Resolution-PC 2001-43~
RESOLUTION NO. PC2001-43
~
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 04429 BE GRANTED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for
Variance for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California
described as:
PARCEL A:
THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO SAN JUAN CAJON
DE SANTA ANA, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
AS SHOWN ON A MAO RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 10 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS,
RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER WITH:
PARCEL 1 IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS
SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 56 , PAGE 11 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE
OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN AND DESCRIBED BY LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT NO. 261,
RECORDED OCTOBER 11, 1991 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 91-556204 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA RECORDED FEBRUARY 9, 1998 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19980071396 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY.
PARCEL B:
PARCELS 2 AND 3 IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 56, PAGE 11 OF PARCEL MAPS,
IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
PARCEL C:
THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 26, IN TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE RANCHO SAN JUAN
CAJON DE SANTA ANA, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNT OF ORANGE, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 10, MISCELLANEOUS
MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO
THE STATE OF CAUFORNIA; BY INSTRUM~NT Ng. ?52~R~ FII Fll APRII Q 1Q~7 IN TI-1~
. .. _ ,. , . .,,.~ .. . . . . ~
OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF TITLES OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY DISTANT THEREON
NORTH 40 DEGREES 50' 15" WEST 273.85 FEET FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE
SOUTNERLY LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER;
THENCE NORTH 40 DEGREES 50' 15" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE, 120.00
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 49 DEGREES 09' 45" WEST 457.95 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY
LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH
89 DEGREES 51' 25" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, 184.04 FEET TO A POINT IN A
LINE WHICH BEARS SOUTH 49 DEGREES 09' 45" WEST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE NORTH 49 DEGREES 09' 45" EAST 318.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CR5065PK.doc -1- PC2001-43
s •
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center
in the City of Anaheim on April 23, 2001, 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 against 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 facts:
1. That the petitioner proposes waiver of the following to permit installation of finro hotel
identification wall signs per each hotel building with the signs located on adjacent building elevations:
Sections 18.48.130.060.0601(d) - Permitted walf siQns and Siqn Standard Matrix requirements.
and 18.48.130.060.0604 (Two hotel identification wall signs per hotel located on
nonadiacent building elevations permitted;
finro wall signs per hotef located on adiacent building elevations
proposed)
2. That the above-mentioned waiver is hereby granted on basis that there are special
circumstances applicable to the property consisting of shape, location and surroundings, which do not
apply to other identically zoned property in the vicinity, because subject property is an irregularly-shaped
parcel that has been impacted by the Caltrans I-5 Freeway improvements, by the recon~guration of
Manchester Avenue into a one-way street and by the future extension of Gene Autry Way; and, further,
that sub}ect-pr-oper-ty is the on~y propeFty i~ The A~aheim Reso~tTM' Specifle Plan No. SP92=2- that fs
located on and takes access from a one-way street.
3. That strict application of the Zoning Code would restrict visibility and deprive the property
of reasonable business identification enjoyed by other properties within the Anaheim ResortT"' Specific
Plan Area because Code typically permits all hotel and motel properties within the Anaheim ResortT"^ to
install two wall signs on nonadjacent building elevations which can be oriented toward different directions
of traffic flow; that due to the size, configuration and surroundings of subject property, and the resulting
hotel building design, compliance with Code requirements would result in, for each hotel building, one
sign being visible to the adjacent public right-of-way (Manchester Avenue, a one-way street) and the
other sign being visible to the adjacent residential and mobile home properties; that, therefore, subject
property would be deprived of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity in the identical zone
and classification; and that the proposed wall sign locations on adjacent building elevations would
provide for the hotel complex to be identified from different directions of traffic flow (southbound
Manchester Avenue and northbound I-5 Freeway) while meeting the intent of the Code inasmuch as only
one wall sign per hotel building would be visible at a time to the public rights-of-way and the adjacent
properties.
4. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to 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 vicinitv and zone.
5. 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 the
property in question.
6. That the requested variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare nor
injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located.
7. That no one indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition to the proposal;
and that no correspondence was received in opposition.
-2- PC2001-43
. •
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALtTY ACT FINDING: The Planning Director or his
authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of
Categorical Exemptions, Class 11, as defined in the State of California Environmental Impact Report
(EIR} Guidelines and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission
does hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to
be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety
and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with the 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 through 5.
2. 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.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicanYs compliance
with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof,
be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this
Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
April 23, 2001. /~ ~ /1 ,
CHAIRP
ATTEST:
0 s~.a.~--
PLANNING COMMISSION
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Osbelia Edmundson, Secretary of 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 23, 2001, by the followina vote of the mem~ers th~rQnf:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ARNOLD, BOSTWICK, BRISTOL, KOOS, NAPOLES, VANDERBILT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BOYDSTUN
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 3l day of
Y~'1 , 2001.
m s~~~
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-3- PC2001-43