PC 77-79RESOLUTIO~~ N0. PL77-79
A RESOLUTI01~ OF TtiE A!~AHEIM CITY PLANt11NG COMMISSION
TNAT PETITION fOR VARIANCE N0. 2917 DE GRANTED, IN PART
NiIEREAS, the Anaheim City Planniny Commission did recelvc a verif(ed
Petitlon for Variance from DSI REALTY II~COME FUIlD, 34j Sa~ Antonio Drive, Lony Beach,
Californla 90iS0% (Owner) and L. J. ItONNER CORPORATION, 343 San An:onia Drive, Lony
Beach. Calffornla 90307 (Agent) of certafn real property situated in the City of
Anahefm, County of Orange, Sta[e of Calffornla, described as:
That port(on of Lot 7 of thc Joseph Flscus Subdivision, as shown
on a Map recorded in book i1, page 73 of Mlscellaneous Maps,
record~ af Orange County, Calirornia, descrlbed as Parcel 1, as
sho,.n on a Map recorded In book 91, paqe 5 of Parcel Maps in the
Office of the County Recorder of sa(d Orange Lounty; and
WIIEREAS, the City Plannin~ Commission did hold a publ(c hearing at the City
Hall in the Lity of Aneheim on March 24, 1977, at 1:3~ P•m., notice of said public
hearing having been duly glven as requlred by law and in accordance with the
provisions of thc Anahelm Municipal Lode, Chap[er 18.03~ to hcar and consider
evldence for and agalnst sai~l proposed varlance and to investigate and mal;e findings
and recomrt~rndations In connec[lon th~:ewith; and
WI{CREAS~ sald Commission, arter due i~~~oec[ton, fnvest(yation and study made
by itself and in Its behalf, anJ after due tonsiceration of ali evidence and reports
r,ffered a[ salJ hearing, does f~inJ and d~termfnc tlic follovi(ng facts:
l. Tha[ [hc petitluncr proposes the following waivers from the Anaheim
Munic(pal Code, to construct a free-standiny sign in the C-R (Lommertial-Recreation)
Zone:
a. SECTIOtI 1ki.05.093.023 - Pernftted si n location.
120 ect rom abutting parcel requlred;
13~ect proposed)
b. SECTION tiS.0y.093•~2~~1 - Maximum siyn helght.
25 cet permftted; 50 feet proposed)
2. That Welver 1-a, above-mentioned, Is hereby denied on the basis that
thc petl[loncr Jid not demons[rate [hat a harJshlp would be created lf said waiver
was not yran[ed.
3, That 1laivcr 1-b, abovc-mentloncd, is hcrcby gran[ed on the basis that
the petit(oncr dennnstrated tliat a hardship would be created if said wafvcr was not
yran[ed since [hie proposed mo[el fs at a lower grade eleva[ion Chan the adJacent
freeway and the proposed 5~-foot sl~~n would provfdo Ident(fication of the motel as a
convenience Co the motortny public; and further, that there are exlsting signs of
slmilan c~(ghts on other propertics fn thc surroundlny area.
RESOLUTION 1~0. PL77-79
4. Thac there are exceptional or extraordinary circumscances or canditions
applicable to [he proper[y involved or to [tie intended usc, as granted, of the
~roperty that do not apply yeneratly to ttic property or class of use in the same
vicinity and zone.
~. That the reyuesteJ variance, as ~ranted, is necessary for the
preservatlon and enjoy~ent of a substancial property riqht possessed by other
property in the same vicinity and zone, and denicd to the property in question.
6. That thc requcsied variance, as ~~ranted, will not be matcrially
detrimental [o [he public welfare or injurious to [he properiy or improvements in
such vicinity ane~ zone in which the property is locateJ.
7, Tliat no one in~ica[r.d their {>resence aC said pu6lic hcaring i~
opposltion; anJ that no correspundence was receiveJ in opposition [a [he subjec[
petition.
EI~JIitOtIMLN1AL IItPrCT FIqGI!JG: That thc Director of the Planning Uepartment
has determincd [hat the proposcd activity falis within thc definit(on of Section
3.01, Class 11, of thc City of Anaheim Guiclelines to the Requiremeni5 for an
Environmen[ai impact Report anJ is, therefore, categorically exr~mpt frcxn the
requirement to filc an Elk.
NOl1, THCREFORE, UL I~ RESOLVCU [ha[ thc Anahcim City Planning Commission
does hereby yran[, in part, subject Petition for Variance, upon the following
conditions which are hereby found ta bc a neccssary prerequisitc co the proposed usc
of the subjcct property in order to preservc [hc safety anJ ~eneral welfare of the
Citlzens of tl~e Lity of Anahcim:
1. That sub;cct prupercy shali be developed substantially in ~ccordance
with plans anJ speciflcations un f(ie with the City of Anaheir~~ marked Exhibit Nos. 1
and "l; provided, hrn~evcr, [hat the propused sign shall bc located a minimum of 120
fcet from ~djaccnt p~rccls of Inn~f.
TIIL FORCGOING RCSULUTIUN is si9neJ anJ approvcd Ly ne this 2bth day of
1larcfi, 1)!7.
~
ZI I( KI1FN RO TEH
ANAHEIM CITY PLAN!~INf LOMMISSION
ATTLST:
~ ,
L R , N~1 1 I 111 ! 1 J
-Z- RESOLUTION N0. PC77-"/9
57ATE OF LRL i FORt~ I A)
COUd7Y OF ORAI~G~ ) ss.
C I TY OF ANAHE I11 )
I, Patricia B. Scanlan, Secre:ary uf the Anatwirn City Planning Cattnission,
do hereby certify that thc foregoing resolution was passecl and adopted at a mce;ing
of the Analicim City Planniny Co~mission held on Mar•ch 2ES, 1977, at 1:30 P.m., by [he
followlny vote of the members tt~ereof:
AYES: CCMNISSi0NER5: f3ARt1E5, UAVID, t1ERElS7, KIfIG, MORLEY, TOLAR
NOES: COHMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSEt17: COMI1155IO~IEKS: JOHIISUN
It~ u171JC5S WIIEIIk:OF, I liave hcreunto set my liand tliis 2Lth day ~f March~
~911
~.~_.t~aJ ~
, „ ~ ~~+ t~ ~ co~nissiot,
_3_ RESOLUTION I~O. PG77-79