Resolution-ZA 2001-24f ~
DECISION NO. ZA 2001-24
A DECISION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 2001-04444
OWNER: Sam E. Chappell Jr.
1785 North Partridge Street
Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATION: 1785 North Partridge Street
CEQA STATUS: CEQA Categorical Exemption, Class 1
HEARING DATE: July 26, 2001
OPPOSITION: No one indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition t0 the proposal and
no correspondence in opposition was received.
REQUEST: Petitioner requests waivers of the following to construct a second story addition to an
existing two-story single family residence on a corner lot in the RS-5000 (Residential,
Single-Family) Zone:
(a) 18.12.060.070 - Maximum lot coverage and minimum open space.
and 18.27.062.030.031 (maximum 35% coverage permitted fora 5-bedroom dwelling on a
minimum 6,700 sg.ft. lot in the RS-5000 Zone;
38.8% coverage proposed fora 5-bedroom dwelling on an existing
6,040 sg.ft. lot)
(b) 18.12.060.050 - Minimum side yard setback.
and 18.27.063.020 (5 feet required along the north property line;
3 feet proposed along Kensington Avenue)
Having been appointed Zoning Administrator by the Planning Director, pursuant to Anaheim Municipal
Code Section 18.12.040, to decide the above-referenced petition and a public hearing having been duly
noticed for and held on the date set forth above, I do hereby find:
1. That this variance is approved on the basis that there are special circumstances applicable to
the property consisting of shape, location and surroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned
properties in the vicinity, because this is a corner lot that is shaped like a trapezoid and the side street
frontage is on Kensington Avenue which "dead ends" at the west (rear) property line of subject lot and,
therefore, no adjoining property is impacted by the proposed addition; and that the petitioner submitted a
booklet with photographs illustrating the "dead end" configuration of Kensington Avenue along the north
property line of subject lot.
2. That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in identical zoning classification in the vicinity because similar waivers have been granted in this
residential neighborhood, as discussed in paragraph (14) of the Staff Report to the Zoning Administrator
dated July 26, 2001.
Based on the evidence and testimony presented to me, I do hereby determine to approve Variance No.
2001-04444, subject to the following conditions:
1. (a) That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and
specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with
the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2; and as conditioned herein.
V2001-04444.doc - 1 of 2 - ZA 2001-24
• •
(b) That plans submitted for building permits shall include elevation plans (east, north and west
elevations) showing that the proposed addition will be architecturally compatible with the design
of the existing house, including that the new roof over the addition will be compatible with the
existing roof lines and that the roofing material and color will be the same as, or very similar to,
the existing roof.
That prior to issuance of a building permit or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this
decision, whichever occurs first, Condition No. 1(b), above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section
18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal
regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the
request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
This decision is made, signed, and entered into the file this 31st day of July 2001.
(~ ~~/Iti1~
Annika M. Santalahti, Zoning Administrator
NOTICE: This decision shall become final unless an appeal to the City Council, in writing, accompanied
by an appeal fee, is filed with the City Clerk within 15 days of the date of the signing of this decision or
unless members of the City Council shall request to review this decision within said 15 days.
DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY MAIL: I do hereby declare under penalty of perjury that on the date set
forth below, I did deposit, in the United States Mail, a copy of the decision to the applicant and did forward
a copy to the City Clerk.
~~.
DATE: July 31, 2001 P j~-'~-`~'
Patricia Koral, Senior Word Processing Operator
V2001-04444.doc - 2 of 2 - ZA 2001-24