PC 75-171~ ~ .
Ri:S~T,UTION N0. PC75-171
A RFSOI.lITION OF THG CIT1' PLA:V;JI`!G CQD~IISSION OF TIII: CTTY 0~ ANAIiT:I'1
TI1AT PrTITIQV FOR VARIANCP. N~. 2735 RG GP.Ai~!TP,D.
{Y!IGRF:AS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive 1
verified Petition for Variance from ROBIiRT F. A~lD JG1.TiA~: S. }•in~~7'(;~"•1ERY, 70£: N. {4est
Street, Anahei.m, California 923R1 (Owner) of. certain renl property described 2s
follows:
All that certain land situated in the Statc of Calif~rnia, Cotmty of Orange, City
of Analieim, ciescriUed as follows:
That portion of the South A99..i0 feat of. the 14est Sfii.C,2 feet of Vineyard Lot
"A7" as shoian on a i•fan rer.or.cieci in Rcok 4, plges F29 anii h30 of 1leerls, records of
Los Angeles County, California, lying iVesterly of tlie 11'ester.ly ]ine of Tract No.
1395, as shoxn on a Pfap recorded in Book 54, pa~e nG of Dliscellnneous ttaps,
recorcls of Orange Coimty, Calif.ornia.
F.xcepting therefrom the Northcrly 21.i.Qf1 feet thereof.
1V1IP.RF.AS, tlie City Plannin~; Commission did holrl a puhlic licarinfi at the City
Hall in the City of Anaheir~ on August 4, 1975, at 1:3n p.n., notice of said public
hearing having been duly ~;iven as required by law and in accordance with the
provisions of the Anahcim ~funicipal Code, Chanter 1^.(13, tn hear and consiQer
evidence for and against said proposed varinnce and to investigate and make findings
ancl recommendations in con~iection tl~ere~vitli; and
NII~REAS, said Commission, after. duc inspection, investi~ation and study made
by itself an~l in its Uehslf, and aftcr due consideration of all c~~idence an~l reports
offered nt sai.~', hearing, locs fir:l nnd determine the folloiving facts:
1. That tlic petitioner requests tlie folloiaing tivaivers from tlie Analieim
Municipal Code, to estAC11S~1 three (3) lots:
a. SL•CTIOV 1S.2,.f161.020 -~linimum lot ~~:idth. (~0 feet required;
71, 82, and 83 fect propose~l)
b, SfCTIOV 15.25.O~i3.~20 - hlinimiun sidayard setback. (8 feet require~l;
1 foot ~~roposed)
SC:CTIO?d 13.7.5.OG6.011 -'4inimum nwnUer ot enclosr.d ~arkinr, s aces.
= snaces required; nnne existing
2. Tt~at IVaiver 1-a, above-mentione~i, is herehy grlntecl on the basi.s thot a
hardsl~ip would Ue crclted if said waiver iaere not gr:mteri since ot;ier propcrtirc in
tne imme;liate lrea are enjoyin~; lots narrower ttian 9~ f.eet; anc?, fiirtltermore, the
proposed lot arels are siibstantially larger than t}ie minimnm 1~,000 5l~111TC feet
required in the RS-1Q,000 Zone; additionally, a single-far~ily residence is existing
on the center of subject propexty.
.i: Th1t IVai.ver 1-h, above-mentioned, is l~ereby f;rlnte~l on the bR51S that a
porte=cocliere (carport) is existing ~aitliin the minim~m~ require~l sicleynrd setback.
Furtliermore, the minimum lot tioidth proposeci in connection with waiver 1-a, above-
mentioned, would be further rerhiced if the proposed minimnm sideyard setbzck were
increased, arid therefore, a harcishiP would be createcl if said xliver were not
granted; pr.ovided, ho~~ever, that certain Building Co~le requirements pert~ining to
fire~valls shall he complie~l wiCh in connection IJ1L~l retention of the porte-cochere.
4. Tliat 14aiver 1-c, ahove-mentioned, is liereby granted on the blsis that
t}ie existing porte-cochere (carporY.) is 1 non-conforminn, le~;al means nf rroviciing
enclose~l parking on the siibject property and, theref.ore, a liarclshiP woiild be created
i.f. said w~iver were not granted. '
5. That the petitioner represevted at the public hcaring that a maximum of
five (5) trees would be removed from tlie site fnr developnent pi~rposPS.
RF.S~LITfI(1N N0. PC7S-171
~ ~
G. T1i:it tliere are exce~~tional or extr~nrdinary circiimstances or conditians
applicabic to tlic ~~rnperty involved or to the intende<l usc of the property that do
not apply generally to tlie property or class of use in the svne vicinity an~i zone.
7. That thc requesteJ variance is necr.ss:try for the prescrvation and
enjoyment of a siibsta~itial pronerty right possessed hy othcr property in the same
vicinity an~l zone, and ~9enied to thc property in question.
3. Ttiat the requested variance ~uill not he Materially detrimenrll to the
puhlic welfare ar injnri.rnis to the PropertV or improvemenY.s in such vicinity and zone
in wiiich the property is locate~l.
9. That two (2) persons tiuere present at said public helring in opposition;
anel one (1) letter was recr,iverl in oPposition t~ sublect I~etition.
E?NIROP~:II:;;TAL II•fPACT R]?PQ?tT FIiIDIVG:
That the Planning Commission recommends to the City Co~mcil thlt the subject
project be exempt from tlie reqiiirement to prepare 1n eiivironmental iinpact report,
purstilnt to the Provisinns of the California F.nvironnental cluality Act.
id~N', TIII:P,P,PORfi, BE IT Ri:SOt,VT;i) that the Anahcirn City Planning Commission
does lierehv grant siil>ject Petition for Variancc, upon tiie following comlitions iehich
are hercUy foun<1 to be a necesslry nrerequi.site to tl~e propose<! use of th:; snbject
property i.n order to preserve the snfety an;l genernl 1•relf.are ~f the Citizens o: the
City of Analieiru:
1. That the owncr(s) of suUject pronerty shall pay to the City of Anaheim
the sum of ;2.00 per front ioot alon~ I¢est Strect for str.ect lightinP p~irposes.
2 That t`~c o~+mer(s) of subjcct ~iropcrty s1i111 p1y to tl?e City of Anaheim
tlie sum of~60 cents per Lront foot 11ons; i4est Strcet for tree P1lntinp purposes.
3. Th1t firc hv,lrants sh111 be instnlled an~t charged as required and
detei7~ineci to Ue necessary by the Chief of the ~ire Deplrtr~enr, prior T.o commencement
of. structurnl framing.
4. Tliat ~!rain:tge of suhject property shall be ~iispose~l of in a manner
satisfactory to tlie City Engincer.
5. In the event that subject propcrty is to Ue divide:~ for the purposc of
snle, lease, or fin:~ncing, a parcel map, to record the anprove~~ rlivision of subject
property shall Uc submitted to anc' approvec: b~~ the Cit~ oF rlnlheir~ nnd then he
recordecl in tlie Ofrice of. the OranPe County Recorder.
6. Th1t the owncr(s) of. subject property si~all pay to the City of An~heim
thc appropriate Park aml recreation in-licii f.ees as cieterniinerl to bc apnroPriate by
tlie City Coimcil, said fees to be paid at the time the buil:iing permit is issue:i.
7. That subject property shall Ue devel.oPed siibstantially in accordance
with plans an~l specifications on file witli tl~e City of Analiein marke~ Tixhibit ~o. 1.
3. Th~t Conditiun !~'os. 1, 2, and 5, above-mentioneA, sh~ll be complie~l with
prior to the commencement of the activity authorizecl un~ler tliis resoltition, or prior
to the tir~e that the building permit is issued, or within a peri.o~l of. one year from
date hereof, wliichever occurs first, or such further time as the Pianning Commission
and/or. City Council may grant.
9. That the existing norte-cochere (carport), if retainecl, sh111 he brought
un to the minimum stan~larcls of the City of Anaheim, inr.luclin~ thc liniform Ruilding,
Housing, and Fire Codcs 1s ldopted by the City of Anahr,ir~.
-Z- RF.SOLIffIf1N NQ. PC75-171
. - ----~r-----~---
.
~ ~ ,
10, That Condition Nos. A and 7, above-mentioned, shall be complied with
prior to final building an:l zonin~ inspections.
TE?C: FORfGOING RI:SQI.IITIQV is signed and approvecl by me this n h day of August, 1975,
o (/~ t~
C?IAIRtN':, AVAH1iI~~l CITY PI,A`d'~'I?t~ Cnnihii5Si0N- ~
ATiGST:
~~~,~ ' ~
S3iC.RLTAP.Y, AWNIGI`1 CITY PLAId1vI?1G CO!4lISSION
STATT: OP CALIPORNIA )
CQUiTf" OF QRANGC• )ss.
CITY OP AidAFliiIhl )
I, Patricia B. Scanlan, Secretary of the City Planning, Commission o£ the
City of Anaheim, c:o hereby certify that the forefioing resolution was passed and
adopted at a meeting of the City Planning Commission of tlie Ci.ty of Anahcim, ]~eld on
Attgtist 4, 1975, at 1:30 p.m., by tlie following ~rote of tlie members tltereof:
AY1:S: CO?CfISSI~iil?RS: BARNES, I{ERBST, JOHNSON, KING, TQLAR, PARANO
NOF.S: COi~L~iISSI0v1iR5: P10RLEY
AliSridT: C.~"E4ISSI0`JGCS; ~0<dG
Ii7 l4IT;dF.SS IV(ILRI:OP, I liave hereu~ito set my hanc', this 4th day of Aug~ist, 19'S.
~ . C%~s~C~~,r/
SECT'.i?I'A. , ., . :_ CT'1 ~.`TI?vG COD~fISSION
-.i- RESOLUTION N0. PC75-171