PC 85-245RESOLUTION N0. PCAS-245
A RESOLUTZON Oc' THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 3520 BE GkANTED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a vecified
Petition for Variance from WILBERT KAY SMITH AND LOIS SMITH, 829 Halliday
Street, Anaheim, California 92804, owners, and SUN BOSS CORPORATION, 1155
Stacy Couit, Riverside, Califurnia 92507, ATTN: JOHN fiAIN, agent for certain
real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of
California described es:
LOT 79 UF TRACT N0. 3823 AS PER MAP RECORDED ZN BOOK 203 PAGES
21 TO 23 Ii7CLUSIVE OF MZSCELLANEOUS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commisaion did hold a public hearing at
tl:e Civic Center in the City of Anahezm on November 13, 1985, 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 18.03,
to hear and consider evidence for and agai~st said proposed variance and to
investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, 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 determine the
following iacts:
1. That the petitioner pcoposes waivers of the following to
construct an enclosed patio addition:
SECTIUN 18,26.063.03U - Minimurn cear vard setback.
(10 feet required; 6 feet proposed)
2. That the above-mentioned waivers are hereby granted on the basis
that there ace special circumstances applicable to the property such as size,
~h~~e, topogra~,k,Y, iuualiuu and yur[ounaings which do not apply to other
identically zoned property in the same vir_inity; and that strict application
of the Zoning Code deprives the proper.ty of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in the ider.tical zone and classification in the vicinity.
3. That there are exceptienel or extraocdinary circumstances or
conditions applicable L•o 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.
4. That the requested variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the
same vicinity and zone, and denied to che pxoperty in question.
5. That the requested variance will not be materially detrimenkal to
the public welfare or injurious to the property or impruvements in such
vicinity and zone in which the property is located.
0652[ PC85-245
~;a;', :'.
~~
6. That no one indicated their pcesence at said public hearing in
opposition; and that no corcespondence was received in oppositi.on to subjecl
petition.
EN'VIRONt9ENTAL IMPACT FINDING: The Planning Dire~tot or his
authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls
within the definition oE Categorical Exemptions, Class 5, as defined in the
State E!R Guidelines and is, therefore, categcrically exempt from the
requirement to ptepare an EIR.
NOW, TIiF,REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anahe9m City Planning
Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the following
conditions which are hereby found to be a neceNsary pcerequisite to the
proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and
general welfare of the Citizens of the CiYy of Anaheim:
1. That subject property shal]. be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file with the CiL•y of Anaheim marked
Exhibit No. 1.
2. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 1,
above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
BE IT FURiHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
hereby find and determine that adoption of this Reeolution is expressly
predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions
hereinabove set forth. Should any such ~ondition, or any part thareof, be
declared invalid or unenforceable by the [inal judgment of any court of
competent jurisdiction, then this ~esolution, and any approva].s herein
contained, shall be deemed null an~ void.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by ~ne this 13th day
of Plovember, 1985.
,, _~
~~~ ~ ~ ~'~'1 ,.1
~_ /'.(.<,_~~.~_.<_r `~ G'. ~•4'.c.'r..-~=
CHAIRWOMAN~ :ANAHEIFI CITY PLANhZNG COMMISSION
~.~~s:: ~i~ ~./. ~° 2~~ti-L~.
SECRETARY~ ANhHEIti CITY PI.ANNING COMMISSION
-Z- PC85-245
, .-.,J
/'1 ~~~
STATE UF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) =S•
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Edith L. Harris, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning
Commission, do hereby certify that the fotegoing cesolution was passed and
adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on November
13, 1985, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMt4ISSI0NERS: BOUAS~ FRY, HERSST~ LA CLAIRE~ LAWICKZ~ MC BURNEY
N,ESSE
P70E5: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
Iid WITNESS WHEREOF, i Have hereunto set my hand this 13th day of
Novembe~, 1985. ~
~' ~c~ / ~ ~~~iz,~.~:~
SECRETARY~ ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-3-
~~~
E~~r~.~,.;..,... ,... . , .. _...
PCS5-245
~:NS~