PC 72-219RESOLUTIC~JO. PC72-219 ~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 2426 BE DENIED
WHEREAS, the Ci:y Plenning Commission of the City of Aneheim did receive a veritled Petition for Variance
from WOODMAN FARMING COMPANY, 3214 Waverly Drive, Los Angeles, Califarnia 90027, Owner;
.TOHN F. HANSCOM, Leadership Housing Systems, Incorporated, 3501 South Harbor Boulevard,
Sante Ana, CaZifornia 92704, Agent of certain re&1 property,situated in the City of
Anaheim, County of Orange, State of Califarnia, described as That portion.of the Southweat
quarter of the Northeast quarter of Sectian 21, Township 4 South, Range 10 West in the
Rancl:o San Juan Cajon De Sattta A.na, as per map recorded in book 51, page 10 of Miacellan-
eous Mapa, in the office of the County Recorder of said Counl•y, described ae follows:
Beginnittg at th~. intersection of the centerline of Cerritos Avenu,e ~ith a line parallel
with and Easterly 7U.00 feet £rom the West line of eaid Southwest quarter: thence North
0~ 09'.34" West 1358.12 feet aiong said parallel line to the Southwest corner of Lot 136
in Tract No. 1961, as per map recorded in book 67, pagea 26 to 29 inclusive of ea~d Mis-
cellaneous Maps, thence alon$ the boundary of said tract following couraes; North 89° 50'
26" East 90.00 feet, South 0 09' 34" East 25.49 feet, Nortl: 89° 44' 44" Eeat 902.52 feet,
Nacth 0° 15' 16" West 22.00 feet and North 89° 44' 44" East 256.00 feet to the c~nter line
of Walnut Street, thence South 0° 15' 16" Eaet 1360.27 feet along said center line to said
center line of Cerritoa Avenue; thence North 89° 59' 18" West 1250.59 feet to the point of
beginning
; and
WHEREAS, the City Plenning Commission did hold a public heacing et the City Hell in the City of Aneheim
on Auguat 21, 1972, et 7: 3bo'clock P.M., notice oE seid pubtic heacing having been duly given
es cequired by lew and in accocdence wlth the pravisions of the Maheim Municipal code, Chapter 18.68 to hear
end consider evidence for and ageinst seid proposed conditionel use and to investigate and meke findings end
recommendetions in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation, and study mede by itself end in its be-
half, end eEter due consideretion of ell evidence and reports offered at esid hearing, does find and determine the
followir.g facts:
1. That the petitioner requeats variancea from the Anaheim Municipal Code as
followe: ~
a. SECTION 18.08.440 - Lot frontaRe on a puhlic etreet required
(Lot frontage or. a public etreet not proposed).
b. SECTION 18.28,050(6-a-1) - BuildinR setbsck abuttinR an arterial hiAhway
(20 £eet reqvired; 15 feet propoaed).
c, SECTION 18.28.050(7) - Mini:vum distance between buildinRa
(26 to 30 feet required; 12-15 feet proposed).
2. That the petitioner proposes to establi9h a 2-story, 552-unit statutory
condominium complex.
3. That due to the fact that the Planning Comisiasion has recommendecl disapproval
of the proposed reclaseification, implemenl•s~tion of the variance request ia
denied since 1Y cannot be exercised under the existing zoning.
4. That there are no exceptional or extreordinary circumetances or conditions
applicable to the property in~olved or to the intended use of the property
that do not generally apply to the property or clt~sa of use in the eam~
vicinity and zone,
5. That the requested vEriance is not necessary for. the preservation end enjoyment
of a substantial property right poasesaed by other pro~erty in the same vicinity
and zone, and denied to the property in question.
6. That the requested variance will be materially detrimeaCal to the public welfere
or injurious to the property or improvementa in such vicinit~ and zone in which
the property is located,
7, That 10 peraone anpeared representing 35 persona preaent in the Council Chamber
in opposition; that nne letter and petitions signed by 66 property owners was
preaented, all in opposition,
s ~
~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLV~D the: the Anehelm Ci~y Plenning Commieslon does heteby deny subject
Petition for Verience on the besis of the eforementioned findinge.
THE FOREGOING RESQLUTION is aigned end epp:oved by me this
ATTEST:
~i i~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
t_ 1972.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) •
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) es. '
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
1, Anit Krebs, Secretery of the City Plenning Commiasion of the City of Anehelm, do hereby cedify that the fote-
going resolution was pessed end edopted at a meeting of the City Plenning Cammlesion ofthe City of Aneheim, held on
Au~;ust 21, 1972, et 7; 30o'clock P.M., by the Eollowing vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONEi2S: Farano, Gauer, Kaywood, Rowland, Seymour,
NOES: COMMLSSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Allred, Herbst,
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I heva heceunto set my hend this 31et day of August, 1972.
/~~~~77~v _
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMYSSION
RESOLUTION NU. pC72-219
V2-D -2-