PC 85-92, l~::...
RESOLUTION NO. PC85-92
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COM6IISSION
Tt1AT YETITIOfI FOR VARIANCE N0. 3469 BE GRANTED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified
Petition foc Variance from ANAHEIM HILLS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 6507 Sercano
Aven~e, 'B", Anaheim, California 92807, ownec, and GUNSTON HALL COMPANY, INC.,
6507 Serrano Avenue, 'B", Anaheim, Caiifornia 92807, agent for certain real
propecty sicuated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of
California desceibed as:
PROPOSED TRACT N0. 10975~ BEING A SUBDIVISION OF:
PARCEL 2~ AS SHOWN UN A MAP FILED IN BOOK 155~ PAGES 32 AND
33 0[' PARCEL MAPS~ IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNiX RECORDER OP
ORANGE COUNTY~ CALIPORNIA.
WHEREAS, the City Planni.ng Commission did hold a public hearing at
the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on April 1, 2985, 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,
tv hear and consider evidence fo~ and against said proposed variance and to
investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection thecewith; and
WHEREAS, saiu Commission, after due inspection, investigation and
study made by it;self and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all
evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the
Eollowiny facts:
1. That the petitionec proposes a waiver of the following to pe~mit
an 83-unit attached condominium subdivision:
SECTION 18.31.0G3.022 - Minimum side Yard setback.
AND 18.32.020.050 (7 S 8 feet required; 2 to 12 feet proposed)
2. That the above-mentioned waiver is hereby granted on tY,e basis
that there ace special circumstances applicable to the property such as size,
shape, topography, location and surroundings which do not apply to other
identically zoned property in the same vicinity; and that strict application
o¢ Lhe Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges er.joyed by other
properties in the identical zone and classification in th~ vicinity.
3. That there are exceptional or extraordinacy circumetances or
conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the
property tnat do not apply generally to the p~operty or class of use in the
same vic?nity and zone.
A. That the requested variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property riyht possessed by othe~ property in the
same vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in question.
5. That the tequested variance will not be materially dctrimental to
the public welfare or injueious to the property or improvements in such
vicinity and zonp in which the ptoperty is located.
z~: 3
~~r #0489c PC85-92
~A
6. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in
upposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to subject
petition.
ENVIRONt9ENTAL IMPACT FINDING: That the Anaheim City Planning
Commission ha~ reviewed the proposal to permit an 83-unit attached condominium
subdivision with waiver of minimum side yard setback and approval of revised
specific plans on an icregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of
approxim~tely 37.2 acres located approximately 615 feet southwesterly of the
intersection of Nohl Ranch Road and proposed Stage Coach Road; and does hereby
approve the Negatice Declacation upon finding that it has considered the
Negative Declaration together witi~ any comments received ~uri.ng the public
ceview process and further finding on the basis of the initia] study and any
comment~ received lhat the~e is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect on the en~ironment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning
Cammission does hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the following
conditions which are hereby foi:nd to be a necessary prerequisite to the
proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and
general welface of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That subject pcoperty shall be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications cn file with the Gity of Anaheim marked
Exhibit Nos. 1 through 7.
2. That pcior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 1,
above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
BE IT E'UR~PHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does
Y.ereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly
predicated ~apon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions
hereinabove set focth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be
declared invalid or unenforceable by L•he final judgment of any court of
competent jur?sdiction, then tY~is Resolution, and any approvals herein
contained, shall be deemed null and void.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and appruved~by me this lsc day uf
April, 19a"5. // J/
~~ ~;
._ ~' . /~ /.
__~~~~ ~ •~~,'~~
-CHAIRMAN~ ANAHETM'CITY PLANNZNG COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~ ~ ~~
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COI•iMISSION
-2-
PCSS-92
_ - :^
, ~
STATE OF CALIFORNiA )
COUNTY OF URANGE ) ss.
CZTY OF ANAHEIM )
i, Edith L. Harris, Secretary af the Anaheim City Planning
Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and
adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on April 1,
1985, by the following vote of the members thereaf:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: flOUAS~ BUSHOTtE~ FRY, fIERBST~ KING~ LA CLAIRE~
MC BURNEY
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: tJOPlE
IN WITNESS Wh:..::OF, I have hereunto set my hand this lst day of
April, 1985.
`~~ cT~ .~° ~.r.,~_
SECP.ETARY, ANAHEIPI CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-3- PC85-92