PC 72-101• s
RESOLUTION N0. PCi2-101
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COI~!MISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIAHCE NO. 2362 BE DENIED
WHEREAS, thc City Plenning CommiosIon of the City of AneheIm did recelve a verified Petition for Verience from
ANDRO PETERSEN and SAM ZONA, 415 West Katella Avenue, Anaheim California 92802, Owners;
ADVANCE ELECTRIC SIGN COMPANY, Attention of Robert Van Gerpen, 1120 Towne Avenue, Los Angeles,
California 90021, Agent of certain real property situated in the City of A.naheim, County of
Orange, State of California, described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and referred to herein as
though set forth in full
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commiesion did hold a public heedn~; et ihe City Hall In the City of Anaheim cn
May 15, 1972, et 2:00 o'clock P.M., notlce of seid public hearing havlr.g been duly glven es required by
luw and in ecoocdeutce yvit}i the provisions of the Aneheim Murticipe! Code, Chapter 18.68, to hear and consider evidence for
and egainst aeid proposed varience and to inve~Ugate end make findings and recommmdstions in connection therewith;
and
WHEf~EAS, edd Commission, eftet duo laepection, investIgation, end study mede by ltself and In its behelf,
and efter due considaation of ell evidence and reports otfered at seid headng, doea find end detecmLte the following
fecta:
1. Thet the petlHoner requests a verlance from the Anehcim Municlpal Code as follows :
SECTION 18.37.040(B-3-a) -'Maximum area of a free-standin~ sign. (220 square feet
, permitted; 47.6 square feet propoaed)
2. That the requested variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
a substantial property right possesaed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, and.
denied to the property in question.
3. Thut the Plenning Commission denied the previouca request for waiver of maximum aign
height and sign area approximaCely one year agc on this a~ame parcel and this request ie very
similar to the previoua request with the applicant still claiming that this parcel is not
given adequate signing privilege under the sign ordinancr..
4. That existing non-conforming signs and existing signs previously approved in khe
commercial recreation area have become a blight upon the area.
5 That the narrow streeL frontage of this parcel is ~ sel.f-created tiardship i.n that the
bal.ance of the frontage of this original pa~czl {now under separa[e ownership) now enJoys its
own signing,
6. That the Planning Commission is present2y studying amer~dments to the Sign Ordinance
whlch is proposed to establish an amortization period for the re:.noval of all non-conforming
s±gns and epproval of aubject petition coul.d eataUlish a liardship, since the petitioner could
claim echsiderable monies had been spent in the very recent past and new signing couid be quite
expenaive.
Vl-D _l.
.
.
~
~
E~1 1 T T ~ __ ..~ ; : /~ ) )
1
SCHEDtiLE A
~,p, 3823~0
The assurances re(erred to on the face page are:
Thct, nccording tn thc Compnny's property records relative ta the (ollowing described renl prop•
erty (but without examination oi those Compnny records maintained and indexed by namel:
s8• 8t~8Qtl8~ .~i~U~ $
A. The Inst recorded instrument p~rportin to trnnsfcr titlc lo snid real iro~~crtv is:
A deed dated Bebrusry 15, ~971 to WE3TWARD I~0 SEVEN 3BA3 MJ'ITL,
a genersl partnership~, reaordeC March 3, 1971 in book 9559,
pege 349, Offialal Reoorde.
B. There are no mortgnges or deeds of trust which purport to alTect said reul propcrty, other
thnn .hose shown Lelow wider Esceptions.
No gunrnntee is mude rcgnrding any liens, claims ot licn, de(ecls or ei~cumLruncca othcr th+~n tliosc apecifically
provided for nbovc, nnd, if in(ormation wns rcquested 6y re(erencc to u strect nddress, no guurantcc is made thnt
said reel property ia d:e snme as snid nddreas.
Exceplions:
3ee nttached 3L~EDULB C
LOT DOOK GUARAhTEE
f1.TA f.nnrnntre Fnrm I~n.
7•- 'C(
,~~.
~ f," i972
a~. „r ivF~
~~/~~IN~}
::rviSiON
yARiarac~ ~o. ~ .3 6 _z _ -
~ . ~
SCHEL~tFL3~ 8
( Ttsa+~ portio~s oP the Southeaet quarter af 3eation 22, RbKnehip 4 3~uth,
Range 1~ td~~t, 3r- the Runcho Juan Ca~on de Sante Aaus, in ti~e City ot'
Anaheim, na eh~r~n on a a~ p reoorded ln book 51, page 10, Miscellaneoua
Meps, record~ o~' eaid Orunga Couuty~ described ae SolicMat
Commetacing at the Southreat corner of aaid Southeast quarterj thence
BTorth 675 feet along tho Weat lina of nuid Soatheast q-aarterj th~nae
Egat 573.51 feet parallol mith the South line of eald Southeset 9uarter=
thenca 3~uth 0 16' ~J" East 675.11 fe~t to the Soutta line of said
Sa~utheast quarter end the true point oY begisu-ing= thenee F7iet 26~
teet along said South iinef thence North 0" 16' 30" Hest 675.11 featf
thence Y1eat 26~ feet parallel with oaid Sauth lirtej ~hence south 675.11
feet t~ the trua roint oP beglnning.
SXC~TIHf3 ~ROM ~ lollowing deaoribed 1Qnds •
Goc~mencing at tne SouLhwest ~~~•ner of Baid 3outheaet qut+rterj thcnce
Nar`h 675.0'J Seat nlong the 'aaat line of said Sautheaat quarterj thenee
F~Bt 573.51 Teet parallol with the Sout~h lir~e of said ~autheast quarters
thenee 3outh 0° 16' 30" ~ast 675.11 Pcet ta tho Sonth line oP eaid Souttz-
eaat qu,arter and the true polnt of beglnning= thcmee Haat 15~.00 ~'eet
elong aaid 3outh lins; thence Ir~rth 0° 16' 30" Weat 310.Oc? root parallel
t~ith eaid line having a bearing oP Sauth 0° 16' 3~" Eaats thence WQat
150.~0 Yeet parallol +with aa id South linej thenoa south 0° 16' 30" Eaat
310.00 teet to the trtte point ot beginning.
, _.l. -~
~ ~r 1372
FEr,t;y~p
z ~,~nct
: ,vo;~Or9
-lt.~o
IlARiA(~CE hlq. ~ 3 ~ 2
~
~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED thet the Meheim Clty Pleming Commission does hereby deny subject
Petitlon for Verience on the besis of the afocementioned findings.
THE FOREGOING RESULUTION is signe3 and approved by me s 25th day f Mey, 1972.
- / • _
CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Li~~l~l/Yf/ ~2l~CI~/
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFOP.NIA )
COllNTY OF ORAhGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, And; riL~ieN~t• Secretery of the City Plenning Commission oE the City of Anahe;m, do heroby ceRify thet the fore-
going resolution wes passed end edopted et e meet[ng of the Ciry Plenning Commisalon of the City oE Aneheim, he'd on
Mey 15, 1972, et 2:00 o'clock p.M., by the foIlowing vote of the membece theroof:
AYES: COMh7ISSI0NERS: ALLRED, FARANO, GAUER, KAYWOOD, ROWLAND, SEYMOUR.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: HERBST,
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE,
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I heve hereunto set my hand this 25th day of May, 1972.
RESOLUTIOM NO.pC72-101
l/l/h~l~ %~~~Zl~G~/
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
V2-D '2'