PC 78-66RESOLUTION N0. ?C 7$-66
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIOfJ
THAT PETI710N FOR VARIANCE N0. 3005 BE GRANTED
WHEREAS~ the Anaheim City Planning Commisston did receivc a verifted
Pe[ition for Variance from 808 AND ELIZABETH KIRKPATRICK, BILLY L. AND PATRICIA
WOLFE, and OSCAR AND ELI~ABETN STANY.OV, 905 South Euclid Street, Suite 111~
Fullerton, Californta 92633, owners, and TALLAS D. MARGRAVE. JP.., 161 Fashion Lane.
Suite 110, Tustin, California 92680, (agent) of certain real property si:uated in the
City of Anahelm, County of Orange, State of California destribed as:
The SouCh 100 feet of the North 360 feet of the East 448 feet of
the Mortheast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast
Quar2er of Section lj, in Township A South, Range 11 West, S.B.B.
E M.
WHEREAS, [he Cfty Planning Commission did hoid a public hearing at the City
Hall in the City of Anaheim on April 10, 1978. at i:30 p.m., notice of said public
hearirt~ having been duty given as requirrd by law and in accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and consider
evidence for and against said proposed variance and to investEgate and make findings
and recommendations in connection therewith; and
41HEREAS, said Commission, after due inspec[ton, investiga[ion and study made
by itself and in its behalf, and af[er due consideratfon of all evidence and reports
offered at said hearing, dces find and determine the following facts:
1. That the petitioner proposes a waiver of the foliowing to construct a
24-unit apartment complex:
SECTION 18.34.062.012 - Maximum struccural hei h[
~1 stor~ permitted w(thin
150 ~eet of RS-A-k3,000 zoning;
2 stories proposed)
2. Tha[ the above-mentioned watvcr is hereby granted on the Lisis that the
petitloner demonstrated thaC a hardship exists in that a similar request was
previously granCed on the property south of subJect property.
3. 7hat there are exceptional or ex[raordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do
nat apply generaliy to the property or class of use in the same vicfni[y and zone.
4. That the reques[ed variance is necessary for the preservation and
enJoyment of a substantial property rTght possessed by other pro~erty in the same
vicinity and zone. and denied [o the property in question.
5. That the requested vartante will not be matartally detrimental to the
public welfare or inJurious ta the property or improvements tn such vicinity and zone
In which ihe property Is located because the three nearby RS-A-43,000 prope~ties
whtch are the reason for the requested waiver are desi9nated for general commercial
land uses by the Anaheim General Plan and because cwo of said properties are
currently developed with commercial uses.
PC78-6b
6. That two (2) pcrsons indicated thetr presence a[ said public hearing in
opposition; and tha[ no correspondence was recelved in opposition to the subject
petition.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City Planning Commisslon has
reviewed the subject proposal to reclassify the zoning from RS-A-43,000 (Restdenttal.
Agricultural) to RM-1200 (Residentiat, Multiple-Family) ta construct a 24-unit
apartmen[ complex with waiver of maximum struc[ural height an a rectangularly-shaped
parcel of land consisting of approvfmately 0.9 acre having a frontage of
approximately 100 feet on the west sfde of Maqnolia Avenue. having a maximum depth of
approximately 395 feet, being located approxtmately 262 feet south of the centeriine
~f Ltncoln Avenue; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaratlon from the
requirement to prepare an environmental tmpact report on the basis that there would
be no signiffcant indtvidual or cumulative adverse environmenCal impact due to the
approval of this Ne9ative Declaration since the Anaheim General Plan designates the
subject proper[y for medium density residenttal land uses commensura[e with the
proposal; tha[ no sensitive environmental impacts are involved ln the proposal; that
the Ini[ial Study submitted by the petttioner indicates no significant Tndividuai or
cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and that the Negative Declaration
substantiating [he foregoing ftndings ts on file tn [he City of Anaheim Plann(ng
Department.
NOW, THEREFORE~ 8E IT RESOLVEO that the Anaheim Cfty Planning Commfssion
does hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which
are hereby found to be a necessary prerequtstte to the proposed use of the subject
property in order to preserve the safety and general w~iFare of the Cici~ens of thc
Gi[y of Anaheim:
1. That this Variance is gran[ed subJect to the completion of
Reclassification r~o. 77-78-54, now pendina.
2. Thai subjcct property shall be developed substan[tally tn accordance
with plans and specfftcations on file with the Clty of Anahetm marked Exhibit No. 1.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is s(gned and approved by me thts lOth day of
Ap~il, t978.
~ ~ r~~ 9~-~
CHATRNAN~ ANAHEIM LITY LANNING COMNISSION
AT7E5T:
SECRETARY,- ANANEIM CITY PLA~:NIhG COMHISSION
STATE OF CALIFORtIIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Edith L. Harris. Secreta~y of the Anaheim Ci[y Planning Commtssion. do
hereby certify that the fo~egotng resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of
-z- Pc78-66
. ; ,
the Anahelm Ctty Plnnning Commlssion held on Aprtl 10, 1978~ at 5:30 p.m,, by the
foliow(ng vote of the manbers thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES, OAVID. HERBST, JOHNSON, KING, TOLAR
NOES: COM415SIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: C04MiSS10NER5: LI~IN
1978.
IN WITNE55 UHEREOF~ I have hereunto set my hand this lOth day of April,
~~ ~ ~~~
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM GITY PLRNNING COMMISSION ,
-3- PC78-66