Loading...
Resolution-PC 90-230• r RE;~OLU_'1'ION NQ,~P,~;10•-2~Q A~rSOLUTION OF 'PI~E ANAHEIM CTTX PLANNING COI~fISS:iON THAT E'ETITION FOR VARIArICF Nq. ~1063 BE DENIEU WHEREAS, thr~ Ana2ieim City P:lanning Commission did recei.ve a verxtied PQt;:itic~n for Varianco for certain real pxoperty situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, S~ate of Cali£ornia described as: TH~: NOFtT1iERLY 300 FrFT OF THE NORTFi~AST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUAFTER OR TH~ NORTHWES7' QiTAktTER OF C~CTIbN 23, TOWDTS~IIP ~~ SOUTH, R]~NGE 11 WES~', IN THE FANCHO LOS COYOTES, AS SEiUWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 11 ; OI' MI:iCELLANEOUS M~-FS, RECORU5 OF ORANG~ COUNT'I, ~ CALIP'Ofi:N.LA. AIHEREAS, tho City P].anning Conunission did h~ld a public hearing at the Civic CentQr i.n the City of. Anaheim on Septe~nber 10, 1)9~, at ~.:30 p.m. , nati.ce of sa:id public hearing having been duly qi.ven as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of t.he Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18,03, to 'he~ar and consider evidence for ~+nd against said propose8 variance anc3, to :investigate and rnake findir~.r,s ar~d recommendations in connection therewiL•h; and WEiERE1.~, said Cornmission, af:rer due inspection, investigal:ion and study made Ly itself and in its bohalf, ~nd after ~ue consideration of all Qvidence ar.d reports ofFQred aL said liearing, does find and determine the ~allowing facts: 1. That the petitio~,or proposes waivers of tha fnllowing t~ establish u 14 unit, 15 iot RM-3000 condominium subclivision: ~~,) C~c~;.i~n_1ti.,~1~Q,61~2. - Mini~m~m t~il .3.nq ; itg~rea. (~CQQ~qtf~, pei dcvelJ.ing uYiit required; 2,9R2 sgttt., proposod) (H) S~.c!~Qn 1$,~~1_,Q¢_~?`~ - M.in3mum lan~c~~~e_~-t~4'~• (2~. feet requi.rad adj~oent to R~-7200 zoni.ng to east and ~oul•h; Q_to 'LQ .e~i. pr.oposed) ~.1"~ ;'i:.A'1:.:~~~ + ~F ~ ~ ~ .. ~; 2. That the above-mer.t.ionQC1 waivers arQ herehy don.iasQ on the ;-,~ basis th~it.: the praject was denied. r 3. That there are no exceptioiial or exLraoxdinary circum~tanceQ ,,.~ or condit ions applicabl~ to the property invo].~rea or to the intended use of tho ~ ~ propart;y t:hat do not apply gonerallz~ ~o t}ie property os alans of use in L~~e ~ same vicanity and zono. A. ThaL the r4queste(1 var.itince is not- necassarf for the presarvation ar.d enjoymer.t of a substantis?. ~proporL•y r.ight: posseLSed by other property i.n th~s same vzcinity and zone, and Ctexzied to L•h~ prop~rty in questiun. _ " 5. Thak thQ requested ~~ariance will bo mat:erially datrimenral :._. to the p~~blic wcslfr~re or injuriou3 tio *.he pr~portg cr i.npr~vsments in auch visinity clnd zonc: fn which tha proporty is lac;+ted. -1- PC90-230 1646r y, i '~' ~ j , ..f, , . , ,~ 1 ~ '__ _ ~ , ... . . . . " , . . ~ . . . . i i~. n.A~~4.P. r11Lb~ ~ . ~I 1 ~ ~.Y~ ...t..: . ~ '. ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ , i~ ~~ ~ ' . ~ . , . ,~' .. .. . . ,..~ , . ,.... ' ~ . . I,ily~~;~i~~~ • ~tiFr'~tit ~ 6. Tyah n,o ane~ indict~ted their preyence a~ said ~ublic hearing in appositi~n; nnd tihat no correspond.once was received in opposition to subject potition, ~,LXI' RNIA ~P,/'[RONME~ITAL ~~1ALITY ACT FINDTNfi: That the Anaheim City :.t Planning Commission has reviowed the proposal t-o ostabl:i.sh a 14 unit, 15 lot i.i 1?M-3000 condominiutin subdivision with waivers qf miiiimum building si~e area and ~' minimum landscaped sc~tback on a rectangularly-sha~ad parcel of lana ~onsistxng of ~approximately 165 feet on the south side of Ba].l Roacl, hav.inq a maximum depth of approximately 247 foet, being loca~ed ~pproxi.mately 530 feot oast ot the cer~terline af Oaktiaven Driv~ and further described as ~23A West Ba11 ~:oad; ' and does hereby Rppr~ve the Negativo Decluration upon findizig tlzat it has considered ~he N~gativo Declaration t~qeL-har wzth any comments received during the public review procQSS and f,urther f.inding on the basis of the ini~ial study and any comments rQCeivod khat ther~ is no substantia'1 evidence that the " project wil]. have a significant effect on ~he environment. ; NOW, 7'H~REFOR~, EiE IT RESOLV~n that the Anaheim City Planuing Cnmmission does herebp deny subject PetiCion i'~r Variance ~n th~ basis of the ~ aPorementioned findi:igs. T.FiE E'OREGCING RESOLUTION was adopted at the I'13nnin~ Commission meQting of SeFtomb~r 1U, 199U. -~ ~/~ -, , ~ • ,~~ = ~~ a ' /~ ~~~`~' t~„/ ~_._ CEiAIR~MAPI, .ANAHEIM CYT~~LIINNIIdG COMMISSION ATTE;ST~ ~. SECRE. RY, ANAHETM CITY PGANtdIN~ COMMI'SStON STATE OF CA~,IFOftNTA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) gg, CITY OF ANAHEIM ) ~ I, Edi.th L, Harris , S~cretary of. the Ar.aheim City Planning r~ Commissi on, do hereby cartify that the fnregoing resolutio•n was passed and ; adopted `' ' at a meeting of Che Anaheim City Planning Commission held ~n Soptember x0, !990 , by the following vote of the membsrs thereoF: .AYES: ~ CUbiMISSIONERS: gOYDSTUN, FELDHAUS, HE;Nl~'INGER, MESSE, P6RAZA TIOES: COt+fMISSTONERS: }3UUAS, HF,LT~YER A$SENT: COMMISSI0:IERS: itONE / IN WITIr'ESS WIi~R~OF, I haue Yiereunto set my hand this _~7~ day a~ - ~ . _ . 1990. .~_.__ ~ ~~~~~}'~"''"' ,: SECRF.TARY, ANAHEIM PLIINNTNG COD4dTSSION 'Z- PC90-230 ~ 4