PC 78-191RESOLUTION NQ. PC78-191
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAIIEIH CITY PLANtIING LOMMISSIOtI
TfIAT PETITIOt1 FOR VARIAtICE N0. 3035 BE GRANTEG
NHEREAS, Lhe Anahcim Gity Planning Comnission did receive a verlfied
Petition for Variance from DEqtlIS D. AtiD SALLY AHN ROCY., 9z3 Chippewa Avenue,
Anaheim, California 92801, owners of certain rcal property situated in the City of
Anaheim, County of Orange, State of Lalifornia described as:
Lot 22 of Tract 2092 as per map recorded in Book 65, Pa9es 3z and
33 of Hiscellaneous Naps in the officc of the recorder of said
Orange County.
WIIEREAS, the Ci[y Planniny Comnission did hold a public hearing at the City
Hall in the Lity of Anaheim on August 14, 1978, at 1:30 p.m.. notice of said publ(c
hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with ihe
provisions of tiie Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18,03, to hear and consider
evfdence for and against said proposed variance and to investi9ate and make findings
a~d recommendations in connection therewich; and
tilFf[REAS, said Cor,mission, after due inspection, investigation and study made
by itself and in its behalf, and af[er due consideration af all evidence and reports
offered at sald hearing~ does find and deterninc the following facts:
i. That the petitioner proposes a waiver of the following te cons[ruct a
two-story building anJ garage addition [o an exlsting single-famity structure:
SECTION 1Fi.OG.050.020 - Ninimum dlmensions of a two-car ara e.
2Q x 20 feet required;
21 x 17-1 2 fec[ proposed)
2, That [hc abovc-mentioned waiver is hereby granted o~ thc basis that the
propused garage would replace an e:cisting and smaller garage (17-1/2 x 19-1/2 feet);
that the petitloner demonstra~ed a hardship exis[s in that the size of the praperty
restricts devetopment in accordance with current Code requireme~ts; that when the
property was originaliy devetoped~ Code requirements concerning on-site parking were
satlsfied; and that other properties in [hc samc vicinity and zonc are developed with
smaller garages and de~(at would bc depriving this property of a privilege being
enjoyed by ocher properties in the immediate area.
3. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditinn~.
applicable to the property invoived or to the intended use of the property that :~~
not ~pply generally to the p.^operty or class of use in the same vlcini[y and zone.
4. Tfi at the requested variance is necessary for [he preservation and
enJoyment of a substantial property right possessed by o[her praperty in the same
vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in question.
5. That the requesYed variance will not be materially detrimental te the
public welfare or injurious to the proper[y or improvements in such vicinity a~d zone
in which [he praper:y is located.
PC78-19~
i
G. Tha[ one person inJicated their presence at said public hearing In
opposition; and that no correspondence was received in oppositfon to [he subject
petition.
EtJV1RONNENTAL IMPACT FINDIIIG: Thc Planning Director or his authorized
representative has de[ermined tha[ the proposed proJect falls wtthin the defini[ton
af Gategoricat Exemptions, Class 3~ as defined in Paragraph 2 of the City of Anaheim
Environmental Impact Report Guldelines and is. [herefore, categoricaliy exempt from
the requirement to prepare an EIR.
NON, TIIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVEU that [he Anahcin Ci[y Planning Commission
does hereby grant subJect Petitton for Variance, upon the follawing condition which
is hereby found to be a necessary prerequisi[e [o the proposed use of Che subject
property in order to preserve the safety and general wcifare of thc Citizens of the
City of Anahe(m:
i. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance
with plans a~d specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked ExhJbit Nos. 1
th rough 4.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Lity Planning Cortmissi~n does hereby
find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon
applicant's compliance with each and all of ihe conditions hereina6ove set forth.
Shouid any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or une~forceable
by the final judymen[ of any court of competent jurisdfction, then this P.esolution,
and any approvals hcrein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
THc FOP,EGOING RESOLUTIO;J is signed and approved by me this 14[h day of
August 1978•
N , I Ntl N h' SSI II
ATTEST:
lo~ ~ ~t1~t.i...~
S[CRETAR , ANAHLIH C! PLAtiNI~IG COHM15510t~
STRTE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORAtIGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
i, Edtth L. Harris, Secretary of the Anahe3m City Planning Commission, do
hereby certify tha[ the Foreg~ing resolu[ion was passed and adopied at a meeting of
the Anaheim Ctty Planning Commission held on August 14, 1978~ at 1:30 p,m,~ by the
follarring vote of th~ membe~s thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES, DAVID, NERBST, JOHNSOf7~ KI~lG, LINN
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
A95ENT: LOMMISSIONERS; TaLAR
I1~ WITNESS NNEREOF, 1 have hereunio set my hand this 14th day of August
1978.
~~ .~° ~~.~, -
SECRETARY~ ANAHEIM C~TY PLANNIFlG COMMISSION
-2- PC78-191