PC 75-68~ .~ ~ FESO~UTION N0. PG75-68 ~
A RESOLUTIOPJ OF 7HE CITY PI.ANNING LOMMISSION OF THE C1TY OF AhA~EIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 2696 BE GRANTED.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did r-~a+v~ a
verified Petition for Variance from GEORGE WOMMER, 1817 East Clifpark Wey~ ilnaheim,
California 92805 (Owner) of certain real property ~Ituated in thc City of
Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, describsd as:
Lot No. 156 of Tract No. 6409 as per map reco,~ded in book 241 pages 25 ti~rough
29 inclusive of Miscellaneous Maps, in the office of ti:';e county recorder of
said county; and
WHEREAS, Che City Planning Commission did hold a public b.RaiiN~ a5 the City
Hall in the City of Anaheim on March 31~ 1975, at 1:30 p.m., noe::: ~~F' said
public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in ;~rr;~rdanS~
With the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Ch~pter 18.~>, 'tQ hzar and
consider evidence for and against said proposed variance and to inv~s`igate
and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; an~
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, invtlS".~•9atiEUi. enG 5tudy
made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideratiqn of all evidence
and reports offered at said hearing, does find and detei'mi~~,~ the 1'o~iowing
facts:
1. That the petitioner requests the following waiver fro~~ the Anaheim
Municipal Code, to allow a pet rooster in the RS-7200 (Residential, Single-
Family) Zone:
SECTION 18.02.052.0133 - P~rml*_Yed poultry. (Rooster5 not pernait>ec1
2. That the above-mentioned waiver is hereby granted for a time limitstion
of two (2) years,'subject to review and consideration for extension of time,
upon request by the petitioner; said waiver bei~g granted on the basis *hat .+ie
petitioner indicated that the life expectancy of a rooster is apprott?mately
seven (7) years and the subject pet rooster is presently approximately six (G)
years old,
3, That the petitioner stipuiated that the pet rooster would be kept
inside the residence and/or garage and in a cage the majority of the time, and
especially at night and until 9:00 a.m.; and further, that the family did not
intend to replace the pet rooster upon his demise.
4. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the pr~perty involved 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 variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoy-
ment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same
vicinity and zone, and denfed to the property in question.
6. That the requested variance will not be matertally detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and
zone in which the property is located.
7. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition
and no correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition.
ENV.IRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FINDING:
That the Director of Development Services has determined that the proposed
activity falls within the deftnition of Section 3.01, Class I of the City ~f
Anaheim Guidelines to the Requirements for an Environmental Impact Report and
is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an EIR.
RESOLUTICN N0. PC75-68
~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE ~tESCLVED that the Anaheim City ~r~,aing Commisston
does hereby grant subject Petition ~or Variance, upon the follrn+ing coRdiL.tor~s
which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisitie to the propose~ use af
the subject property in order to preserve the safety and general we]Bare o~
the Citizens of the City o4 Anaheim:
1, That subject property shali be developed substantially in accorda4.~::
with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked ExhbbiY
Nos. 1, 2 and 3.
2. That a time limitation of two (2) years, shall be granted for the
use requested in this variance and, upon request by the petitioner, an additional
period of tir.~e may be granted upon approval by Y,he Planning Commission and/or
City Council.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 3~st day of
Ma rch , 1975. .>-~~~
,
. C R N, HEI CITY PLANNING C~MMISSION
ATTEST:
a~~~.aJ.c~, ~~.~~~
SECRETARY, AMAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFOkNIA )
COUNTY OF ORIINGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Patricia B. Scanlan, Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the
City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the forego.°~g resolution was passed and
adopted at a meeting of the City Flanning Commission of the City of Anaheim, held
on March 31, 1975, at 1:30 p.m., by the following vote of the members thereof;
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FARANO, GAUER, JOHPJSON, KING, MORLEY, TOLAR, HERBST
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNE55 WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 3~st day of March, 1975.
~ ~. _ . -~.~
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNINu LOMMISSION
.2_ RESOLUTION N0. PC75-66