Resolution-PC 2001-54•
RESOLUTION NO. PC2001-54
~
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 2001-04428 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:
THAT PORTION OF LOTS 1 AND 2 AND THAT ONE ACRE SCHOOL LOT OF
THE WALNUT COLONY TRACT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF
ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 1 PAGE 14
OF THE RECORD OF SURVEYS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, LYING EAST OF A LINE PARALLEL WITH
AND 125 FEET WESTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF WEST STREET AND
NORTH OF A LINE PARALLEL WI7H AND 371.50 FEET SOUTH OF THE
CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE.
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:
wall signs:
That the petitioner proposes waiver of the following to permit finro business identification
Sections 18.48.130.060.0601(d) - Permitted number of wall sipns and Sign Standard Matrix
and 18.48.130.060.0604 reguirements.
(maximum one business identification wall siqn per building or
storefront permitted in The Anaheim ResortT"^ Specific Plan No.
92-2;
finro business identification wall siqns proposed, consisting of one
existing wall sign facing Katella Avenue and one proposed wall
sign facing West Street)
2. That the above-mentioned waiver is hereby granted on basis that there are special
circumstances applicable to the property consisting of size and location, which do not apply to other
identically zoned properties in the same vicinity, because the property has frontage on two major streets
(Katella Avenue and West Street); and that Code typically provides for businesses to have business
identification signage visible to the adjacent street frontage by a combination of wall and freestanding
monument signage oriented towards different directions of traffic flow, however, existing site constraints
preclude the installation of an Anaheim Resort freestanding monument sign (the existing 5-foot wide
setback area adjacent to each street frontage is not wide enough to install such a freestanding monument
sign) and the existing wall sign facing Katella Avenue does not provide any business identification visible
to vehicles travelling northbound on West Street.
3. That strict application of the Zoning Code would deprive the property of reasonable
business identification typically enjoyed by other properties in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area.
CR5063PK.doc -1- PC2001-54
~
~
4. That the requested waiver 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.
5. That the requested waiver is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to the
property in question.
6. That no one indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition to the proposal;
and that no correspondence was received in opposition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 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 (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:
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, 2 and 3.
2. That approval of this_ application_constitutes approval of the proposed requesi only to the exteni 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 fo~th. 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 Plannin Commission meeting of
April 23, 2001. n ~ /\
CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM
ATTEST:
0 5~.~.~a--~ -~~
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
ING COMMISSION
-2- PC2001-54
~ ~
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 following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ARNOLD, BOSTWICK, BRISTOL, KOOS, NAPOLES, VANDERBILT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BOYDSTUN
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ~ day of
~ , 2001.
~ s6.~-~ ,~-~
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-3- PC2001-54