PC 69-72~::
i
,. 'i.
RESOLUTION NO, p~69- ~ 2
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY FLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CI'IT OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 2072 BE DENIED
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission ef the City of Anaheim did receivic e verified Petition for Varionc~ :rom
FORESI LA~JN CEM,EI'FJ3y AS9JCIATION, 17125 Glendale Avenue, Glendale, California 91209, Owner oi
certain real nroperty situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California,
described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and referred to herein as though set forth in full.
; end
WHEREAS, the City Plenning Cammission did hold a public heedng at the City Hall in the City of Anaheim on
_ April 7~ 1969, at 2:00 o'clock P.M., notice of seid public hearing heving been duly givm as required by
law and in accordence with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chepter 18.68, to hear end consider evidence for
and against said proposed variance and to investigate and meke findings end recommendations in connection therewith;
and
WHEREAS, said Commission, efter due inspection, investigntion, and study mede by itself end in its behalf,
and efter due consideretion of all evidence end reports offered at said hearing, does find end determine the following
facts:
~;} ;
~,I ~~
1. Thet the petitioner requests a veriance from the Anaheim Municipel Code as fol lows, to es{:ablish two
free-standing signs and one roof sign:
Lincoln Avenue frontaae free-standinq siqn -
(a) SECTION 18.62.090(D-1) - Required distance of a free-standinq s~~n from a
roo:~ siqn. (300 feet required;235 feet irom Michaels
Market roof sign proposed;.
(b) ~L-CTION 18.62.090(B-2) - Max~mum heiqht of a free-standinq siqn within 300 feet
of a residential structure. (25 feet permitted; 51
f eet propos ed ) .
(c) SECTION 18.62.090(B=4) - Maximum area of a free-standin sign. (350 square feet
permitted; 684 square feet proposed).
State Colleqe Boulevard frontaqe F'ree st-ndina sion -
(d) SeCTION 18.62.090(B-1) - Re uired distance of a free-standinq siqn from a roof
siqn. (300 feet required; 285 feet from Thriftimart
roof sion proposed).
(e) SECTION 18.62.090(B-2) - Maximum heiqtit of s Free-standinq siqn within 300 feet
of a residential structure. (25 feet permitted; 51 feet
proposed).
(7) SECfIODJ 18.62.090(B-4) - Maximum area of a free-standina si n. (350 square feet
permitted; 684 square feet proposed).
Bank of America roof siqn -
~g) SECTION 18.62,090(D) - Maximum heiqht of a roof siqn within 300 feet of a
residential str~cture. (25 feet permitted; 53 feet
proposed).
.(h) SECTION 18.62.090(D) - Maximum heiqht of a roof siqn from roof
oermitted; 35 feet pro osed). ~?5 feet
~
.~-
' • ~' '
~,
, March 11, 1969
~eST~F,
~ r~~T L~4w N'~ s u.
City of Anaheim
Planning Department
r '
~ SECU =;!`i"`r' 7"C"+'LE INSURANCE CO/MPANY
BECU"WITY B25 NORTH L~I7pA'~,WA ~ SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIq gZ7pj/.il'~/_ s~
TITIE •
7-7231
~ . ~ /~
. ~
, , ~~`
?>
F. R. "pILN" MARyIN ~
VICE PFEBIOENT G MGNAGER ~ ~
The following is the legal descripl•ion for the properties identified by the Orange County
Assessor as A.P, 83-051-2 8 and A.P. 83-052-2 and 3 for the year 1968.
Those portions of the North half of the Southwest quarter of Section 12, Townsl~ip 4 South,
Range 10 West, in the Rancho San Juan Canjon de Santa Ana, in the City of Anaheim, as
' shown on a map recorded in book 51, page 10 of Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange
' County, California, described as follows:
~~ ~fi
~ i
~
~' 1 ' .i
t:;A ~ i
f~ ~ ~
€'~ j j
~~ I~i
PARCEL A: That portion of the Northwest quarter of said Southwest quarter bounded Norther-
ly by the centerline of the Anaheim-Olive Road, now Lincoln Avenue, as shown on said Map,
and bounded Southerly by the Northerly lines of Tract No. 3288, as shown on a map, recorded
'• in book 104, pages 14 and 15 of Miscellaneous Maps, and Tract No. 1782 as shown on a map,
} recorded in book 110, pages 25 cnd 26 of Miscellaneous Maps, records of said Orange County.
h
' EXCEPTING THERErROM that portion describad as follows:
r
Beginning ttt u point in the centerline of said Lincoln Ave. Soukh 78" 52' 26" East 102,50
, feet, along said centerline, from the Tdest line of said Seceion 12; thence South 0° 24' 19"
West 134.85 feet; thence South 78° 52' 26" East parallel with said centerline 100.00 feet;
Chence North 0° 24' 19" East 7.96 feet to the Southwest corner of the land described in
the deed to Ross Realty Co., recorded June 2, 1965 in book 7540, page 730 of Official Re-
cords; tltence along the boundary of said last mentioned land the following courses and dist-
ances; South 78° 52' 2G" East 54.G6 feeC to the Southeast corner of suid land; thence
North OP 11' 45" East, parallel with the West line of said Section 12, 126.92 feet ro said
centerline; thence North 78' S2' 26" West, along said c,nterline; 154.66 feet the point
of beginning.
PARCGL B: Tho~e portions of the Northeast quarter of said Southwest quarter shown,as
Parcels 1 and 2 on a rtiap, recorded in book 8, page 3 of Parcel Maps, records of said Orange
County.
~~•aa7 z
Sincerely youra,
' /
Robert J. e
ab Engineeri S ervisor I
MEMBER: nMERICAN LAND TITI.E A6OOCIATI::N v i:M1LIFOFNIA LANO TITLE 4BBOCIATION
. . ..
;:
2. That there are no exceptional or extraordinary ~.i°_umstances or ~on~iitions appli:.-
able to the property im~~lved o* to the intended use of the property thst do not appiy
generally to Cr~mmunity Shopr.:ing Centers throughout the City.
3. That no evidence was submitted to the Planning Commission demonstrating hardship,
which would justify granting th? proposed waivers ~~a) and (d) abov' o! the required
distance of a free-standing si~n from a roof sign.
4. That the granting r.'r the proposed height and area waivers ~(b), (c), (e) and (fj
above~ for the two additio;~al free-standing signs would have a detrimental effect upon the
sinqle :amily as •r:~?1 es the multiple family residences within the 300 foot 3rea surrounding
the said sign area; and that the petitioner was encouraged to sign said shopping center, so
that it would more nearly be in conformance with the requi.rements of the Sign O:dinance.
5. That although the Sign Ordinance has been encouraging inte3rated signin9 of shopping
canters, the proposed height and size of the two additional free-standinc sig~s wouid be so
far in excess of i.hat permitted by the Siqn Ordinance that the sign would be a detraction
rather than an asset to the extensive renovation which subject propasty has undergone in en-
hancing this shoppir.g center.
6. That the granting of the proposed waiver; [(g) and (h) abov ~ of the height of a roof
sign within 300 feet of a residential structure (over 100°,6 hicjher than permitted) and the height
of said sign from the roof (40~ higher than permittedj would set an undesirable precedent for
similar requests for individual s~9ning from other shopping centers.
~,OW, THEREFl~RE, BE IT RE9JLVED that the Anaheim City Pl;nning Commission does hereby
deny subject Petition for Variance on the basis of the aforementioned findings.
THE FOREGOING RE90LUI'ION is signed and approved by me this 17th day of ppril, 1969.
~~ct ~ ~>>/ <-! E'l r_<-~`,
CHAIRivik7~ AP:AHEIM CITY PLANNIMG COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~, (~/`-7 L Yt-/ ~~-VJ~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CIrY PLANPdI~IG OJMlvfISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
GDUIJIY OF ORANGE ) ss.
' CITY OF ANAHEIId )
I, Ann Krebs, Secretary of the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheirn do
hereby certify that the forv.going resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the City
` Planning Comm`•ssion of the City of Anaheim, held on April 7, 1969, at 2:00 0'clock P.M,, by
' the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Alired, Camp, Farano, Gauer, Herbst. Rowland, Thom.
NJES: OJMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSEM: CUMN~ISSIONERS: None.
IN WITNESS WY,EREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 17th day of April, 1969.
~~/ l
!/G-'7-2 -~-C. ~ ~ . c.2~/
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING ~N~MISSION
Res. No. 72
... .., .. ... ,
,
-ri-`---=-_ , _, ~•. _...__
__ .<..,:.-.._ _ _ ~„_<. _
, .•, _ .- _ ,~.._. _~..._~ ,.- •.,~.M~
~ ._ _ ~ - .~.,., . ... __