE I'T RLSOLIRD t~t tM Aa~6~le City Pludn6 Coa+mia~ion docs hereby ~rant subject
Pe4ition for Variance, upon the tollowln~ eaefltfau a6lc! an heseb~ (wad to be e necessary precequisit~ to lhe pro-
posed use of the subject property ln ord~r to pewerve the s~Eety and g~eeral welfere of th~ Citis~ns oE the City of
Anaheim:
i, 'iha-. tt-:e c~vn_r oi subject property shali dee~ to ihe City of Anaheim a i5-•foot radius
co::i~r =etu_:, io: street nidening purposes.
2, -hat the s~derraiks, wrbs, and gutters shall be repai:ed along IJ~i11s Drive and Claudina
St=eet., a; raqu3red by r...e City Engine~ and in accordance ~iih standard pians and specifications
on f'ii=. ir, the ori ice of the City Engineer.,
~~ ~ha: the oNner of subject property shal~ pay to the C,ty oi Anaheim the sum of $25.00
pe_ d~.eiling unit, ±o oe used fo: park and recreation pu_poses, said amount to be paid at the
time thr buildi~g permiL is issued~
4. 'hat Ccn~ition Noo 1; above mentioned, sha:i be compiied with prior to the time that
the bui~ding permit is issued or within a period oi` 180 days from date hereof9 wnichever occurs
r'irsty o: such furtne_ time as tne Commissior. or City Council may grant~
5,. That Condition No. ?_, above mentioned, shail be compiied with prior to finai puildino
and zoning in=pections.
b~ That subject properLy sha11 be developed substantially in accordance with plans and
speci!ications or fiie with the City o'r Anaheims markec: Exnibit Nos~ 1 and 2~
THE FOREGOINa RESOLUI'!ON !s si~ned ~nd ~pprov~d 1p s~ fW ' 15th day of Jun e5 1967,
/
~-e(-l-l~ /
CNAIRMAN ANAHEQA CTfY P QIO COMYISSIOM
ATT£iT:
f
~ iJ L.;~. % ~~ ,G,..z /
. SECRETARY ANAHEDI CI71C PLANNING CONNLSSION
STATE OF CALIFORPIIA )
COUN'Y'Y OF ORANGE ) w.
CTTY OF APIAHEIE! )
I; Anr: Kr ~-bs , $e~~~iy oE the City P1anRin~ Comnisalon o[ the City o( Aneheim, do h~r~by cer4fy thet
the foregoing resolutlon w~s p~a~ed and adopted ~t • mxting oE the City Plannin6 Commisnion of the City of Aneheim,
held on J•,~n e 5, 19b 7; at 2:00 o'elxk P.11., by the folloMin~ vot~ of the membera thereof:
AXES: COMlliISSIONERS: Alired, Farano, Gauer; He:bst, Mungall, Rowland~ ~aT~,•
~IOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABS~Id'S: COMMISSIONERS: hone..
III ~[Z1ttSS ~IIEREOF, I h~ve hereunto set my hand thl~ :5th day o?' Juney 1967~
/L~j L~ ~'r'L~'~.~a!
SECRETARY AlfANEtN CIFY PLANN1Nfi COMIMISSION
~ ~ RESOLU'E'ION IiO. :16
~ w
j ~ ~"r+ -?.
~