Loading...
PC 72-175. _ _ ...---- -- - s ~- ~ RESOLUTION NO. P~72-175 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION QF THE CITY OF At1AHEIM THAT PETITIOH FOR VARIANCE N0. 23A3 BE DENIED WHEREAS, the City PlanninQ Commisslon of the City of Hnahcim did receive a vedfled Petition Eor Vadance Erom RE:TI! J. t•iAHO\L•Y, ET AL, 543 South West Street, Anaheim, California 92805, Or~rners; HERMAN R. l.?laI:LARDO. 1?272 Pieadowview :)rive, lorba Linda, California 92686, Agent of certain real prop- ~rty situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State ot ~:aliiornia, descri.bed as ~.n•t r:o. 5 of Tract No. 304; and WHEREAS, the City Plonning Commis~ion did hold • public he~dng ot the City Hall in the City of Anaheim on Augual' 7. 197'!., at 2:00 o'elock P.M., nodce ot eaid public heeting heving been duly given as required by lew and in ecooedance wlth fhe provielons of the Anaheim Municlpal Code, Chepter 18.68, to heer and coneider evidence for and against sald proposed vatience and to invcstiQete and mnke findings and recommmdetiona in connection thecewlth; and WHEREAS, ~~id Commieston, after due inRpeetlon, invesUgatlon, end ntudy med- h,y itself end in lts behalt, and after due considaation of all evidence 9nd repoR~ offered at aeid hearing, does flnd and detertnine the following facte: 1. 'Chat the petitloner ~equests variances from the Anaheim Municipal Code as follQws: a. SE(:TION 18.44.010 - Perniitted uses. (Automotive repair garage proposed; automotive repair garage not permitted) h. SECTION 18.44.030(S-a-11 - Diinimum Darki.nQ area requirement. (6ti 2/3io of the total lot arca required (4989 eQuare feet); 1750 aquare feet exterior parking area proposed) 2. That A1ChOLLglt the uses proposed for sub~ect property might be accepteble because similar development hae occurred in this general area foreome time,the petitioner cannot pro- vide the Zeceseary off-etreet parking due to propasing excessive land coverage, thereby crea- ting an undesirable sttuatio~ for the adjoining businesa establishments and residents in thie general area. 3. That although the Commisaion requeated that the petitioner aubmit reviaed plnns that would incorporate adequate parking, the petitioner's cevi.sed plans did not reflecC having pro- vided parking l.n accordance wiCh Clie Conuniseion's request. 4. 7'haC the parking proposed on L•he plens would creaL•e faur parking stalls which would be illegal stalls hecause they would occupy backup apace for tl~e repair bays. 5. That approval of the pr.oposed eite desisn would allow development with inadequete off- atreet parkin~, which could create a very s.~rio~is parki.ng problem in the event the use n~w pro- poaed is termi~aled and anotlier automatically permitted uae was establiahed thut required park- ing in conformity with 1he C-2 parkii~g standarda. 6. That there nre no ex^_eptional or extr,aordinary ciraamstancea or conditione applicable to the properry involved or to the intended use of tlie property that do not appiy generally to the property ur class of use in the same vicinity and zone. Vl-D -1- ~ ~ 7. That the requ°sted variance is not necessary for the preservaCion and enjoymer.t of a substantial property right poasessed by other property in the same vicinity ar.d zone, and denied to the proper.ty in question. 8. That the requested variance will be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. 9. That four persons app~nared representing six persona present in the Council Chaffiber, all in oppositiou; and that a letter was received indica~ing the violations of law if subject petition were apparoved, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thet the Aneheim City Planning Commisston does hereby deny subject Petition for Varience on the besis of the efocementioned findinge. THE FOREGOING R~SOLUTION is signed end approved by me this l~h day of~l+n~ust, 1972. ANAHEIM CITY ATTEST: --L~~~ SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIJN S1'ATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF C`DANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAN~IM ) I, Anc(~ IsS,Qd]ByK^,=Secretary of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Maheim, do hereby cedify thet tl:a fore- going resolution was pessed end edopted at a meeting of t2:a City Plenning Commission of the Cily of Anaha€m, held on P..ugust 7, 1972, et 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the members theceoE: AYES: COn1MISSIONERS: ALLTtEL} FARANO, GAUER, KAYWOOD, ROWLAND, SEYMOUR. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE. ABSENT: C~MMISSIONERS: tIERISST. • IN WTTNESS WHEREG~F, I have heceunto set my hend this 17th day of AugusC, 1972, ~l~ "".'-`_ SECRETAI2Y ANAHEIM ClTY PY.ANNIIVG COMMISSION R~SOLUTION N0. PC72-175 Vi-D '2'