PC 73-1RESOLU~ NO. PC73-1 ~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNi~iG COMMISSION OF THE CIT"f OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITIQN FOR VARIANCE N0. 2454 BE'GRANTED IN PART
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of lhe City of Anaheim did receive a verified Petition for Variance From
CNARLES V. THOMPSON, 1332 North Miller Street, Anaheim, California 92806, Owner of
ceYtain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of
California, described as The Southerly 132 feet of the Northerly 396 feet of the
Westerly 330 feet of the Easterly 660 feet of that portion of Lot 2 in Block K of
tti+9 Kraemer Tract, as,shown on a Map recorded in bock 12, pages 87 and 88 of Miscel-
Ieneous Records of Los Angeles County, California, described as follows: Beginning
at 'e point on the Easterly litie of said Lot 28 chains Southerly from the Northeast-
erly corner of said Lot;';thence Southerly along said Easterly line 12.03 r_hains to
the Southeasterly corner of said Lot; thence Westerly elong the:Southerly Iine of
said Lot, 20 chains to the Southwesterly corner of said Lot; thence Northerly along
Che Westerly litie of said Lot 12.03 chains to the 5outherwesterly corner of the Tract
of land described in deed from Mattie Goetz and husband to Emma Shaffer, recorded
December 6, 1917 in book 316, page 202 of Deeds; thence Easterly along the Southerly
line of said Tract, 20 cnains to the point of beginning; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a pubtic hearing at the City Hall in the City of Anaheim on
Jattuary 8, 1973 at 2:00 o'clock p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and
in accoidance with the 'provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.68, to hear and consider evidence for and against said
proposed variance aud to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation, anii study made by itself and in i:s bchalf, and after due
consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts:
1. That the petitioner requests:requesEs vsrimn6es from Gh~naheim Municipal Code as follows:
a. SECTION 18,04,050(1) - Cond3tions for the continued use of a nonc~nforming
buildinR in an "M" Zone, (Continuati.on permitted
provi~4ed no additionsor enl~+rgements are made thereto;
addition of a warehouse proposed.)
b. SECTION 18.52.060 2 a-1 f~equired front setback abutting a secondarv arterial
hiQhway, (50 feet r~quired; 10 feet eXisfing and
proposed) .
c. SECTION 18.52.060(3)b - Required enclosure of outdoor uses. (6-foot masonry
wall required; 6-foot chainlink fence proposed)
2, That Waiver 1-b, above mentioned, is granted for a period of two years for that
portion of the existing structure presently projecting into the required 50-foot struc-
turaY setback; however, the wall proposed in the front setback is hereby denied, on the
basis that the petitioner stipulated to providing the 50-foot structural setheck for said
wall,
3. Thar rNaiver 1-c, above mentioned, is hereby denied on the basis that only a small
portion of the west property line.would require the solid masonry wall at the present
cime encompassing 40 feet north of the existing structure and 32 feet south of the exist-
ing structure since two slatted gstt;s, 20 and 16 feet wide, are exisCing and proposed to
be setbark 50 feet.
4. That Waiver l~a, above mentioned, is granted for a period of two years until the
existing structurP proposed to be utilized for office purposes has been removed aud re-
placed with Code-type structur.e(s), a~ stipulated to by L•he petiY.ioper.
• -1-
~EV-66•E
" ~ ~ ~ ~
5. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions appli-
cable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property, as granted, that
do not apply generelly to the property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone,
6, That the requested variance, as granted, is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity
and zone, and denied to Che property in question,
i. That the requeeted variance, as granted, will not be materially detrimental to
the public welfare or injurious to Che property or irrprovements in such vicinity and zone
in which the property is located.
8. That one person appeared in opposition and presented a petition signed by seven
persons, also in opposition to waivPrs being requested,
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FINDING:
That the Planning Commission finds and determines that the proposal would have no signi-
ficant environmental impact and, therefore, recommends to the City Couacil that Exemp-
tion Declaration Status be granted.
NOW, T'i°FFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Gity Planning Commission does hereby
grant/~S~b~~~~ Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which are hereby foucd
to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject pruperty in order to
preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
(1) That the sidewalks and driveways shall be installed along Miller Street, as re-
quired by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specificaCions on
file in the office of the City Engineer.
(2) That street lighting facilities along Miller Street shall be installed as re-
quired by the Director of Public Utilities and in accordance with stendard plans and
specifications an file in the office of the Director of Public Utilities; and that a
bond in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim shall be posted with the
City to guarantee the installation of the above mentioned requirements.
(3) That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans on
file with the office of the Director of Public Works.
(4) ThaG'~~ire'hydrant•s shall be installed and charged as required and determined to
be necessary~by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to coimnencement of strucCut~al
framing,
(5) That aIl air conditioning facilities shall be prope_rly shielded from view and
the sound buffered from adjacent properties,
(6) That subject property shall be served by underground utilities,
(7) That the existing structure sha21 be brought up to Che minimum standards of the
City of Anaheim, including the Uniform Building, P1umUing, Electrical, Housing, Diechanical
an~' Fire Codes as adopted by the City of Anaheim,
(8) That drainage of su~ject propPrty shall be disposed of in a manner that is sat-
isPactory to the City Engineer,
(9) That subject property shall be duveloped substantially in accordance with the
City Council Metal Building Policy.
(1~) That appropriate water assessment fees as determined by the Director of Public
Utilities shall ue gaid to the City of Anaheim prior tn the issuance of a lSuilding permit.
(11) That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans
and specificatlavs onfile with the City o£ A:~aheim marked Exhibit ISos, i and 2 provided,
however, that the proposed vrerehouse and stosage building shall conform with th~. City
Council Metal Building Policy and, further provided, that a six-foot masonry wall shall
be conatrucled and set back 50 feet frem the west property line with access gates to be
slatted and relocated to th•e 50-foot setb&ck, as stipulated to by the petitioner.
RESOLUTION N0, PC73-1 ~~-
,. ~-' ~ ~
(12) That the 10-foot setback adjacent to the Miller 5treet frontage shall be fully
lendscaped, including irrigation facilities, said landscaping to be perpetually main-
t2ined.
(13) That Condition No, 2, above mentioned, shaZi be complied with prior to the com-
mencement of the activity authorized under this resolution or prior to the time that the
building permit is issued, or within a period of one year from th~ date hereof, whichever
occurs first, or such further time as tne Planning Commission may grant,
(14) That Condition Nos, I, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12, above mentioned, shall
be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 18th day of January, 1973.
CHAIRMAN AD]AHEIM CITY PLANNTNG COMMISSIUN
ATTEST:
C.~G~ ~~1'~%~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSZON
STATE'OF CAlIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I,'Ann Krebs, Secretary o£ the City Plar.ning Co~ission of the City of Anaheim, do
hereby certify that the foregoing re•solution was paased and adopted At a meeting o€ the
City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held on January E, Z973, at 2:00 o'clock
p.m,, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS'E ALLREA, FARANO, GAUER, HERBST, ROWLAND, SEYMOUR.
NOES; COMMISSIONERS: KAYWOOD.
AI~SENT: COMIdISSIONERS: NONE.
IN WITNESS WH~REOF, I nave hereunto set my hand this 18th day of January, 1973,
(~~Z~f~~''~ ~~~' K~r"
SECRETA~2Y ANAHEIM~CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION N0. PC73••1 -3-