PC 81-38RESOLUTION N0. PC~i-3~
P. RESOLUTIOtJ OF ThIF ANAHEIM ClTY PLANNIPIG C01"~11SSION
TfiAT PETIT101d FOR VARIAPJCE N0. 319S BF GRAPITED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission ciid receive a verif;ed
Petition for Variance fru~ ANGF.L URF.tdO AND CELIA A, URFh1Q, So<< North Vine Street,
Anaheim, California 92aQ5, oi~mers of certain real property situated in the City of
Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California described as:
Lot 15 of Dlock C of Tract No. 549, as per map the~eof rec~rded in
Book 18, pane 23 of Miscellaneous btaps, records of Orange County,
Cali`ornia.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a puhlic hearing at the Civic
Center in the City of Anaheim on Fehruary 9, 1°31, at 1:30 p.m., notice of said
public hearing having been duiy given as required by law and in accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 1£3.03, to hear and consider
evidence for and against said proposed var•tance and to investiaate and make findings
and recommendations ir connectiun thereviith; and
WHEREAS, said Commissionr after 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, does find and deternine the folloti•~ing facts:
1. That the petitioner proposes a 4~aiver of tlie follo~-~ing to retain a`ence:
SECTIOP~ 13.04.043.1n1 - Ma:<imum fence height.
and 18.25.06h f1 inches permttted in front setback;
59 inches existing)
2. That the above-mentioned waiver is fiereby granted on the basis that the
petitioner demonsfrated that a hardship exists in that denial would deprive subjec'
propercy uf a priviieye enjoyed 't,y otner properties in the same zone and vicinity and
that no visual obstruction is caused to traffic in the area,
3. That there are ~xceptional 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 c;ass af use in the same vicinity and zone.
4. That the requested variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property i~ the same
vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in que~tion.
5. That the requested variance ivill not he materially d~trimental to the
public welfare or iniurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone
in a~hich the property is located,
6, That no one indicated their presence at said piiblic hearing Tn
opposi*_ion; and that no correspondence ~aas received in o~oosition to the subject
petition.
FNVIROHME^ITAL IMPACT FI4IDING: The Planrin9 Director or his authorized
representative has determined that the ~roposed project `alls ~~rithin the definition
PC81-34
of Categorical Exemptions, Class 3, as defined in the State EIF Guldelines and is,
Yherefore, categoricaliy exempt from the requirement to prepare an EII?,
hIOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission
does herehy grant suhject Petition for Variance, upon the follrn~in9 conditions which
are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the pro~osed use of the subject
property in order to preserve the safety and general a~elfare of the Citizens of the
City of Anaheim:
t. That the c~,me~(s) of subject property shall deed to the City of Anaheim
a strip of land 10 feet in ti•~idth from the centerline of the alley along the alley
for alley widening purposes.
2. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit PJo, 1.
3. That a building permit shall be ohtained as requ?red by the Ruilding
Divis(en, for the existing brick a~d arrought iron fence.
4. Tliat Condition Nos. t, 2, and 3, above-mentioned, shall be complied
with within a period of sixty (60) days from the date hereof, or such further time as
the Plar~ning Commission may grant.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Ptanning Commission does hereby
find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon
applicant~s ~ompliance Hrith each and all of the conditions hereinahove set forth.
Shouid any such condition, or any part thereof, be decla red invalid or unen`orceable
by the final judgment of any court O~ '.r!''.?.at~~Y jurisdiction, then this ResolutTo~,
and any approvals herein contained, shali be dEeme~ null and void.
THE FOREGOINC, RESOLUTION is signed and appro~~ed by me this 9th day of
February, 1981.
~~/~;: ~ ~~ ~ ~ g.~.~
,~ ~ . ~~.-~
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM CITY PLANPII~lG COMMISSION
AT'i EST:
m c~~ .c -- L`iK.r%v~ i~
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLAPI~ING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUN1'Y OF ORANGE ) ss.
C(TY OF AtJAHEIM )
1, Edith L. Harris, Secre'tary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do
hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted as: a meetin9 of
the Anaheim City Planning Commission lield on February !~, 1°31, by the following vote
of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: QARNES, SOUAS, FRY, HERBST, Kl~dr,, T~LAR
NOES: COMt11SS10,"IERS: BUSFIORE
ABSEN'~: C(1MMISSIONERS: VONE
I~J WITIJ[SS 4/HERFOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ~th day of February,
1981. ,~
/~GQ~.C~ .~ ,?~2~ti~ ~
_2_ ~ECRE ARY~ ANAHEIM CI1'Y PL4NMIPIG COMMISSION p~g~-3~