PC 80-181R[SOLUTIOIJ r~o, re so-t~3t
A RESOLUTI0~1 OF TIIE AWAIIEIt; CITY PLAhl~lltlG COMtIISSION
TfINT PETITi01i FOR UARIFlP:CE N0. ;~71~ ~3E GP,AMTED
4ftIEREAS, the Analieim City Planning Commission did receive a verified
Petition for Variance from GORDO~~ E. SLO~tl, 31~5 Carousel, Anaheim, California,
92t30G, avner, of certain real properly situatecJ in the City of Anaheim, County
of Oranye, State of Califor~ia described as:
LOT 13tF QF TRACT 1u25, I11 THE CITY OF AtJAiIEIM, f,OUWTY OF ORfI~JGE,
STATE OF CAL~FORtJIA, AS PER FIAP RLCORDED III B00f; G2, PAGES 43, lil~
FlND 45 OF ~91SCELLAt1E0U5 PIAPS, I;! TIIE OFFICE OF TfIE RECORDEP, OF
SAID COUt1TY.
WHEREIS, the City Planning Cor~mi~sion did hold a public hearing at the Civic
Center in ttie City of Anaheim on October 20, 1~u0, at 1•30 p.m., notice of said
public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter lE.~j, to hear and consider
evidence for and against said proposed reclassification and to investigate and make
findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WIiEREAS, said Commission, aftcr due inspection, investigation and study made
by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports
offered at said hearing, cloes find and determine the `ollowing facts:
1. That the petitioner proposes a waivcr of the folla•~ing to permit two
detached single-fa.r,i ly ch.~ell ings in the RI•I-1200 (Residential, i•lultiple-fami ly) Zone:
SECT10;! ~~.27.oGi.a3o A~~u i ~.34.o2o.oto
Ptinimum lot are~ ~~~ ~;i~~~~ry uniC,
150u0 sq. ft. required: 77 sq. ft
proposed
2. That the above-mentioned waiver is hereby granted on the basis that the
petitioner der.ionstrated that a hardship exists in that the request is minimal
(amountiny to less than 5$ deviance).
3. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the property 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.
!~. That the requested variance is necessary for the preservetion and
enjoyment of a sul~stantial property right possessed by other property in the same
vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in question,
5. That the requested variance o-~ill not be materialiy detrimental to the
public welfare or in;urious to ttie property or improvements in such vicinity and zone
in ~afiicti the property is located.
PCBO-181
~
o. That one person indicated his presencc at said public hearing in
opposition; and that no correspondence 4~as received in opposition tu the subjeet
petition.
EIiVIF.OtlF1EPlTAL I~1Pl1CT FINJIII.~: That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has
reviewed the proposal to reclassify subject property fr~rn the P.S-/2UU ~Residential,
Sinyle-Family) to the RM-1?!10 lRcsidential, Ftultiple-Family) ~one to permit two
detached sinyle-faroily ~lweliings with ~•laiver of minimum lot area per dweiling unit on
an irreyularly-shaped parcel of lancl consisting of approxinately ~.2~ acre, havin9 a
frontage of approxir,iately ho fect on the ~ouCh side of Belnont Avenue, having a
ma;cimum depth of approxinately 1G3 feet and being located approximately Zov feet east
of the centerline of East Street; and does hereby approve the ~Jegative Deciaration
frori tnc requirement to prepare an environmental impact report on the basis that
there would be no si~nificant indiviJual or cumulative adverse environmental impaet
due to tne approval of this Negative Declaration since the Anaheim General Plan
designates the subject property for low and lo~:~-medium density resiclential land uses
commensurate with the proposal; that no sensitive environmental impacts are involved
in the proposal; tfiat the Initial Study submitted by the pe~itioner indicates no
significant individual or cunulative adverse environnental impacts; and that the
Negative Declaration substantiating tne foregoing findings is on file in u~~. City of
Anaheim Planning Departnent.
r+Oll, in~RtFORt, ot II RtSOLVtD that tne Anaheim City Planning Commission
does hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which
are nereby found to o~ ~ necessary nrcrequisitc to tne prop~sed use of the subject
property in order to prescrve tne safety and general ~•~elfare of the Citizens of the
City of Anaheim:
1. iha[ this Variance is granted subject to the completion of
Reclnssifica*?nn tlo. 7°_~?~-?!?, nrn•! nenrlinn.
2. That subject property shall be developed substantialiy in accordance
with plans and specifications on file aiith the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit tJos. 1
through 3•
f3E IT FURTNCR RESOLVEp that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
find and determine that the adoption of this Resolution is er.pressly predicated upon
applicant's compliance with each and all of tl~e conditions hereinabove set forth.
Should any condition or any part thereof be dec~ared invalid or unenforceable by the
final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then t;~is Resolu[ion, and any
approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and v~~~ci.
TU[ FOREGOItIG RESOlUTIOtJ is siyned and ap~ro~;ed by nc C:s 2.Oth day of
Octobcr, 1930.
/~a~~~~ ~'~~
cfint MAtI
AUNIEItI CITY PLAIItlII1G COMt115S10~~
_2_ PcEa-ist
nTrEST:
~l,c-~ ~ ~ .
SECRETiaRY, A'JANEIII CITl' FLAUI1117G COt1MI5SI0P1
STATE OF CALI FORtIIA )
COUtJ'fY OF ORl1~lGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAllElhi )
I, Editti L. Fiarris, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do
hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meetir.g of
the Anaheim Ci[y Planning Cormission held on October 20, 19II~, at 1:3~ p.~.,by the
foilowing vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COPt~iISSI0GER5: 6AR~JES, BOU/1S, ¢USIIORC, FRY, HERDST, Y.ItIG, TOLAR
t~OF_5 : LOhY~t l SS I OtlERS : NOtIE
ABSEtIT: LOt!MISSIOIIERS: tIONE
It! WIT~lESS ldIIEREQF, I liave hereunto set my hand this 20th day of October, 1986.
~~ ,~ ,a~~,~,~
SECRETARY, tIAFIEll1 CITY PLA~ItlItJG COM!11SSi0t!
-3_ PCBo-181