PC 73-38.,_ _ . _ ~ ~
RESOLU'fION NO. PC73-38
A:~..:SULUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING C~JMMISSION OF THE C1TY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PE1'ITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 2477 BR GRANTED
Wi'GREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive a verified Petition for Variance from
PAUL ~. MC GHEHEY, 1401 Miller Street, Anaheim, California 92806, Owner; MARTIN C. RIPPENS,
18195 East Gslatina, No. 3, Rowland Heights, California 91745, Agent of certain real prop-
erty situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of Califorria, described as
PARCEL 1: The Eas*_erly 330.00 feet of the South 10 rods of the North 70 rods of the WesC
40 rods of Lot Y in Block "K" uf Che Kraemer Tract, as shown on a map thereof recorded in
book 12, pages 87 ar.d 88, Miscellaneous Records of Los tingele3 CounCy, California. PARCGL 2:
The Nortlieriy 16.00 feet of the Southerly 38.80 feet of tne Westerly 25.00 feet of the East-
erly 355.00 feet of the South 5 rods of. the North 70 rods of the idest 40 rods of Lot 2 in
Block ";t" of the Kraemer Tract, as shown on a map thereof recorded in book 12, pages 87 and
88, Miscellaneous Records o£ Los Angelgs County, California
WHEKEAS; the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Hail in the City of Anaheim on
Pebrusry 21, I973, 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'p:ovisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.68, to hear and corisider evidence for and against said
proposed vdriance and to investigate and make findings and xccommenda'iions in connection tnerewith; and
1VHEREAS, said Commission., after due inspection, investigation, and study made by itseif and in its beha:f, and after due
consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts:
Thae the petiticner requests variances from the Araheim Municipal Code as follows:
a. SECTION 78.52.060(3)(b) - Reyuired solid masonry wall (to permit a six-
foot chainlink fence with wood slats around an
outdoor storage area instead of the required
six-foot S~lid masonry wa11)
b. SECTIOA? 18.52.060(2)(a)(1) - Minimum fr.ont setback. (50 feet required; 35
` feet existing ~nd proposed}
2. That the Fetitioner proposes to establish a landscape contracting facility on sub~~
ject property utiliziiig the'existing.residence'located within the requi.red.setback area.
3. That Waiver 1-a, above mentioned, is hereby granted on the basis that similar screen-
ing techniques in the industrial area have been approved in the past.
4. That F~aiver 1-b, above mentioned, is hereby granted for a period of to~o years in
order that utilizaLion of the er.isting structure may be made and to deterniine at the end o£
said time whether other properties in this general area have been developed for industrial
purposa;s w'~er.ein the 50-foot setback was required, and if no development has occurred, the
petitiane: c;ay submit a request to the ?lanning Cemmission for an additional period of time
for utilization bf the existing structure as stipulated to by the petitioner.
5. That thEre are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable
to the property involved or to the intended use of the oroperty that uo not apply generally
to the property ot class of use in the same vicinity and zone.
5. That the requested variance,.as approved, is necessary for the preservation and en-
joyment: of a substantial property right possessed by oCher property in the same vicinity
r~nd zone, and denied to the property in question.
7. That tt~e re~uested v9riance, as approved, will not be materia'lly detrimental to the
puUlic welfare or injurioua ~jo the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in
which lhe property is locateQ.
ENVIRONMGNTAL IMPACT P.EPORT FINDING:
That the Planning Coffinission, in connection with an Exemption Declaration Status request,
finds and determines that the proposal would have no sLgnificant envi.ronmentol impact and,
L•herefore, recommends to the City Councii that no Environmental ~~~pact Statement is necessar}c
DE V-66-E ~ 1 ~
i('. / ~ ~
NOW, THEREFORC, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Plenning Commission ~oes heceby gcant subject
Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which are heceby feund to be a necessary pre:equisite to the pca-
posed use of the subject property in ocder to pceserve the sefety and generel welfare of the Citizens oE the City of
Anaheim:
(1) That the sidewalks and driveways shall be installed along Miller Street.
(2) That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the Cit,y of Anaheim the sum of
$2.00 per front foot along Miller Street for street lighting purpo~es.
(3) That trash storage areas,.shal7. be provided in accordance with approved plans on
file with the office of the DirecEo r of Public Works.
(~F) That the ~xieting structure shall be brought up to the minimum standards of the
City~~:f Anaheim including the Uniform Building, Pluinbing, Electricat., Housing, Mechanical
and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of Anaheim.
(5) That appropriate water assessment fees as determined by the Director of Public
Utilities shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a building permiC.
(6) `Th~t the outdoor sCorage area shali be surfacad or otherwise treated to eliminate
dust.
(7) That subject property shall be developed substa:itially in accordance with plans
and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, and 3 provided,
ho;~ever, thaC redwood ~lats sha11 b~ installed in the chainlink fence slong the north, west,
and ~outh property lines and in the gates along the east side oE the storage yard, to screen
the storage..area from view.
(8) That Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7, above mentioned, shall be complied with
prior to the commencement of the activity author.ized under this resolution, or orior t~ the
time that the building permit is issued, or within a period of one year from the date hereof,
whichever occurs first, or such further time as the Planning Cormnission may gran.t.
{9) That the use of the existing structure is granted for a period of two years and at
the end of that period, and upon written request by the petitioner, the use may be reviewed,
for consideration of an additional period of time if it has been determined that no further
industrial development has occurred to warrant requiring complying with the required setback.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION ia signed and approved by me this
ATTEST:
/~!~ /%~a~`~'., °
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY Or ORANGE ) ss•
CITY vF ~NAHEIM )
1973.
I, Ann Kt?bs ~ Secretary of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby cectify thet
the focegoing r:•soiution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim,
held on February 21, 1973, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., by the following vote of the members theceof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ALLRED, FARANO, GAUER, HERBS~, KAYWOOD, ROWLP,ND, SEYMOUR.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NON~,.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have heceunto set my hand this lst day of March, 1973.
RESOLUTION NO. PC73-38
C~~~,L~t-~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
V2-G '2'