PC 87-61~
RESULUTTON N0. PC87•-61
A ftESO[~U'PIOI~1 QF '.PHE ANAHEIM CI'PY PLAt1NTNG COMNIuSTON
7'FIAT PL;'PITION ror. VARIANCE N~. 3641 EiE GRAN'rEU
WHE}2i:AS, the Anaheim CiLy P.lanning Commission dicl receive a veriFied
Petit.ion for Variance f.rom JOAQUIN SUE'[RO ~ND AGNBS SUEIRO, 19G9 Deer Creek
Circle, Anaheim, Calit~rnia 92807, o~~uners and CALIE'ORNTA RE;~40DGLING, 2821
White St.ar~ $C, Anaheim~ ~alifornia 92806, agent for ccrtain ::eal propFr;y
:;i.tuat:kd in L•he Cil•y of Anaheim, County of. Orange, S~ate of California
de~cribed as:
LUT 20 OF 'PRACT N0. 7676, IN T.EIE CITY OI' ANAHEIT+{, AS PGR MAP
Rf;CORDGD IN BOOK 297, i~11GLS 15, 16 AND 17 OF MISCF:LLANEOUS vAPS~
IN 'PHE 0~'F'ICE QE' THE COUN'PY RCCORAEI2 OL' SAID COUNTY.
WHERF.AS, tne C:ity Planning Commission did hold a publlc heari n~ at the
Civic Center in i;he City of Anaheim on March 2, 1987, at 1:3U p.m., not•ice of
sai.d ~tablic hearing hav.iny bE~n duly yiven as requir?d by .law and in accor.r~~nce
~ith the provisions of the Anahei~~~i t4unicipa:l Ccde, Chapter 18.03, to hEar and
consid~: evi.dence f~r and against. sai.~i proposed var.iance and to investigate and
ntZk~ iiridings and recommcndations in cc~nnectian th~~r.ewith; aai.d public haarittg
hav~ng been continued to th~ I~lannir~g C~~imnission meeting oP f4arch 16, 1987; and
WHEREA~, said Commission, atter due insp~ction, invea~igation and study
made by i.tself and in its beha.lf, and aL-l:e.r due consideration of a11 evidence
and re~~ort.s oEfered at sai~l hearing, does f~nd and determine L•h~ .Eollowing facks:
l. That th~ petitioner. prap~.^.,es wuiveLS of the following to construct
a serond•-5tory 3-r.ocm additi.on to a sin~~le-iamily residence:
S~C'PION A8.?.7.062.02.1 - Maximum n~nnber ~f. bedroom.
~ ( 3 perrnittnd; 7 pro,~osec] )
2. 7'ha~ thc ab~ve-menkionec~ waiver is hereby gra.nted on the basis that
there are special. circumstanr.es af,plicable t~ the ~roperi:~ such as size, shape,
topography~ loc~tio~i ar.r~ surroundi7gs which do r,oL- apply i:o other identi~~lly
zoned proper~y in che sa~ne viciniL•~~; and that strict application oE the Zoning
Code de~ri.ves t;he propes.ey of pr.iviicges ~rijoyed by other pro~erties in tkie
identical zone anci <.;.lassi.Lzc~tion ~.n tht vicini ty.
3. Thal- there arP ex<:epL•ional or er,tr~aordinary circumsrances at:
conditions app.licable l-.o the properi:y invol.vec9 or to the intended use of th~:
properLy that ,~o not ap~ly gencral.ly to Lhe p~operFy ~~r class of u;,e in the same
'' vicinlr.y and zone.
~. ~rha~ rhe requc:~ted variance is necessary for tt-~e orespcva~ian and
enjoymen~. oE a sub:~tanti.a.l ~roperL•y rigk~~t pr~;;~ess~d by -:ther propect;~+ in tre
sam~ viciniY.}• an~? zone, and denied ta tlie property in que:t~.on.
5. That the reque~l:ed variance wi11 not be ~aL•erially detr.imentaJ. to
th~; puhlic welfare ~r injur. ious to the nroncr~y or improvemc~nts in :~uch vicinitv
and 2one in which the property is lorated. ~~
6. That no one i.ndicated their pre~en~e ~-~±~ said F~unlic nearir.g in
opp~sitian; and ti~at no c~rresponc7ence was received :in opposition L•~~ subject
'.~':;~,: ` ~ petition.
~'~' ~ ~ 1074r PC87-G1
~'~ }
., , j .Wr~
V` !7~}f~~1{~~1~~.1 i,.~ A,}, t . . ... . . .
~VM11~Si~'.~~{V:~ (A/'f ~..i.~'r_. . .. .. .. . ~ . . . ~ ... , ....
j ~;
. d
. . . . . , . . , ' . ~ . . ~ 4 1~~p
}
. . . ' . . . ~ . ` ~4~'
r'~, ~~ ,,~
.~ ~ ~ ,, ~;;
GI~VIRONM~NTAL _IMPACT EINDING: The Planning Direc~or or his
auth~rized c~p~esenta~ive has determinea that the pruposed ~~.roject falls
within the definitiGn of. Categorica.l Exemptions, Class 5, as d~:f'.ned in
~he State EIR Guideiines and is, there~ore, cateyoricall}~ exempt f:rom th~
requirement to pr.epare an E:tR. `;,;
.. ,.
~
D10W, THEkEFORE, CE IT FtI:SOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning
c;ommission doe~ herehy qrant suUiect Peti.t:ion for Variance, upon the
;~:.: foll.owi.ng con:~itions whiah a~:e her.eby Fo~ind to be a necessary
?,~'~ prerequisite to the ~ro~os~u~ use of t~he subject prapert,y in order to
{~ ., .
> preserve the safe~y and general wel~are of th~ Citiz~ns of the City of
i~~
Anahei.m:
1. That subject ~roaer::y shall be developed substantially in
accor.dance with ~~lans and speciEications on £ile ~aith the Ci.ty :;~
of R-~aheim marked Exh.i:~it Nos. ~ and 2.
:,
'l. Th:~t prior to final building and roning ir~spenCions, C.osldition
' No. 1, above-mentione3, shall be comglied with.
'';
~ ;;;
~ AE I`P FURTHER R~ ~~t,VED that the Anaheim Cit•y Planniny Commission
~ hcreby find and dctermine that adopticn c~f thi_s Res~lution is ~;~~
C3UP. S
; ~xpressly predicated i;p011 applicant's compliance with each dI1C~ a11 oE the
'. c:onditions hereinabov~ set :Eorth. 5houlcl any sur.h ,ondi.tion, or any pazl
~ thereof, be derlared invalid or unenEorcea~le hy h.ht fa.na]. judgment oP i',
any r_ourt of comp~tenL• jurisdiction, then this Res,~lution, and any ~,:
'+ approvals herein containnd, shall be deemed nu:l1 and void. ~;
'
~ THF' HOREG~ING RCSOi~~TION is signed and appr~vPd bY m.~ L-his 16th ~, J
t day oP March, 1987. ;
` ~..-, ~ ~(~;~;
U ,s ~~?' , .
; ~.~/. '~ ~ f ~~ .^ t~
i CHAIR~4AN~ ANA r, M CITY. PLAN ING COC'IMISSTON
~
i
I ATTGST: -
, _~~~~~-=-~-' ---~ .~;/~/c~-~ _ , ~,:
_~L i
S~C12~TA . , :~NAEIb;IM CiTY Z~LP.f~NING COt4t4IS5IGN °
'~
STATE Ob' CALI~ORNI1~ ) '
°;
COUNTY Of' OFtANGE ~ '~s.
CITY OF A.NAHH'!M ) ~i
Gdith L. Harri.s, Secretary ryt the Anaheim CLty P1r.nning ;~
I,
Commission, do hereby certity khat the L-ore~oing resolution was pas~ed `,~~
anc~ ac~or~ted at a Yneeting aE Lhe Ananeim City ~lanning Commission h~ld on
March lo, 19t37, by the Eollowing voi:e c~f the mentbers thereoF: ;~
AygS; CQMMISSIUNT3<<S: BOUAS, FP,Y, HEIZCiST, LA CLA.iRF, LAWICKI, MC SURNRY. ~,
NnES: COMMLSSIONERS: MGS5C
ADSEIdT: C'Ot1MTSSTGI~~RS: NONF~
~-,
IN WITN~SS WH~REGF, ~ have hereunt.o seL my hand this lbth day ~f ;;}':
~i
~.
Marah, 19F37. -
.~~~ . ' ~:
.. ~..
SECREx'ARY, IQAHB3'M CITY PLANNIN 'OMMlSSION '.',;~
_2_ YC87-6?
, '.'.`F~I L
~
4f
i::
hl~; ~
, ~~~V ,.r,.. ..... ~ . _-_~~. ..