PC 72-197• ~
RESOLUTIQN NO. PC72-197
A RESOLUTION OF THE C1TY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE N0. 2411 HE DENIED
WHEREAS, the Clty Plannlne Commis~fon of the Ciry oE Mahelm did recelve a vedfied Petltion for Vadunce from
:;TANDARD OIL OF CALIFORNIA, Post Office Box 31, Long Beach, Galifornia 90801, Owner; AMERICAN
PERMIT SERVICE, Poat Of£ice Box 364, La Puente, California 91747, Agent of certain real proper-
ty aituated in the City of Anaheim, County of OrangP, State of California, d~ecribed ae The
North 195.00 feet of the West 200.00 feet of the Northwest quarter of the Southviest quarter
of Section 7, in Township 4 South, Range 10 Weat, in the Rancho Los Coyotes, es eaid aection is
shown on a mtp recorded in Book 51, Page 10, of Miscellaneous Maps, in the office of the County
Recorder of eaid county, Said prcperty is located at the Southeast corner of Magnolia Avenue
and Creacent Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commie~lon did hold • public hearing at the City Hall in the City ot Anaheim on
Augu6t 21, 1972, at 2:00 o'elock P.M., notlce of said public hearing having bern duly glven as requiced by
law end in eccordance witF the provislons of the Anehelm Munlalpal Code, Chepter 18.d8, to hear end consider ovldence for
and aQelnst said propo~ed varlance end to investiQete end mnke Elndinge and recommmdetions in connection thecealth;
end
WHEREAS, s~td Commiseion, aEtec due fnspecHon, InveaU~atlon, end etudy mede by lteelt and in !ts behalt,
end after due cronsideration of all evldence and repod~ offered at eald hecdng, doee find and detecmine the followlnQ
facte:
1. That the petitionar requests variances from the Anaheim Municipal Code
as fol2ows:
a. SECTZON 18.62.090fB-`) - Minimum distance between free-standing
~ signs. (300 feet requiredj 10 feet
proposed)
b. SECTION 18.62.090(B-1) - Maximum number of free-standing signs.
(4 siqns proposed; 1 permitted)
c. SECTION 18.62.090(B-2) - Minimum sign height.
(8 feet required; 6~i feet propoaed)
2. That signing as proposed i~ far i.n excess of oigning permitten within
the Sign ordinance, and to grant subject petition would be establ=sh-
ing an undesirable precedent wherein every other service station in
Anaheim could request similar signing.
3. That the Planniny Commission earlier in 1972 had denied a similrr
request with a fa.nding that apQroval would establish a precedent
for mass signing of other service stations throughout the city, and
no changes have occurred to warrant favorable consideration of this
petition.
V 1-D -1-
. ~ ~
, 4. That the petitioner is propos~ng to increase the number of signs on
these sezvice station sites from tour to eight times tha.t permitted
by Code, thereby automatically yranting the petitioner a privilege
not enjoyed by other commercial and industrial developments through-
out the city.
5. That there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
condii:ioi!~ applicable to the property in•~olved or to the intended
use of the pr.operty that do not apply generally to the property or
cla~s of use in the same vicinity and zone.
6. ?'hat the requested variance is not nece~sary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial proparty right poss'essed by other
property in the ~ame vicinity and zone and denied to t~e property
in question.
7. That the requested variance will be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in ^uch
vicinity and zane in which the property is located.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLV.ED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby deny subJect
Petition for Voriance on the besis of the aforementioned findings.
THE FQREGOL*7G RESOLU'TIdN is signed end approved by me thia 31ptit day of August, 1972.
ANAHEIM CITY
ATTEST:
Li~E~/ ~
SECRETARY HNAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALII"ORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Ann Krebs, Secre~ury of the City Planning Commission of che City oE Anaheim, do hereby cedify thet the foce-
goin~ resolution was pessed end edopted et a meeting ofthe City Plenning Commisaion ofthe City of Anaheim, held on
August 21, i972, at 2:00 o'rlock p,hf., by the following vote o{ the members t:~ereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FARANO, GAUER, HERBST, KAYWOUD, SEYMOUR.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE .
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ALLRED~ P.OWLAND.
1N WITNESS WHEFEOF, I have h~!eunto set my hand this 31at day of August, 1972.
RESOLUTION NO. PC72-197
~%~~~r7' ~""..-e~
SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSTON
V2-D -2'