PC 73-62~ ~
RESOLUTION NO. PC73-62
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 2486 SE GRANTED
!4HEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive a verified Petition for Varience
from JAMES WINGERT, 1424 James Way, Anaheim, Celifornia 42801, Owner of cerl•ain real prop-
erty situated in the City o~ Anaheim, County of Orange, State of. California, described as
Lot 42 of Tract No. 5427
; and
WHEREAS, the City Plan~ing Commission did hold a public hearing at the City Hall in the City of Anaheim
on March 19, 1973, at 7:30~ o'clock P.M., notice ot said public heacing having been duly given as ce; uired
by lew and in accordance with the provisions of the Aneheim ldunicipel Code, Chapter 18.68,to hearand consi~9ec
evidence Eor and against seid proposed variance and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in conn~ec-
tion therewith; and
WHEREAS, seid Commission, efter due inspection, investigetion, end study made by itself end in its behalf,
and after due considerati~n oE all evidence and reports offered et seid hearing, does find and determine the following
facts: '
1. That the petitioner reauests varianaes froui the Anaheim Municipal Code ae follovis:
e. S~'CT20?d 18.20.030(2)(a) - Minimum side yard. (10 feet
required; 7 feet proposed)
b. SEC^ION 18.20.C30(3)(a) - btinimum rear yard. (25 feet
required;,ll feet proposed)
2. Th~i;'the petitioner proposes two addi.tions to the home, one encroeching into the
z•ear yard setbaok, and.the otheronoroaching into the requir~d side yard setbsak.
3•. That there ere exceptionel or extraordinary circumstences or conditions appliceble to the property involved
or to the intended use of the propeity that do not apply generally to :he property or class of use in t~ie same vicinity
and zone.
4. Thet the requested vnrience is necessery for the preservatior. and enjoyment of a substantial property cight
possessed by other property in the seme vicinity end zone, and denied to the propecty in question.
5. Thet the requested veriance will r.ot be meterially detrimental to the puhlic welfate or injurious to the pmp-
erty or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located.
E:~NIRO?~THfE?V`rAL IMPAC~, ftEPORT FII3DING:
That the Plannir.g Commission, in conneotion with e,n Exemption Declaration Status request,
Pinds ard determines that the proposal would have n~ signifiaant environmental impaat, and
~there£ore, reaommends to the City Counoil that no Environmental Impaot Statement is necessary.
1-G -1-
.~
,.'- ~ ~
N064, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thet the Anaheim City Plenning Comr.:ission does hereby gcant suh;~t2
Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which a:e heceby iound to be a necesser,~ precequisite tc UiF pro-
posed use of the subject property in order to preserve the sefety end generel welfaro of the Citfzens af the Cit~ oi
Anahcim: .
(1) Tkiat su~:;ject proporty sha11 be developed ~utstantially in auo~rdai~Ce with
plans and speaifications en file with the City of Anaheim marked ExhiUit ;:os. 1, 2,
3, and 4.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is ei~ed end epproved by
ATTEST:
SECRETARY AN/:EI;:IM CITY PLANhiNG COMMISSION
STATE OF CAI,IFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) sB•
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Ann Kreba, Secretary of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that
the foregoing resolution was pacsed end adopted at n meeting of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Aneheim,
held on Merch 19 ~ 1973, at 7:30 p.ml o°clock P.M., by the iollowing vote oE the e..7bers thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ALLRED ~. FARANO ~ GAIIER, f~RTiST,. KAYWOOD ~ SE='~dOJH.
NOES: COMMISSIOKFRS: NONE.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ROWI,AND.
IN WITNESS WFIEREOF, I heve heceunto set my hend this 29th day of March, 1973.
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. PC73-52
V2-G '2'