PC 73-174FESOLU~V N0. PC73-174 ~
p RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT °ETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 2534 BE DENIED
NHEREAS, Lhc ~ity Planning Commission of the City of Maheim did receive a verified Petition far Variance from DALE
E. AND SARAH A. FOWLER, i430 South Grand Avenue, Santa Ana, California 92705~ Owners of
certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of Calif-
ornia described as The southerly 315.00 feet of that portion of Lot 2, Block "K" of the
Kraemer Tract as per map recorded in Book 12 Pages 87 and 88 of Miscellaneous Records,
in the office of the county recorder of Los Angeles, County, California, described as
follcws: Beginning at a point distant westerly 628.65 feet, measured at right angles
trom a point on the easterly line of said Lot 2 that is southerly 1155.00 feet from
the northeasterly correr of said lot; thence ~outherly 693.00 feet parallel to the
said easterly line; ther+ce westerly 691.35 feet paraliel with xhe northerly line of
said lot to a point in the westerly line of said lot; thence northerly 693.00 feet
along said westerly line; thence easterly 691.35 feet, parallel with the northerly line
of said lot to the point of beginning. Except the easterly 11.35 feet thereof as des-
cribed in a deed to Dominic Jambon and Yvonne Jambon recorded June 21, 1961 in Book 576v
Page 590 of official records.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Ha11 in the City of Anaheim on
Augu s t 6, 1973 ~ at 2:00 o'clock p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and
in accordance with the provisions nf the Maheim Municipa] Code, Chapter 18.68, to hcar and consider evidence for and against said
proposed variance and to investigate and make Fndings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, invesUgation, and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after duc
consideration of all evidence and reports otfered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts:
1. That the pctitioner requests a variancc trom the Maheim Municipal Codc:
SECTION 18.52.060 - MasonrY wall adiacent to residential zone, (Six-fo~t high
wall required; none pr~posed)
2. That the petitioner has not demonstrated a hardship existed if the waiver was not
granted except an economic hardship. ^
3. That the petitioner would be depriving the adjoining residential propert;~ owners
of the protection needed from a~ industrial use, particularly since the petitioner was
only proposin9 "spec" buiidings and tenants of these buildir+gs could be occupied with
industrial uses that might be harmfui to the existing residents in this area.
4. That there are no exceptional c~r extraordinary c?rcumstances or conditions appiic-
able to the property i'nvolved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply
generally to the property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone.
5. That the requested va~iance is not necessary for the preservation and Pnjcyment
of a substantial property riglt possessed by other property in the same vicinity en~i zone,
and denied to the property in question.
6, That the requested variance wtll he materially detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to the proper~fy or improvements in such vicinity and zcne in whi~h the property
is located.
7, That two persons appeared, representing three persons prese~t in the Councii Chamber,
and a petition signed by 11 persons was received, all in opposition.
VI-D - 1 -
DEV-66•E
~ - ~ ~ i-
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FINDING:
That the Planning Commission, in connection with an Exemption Declaration Status request,
finds and determines that the proposal would have no significant environmental impact and,
therefore, recommends to the City Council that no Environmental Impact Statement is neces-
sary.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESCLVED that the Anahcim City Planning Commission does hereby deny subject Petition for
Variance on the basis of the aforementioned finds.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUI'ION is signed and approved by me tlus 16th day uf Augu st , t 973.
..
ATTEST:
,L~+.~~~c~~60't -5-
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANI~ING COMMISSION
( /~j~7c~~
SECRETAFY ANAHEIM CiTY PLANNING COMMISSION
$TATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Ann Krebs, Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the City oC Anuheim, do hereby certify that thc
foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a!k+scdng mc llie Ci.~ P1~tiil'iFl1g'~ommission of the City of Anaheim, held on
August 6, 1973, at'_:9~m'c~!2~p~;"?;;by ~efollowringr~oltaof.~'~,amembersthercof:
AYES: (:DIR~{I15Sx014~kR~: T',~F4~„H0, GAW.EP~., HERB~T, SEY.NOUR..
NOES: C~1+SNtlss(ONF..~es:. K~ I I~G,
ABSENT: CObiE~USS'ddNER=C,•, Ai: ~R~ ~ ~AW~+~+4'~'.
INW[TK:SSEf~lEREOF,lhavehq~iu;;;9~ !hYhg~dtN,~~;j Lbth x1~v af August, 1973.
RESQLUTION N0. PC73-? 74
V2-D
~n~~~~~
SBCJ~r,t'CARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-2-