PC 75-39+ ., J RESOLUTION N0. P~~r-39 ~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMZ~S73 N OF TH~~ GRANTEDNAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive a'verified Petition for Varience
Ecom WILLIAM T. MESSENGALE, 2168 Anchor Street, Anaheim, California 92802 (Owner) of
certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of Cafif-
ornia, described as Lot 41 of Trect No. 5123, as shown on a Map recorded in book 247,
pages 21 and 22 of Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange County„ California
; and '
WHEREAS, the CiYy Planning Commission did }~old a pubtic hearing nt the City Hall in tha City of Anaheim
on February 19, 1975, at ~; 30 o'clock P.M., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required
by lnw entl in accordence with the pmvisions oE the Aneheim Municipnl Code, Chepter 18.03,to hear and consider evi-
dence for and egaiust said proposed variance end to investigate and meke findings and recrommendations in connection
therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation, and study mede by itself and in its behalf,
and after due rnnsideration of all evidence and reports oEEeced et said heering, does find and detetmine the following
fects:
1. Thetthepetitionerrequests the following waiver from the Anaheim Municipal Code, t~
construct a bedroom addition to a single-farnily residence:
SECTION 18.27.062.020 - Maximum coveraqe. (~ permitted; 38.5% proposed)
2, That the above-mentioned waiver is hereby granted on the basis that the variance,
as proposed, is minimal.
3, Thet there are exceptional or extraordinary ciccumstances or conditions epplicable to the property involved
or to the intended use of the pr~perty that do not epply generelly to the propecty or class of use in the seme vicinity and
zone.
~+, 'I`hat the requested veriance is necessary for the preservetian end enjoyment of a substantial property rig t
possessed by olhec pcopecty in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in question.
$. That the requested varience will not be meterinlly detrimentel to the public welEere or injuri~us to the prop-
erty or improvements in such vicinity end zone in which the propecty is located.
6. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition, and no
correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition; however, the property owners
immediately adjacent to the subject property to the north and south signed the petition in
favor of the proposal. '
ENV I RODIMEN'i'AL I MPACT REPORT F IND I NG:
That the Director of Development Services has determined that tFie proposed activity falls
witfiin the definition of Section 3.01, Class 5 of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the
Requirements for an Environmental Impact Rep;rt and is, therefore, categorically exempt fro
the requirement to file an EIR. RESOLUTION N0. PC75-39
• ' NOW, THEREFORE, BE ~ESOLVED thet the Aneheim City P1ann~Cammission does hereby grant subject
^Petition for Va:ience, upon the following conditions which ere hereby found to be e necessary prerequisite :o the pro-
posed use of the subject property in order to preserve the sefety end generel welfare of the Citizens of the City of
Anaheim: .
1. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and
specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit No. 1.
2, That Condition No. l, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final
building and zoning inspections.
THE FOREGQING RCSOLUTION is eigned end epproved by me thie 19th day of Feb rua ry, 1975.
f
CH IRMAN AN HEIM CITY PLANNIBG COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~ • • p~ j~C'~~r"i'.~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION .
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) se.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I,Patricia B,Scanlan, Secretery of the City Planning Commission of the City of Aneheim, do he;eby certifv thnt
the foregoing cesolution was passed end edopted et a meeting of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Aneheim,
held on February i9, 1975, ~t 1;30 o'clocl: Y.M1i.. by the following vote oE the members thereo°_:
AYES: COMMTSSIONERS: GAUER, JOHNSON, KING, MORLEY, TOLAR, HERBST
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: FARANO
II3 WITNES:i WEIEREOF, I havc heceunto aet my hand this 19th day of February, 1975.
~ ~ R~~~~
SECRE'I'ARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
.2_
RESOLUTION N0. PC75'39