Loading...
PC 80-221RESOLUTION N0. PC 80-221 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNIPIG COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR VARtANCE N0. 3180 BE GRANTED WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commtssion did receive a verified Fetition for Variarce from RANDALL WILLIAM BLA~dCHARD AND CANDACE L. BLANCHARD, 16371 Beach Boulevard, Nuntington Beach, California 92647, owners, and DEFRAPJKSIGN, INC./DESIGN 2, 3413 West Fordham, Santa Ana, California 92IO~i, agent, of certain real property situated In tlie City of Anaheim, County of Orange~ State of Caitfornia described as: PARCEL A: Parcel 2 as shrnyn on a Map filed in beok 123, pages 44 and 45 of Parcel Maps, records of Orange County~ California. WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on December 3, 1980, at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly g(ven as required by law and in accordance with the provistons of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed variance and to tnvestigaYe and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHERF.AS, said Commission~ after due inspection, investigation and study made by itseif and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: t. That the petitioner proposes a waiver of the following to retain a free-standing sign: 5ECTION 18.05.093.023 - Permitted location of a free-standina siqn. 120 eet rom abutting property permitted; 28-~et existing) 2. That the above-mentioned wa(ver is hereby granted on the basis that the petitioner demonstrated that a hardship exists in that dental would deprive property of a privi]ege enjoyed by other propertles in the same zone and vicinity. 3. That there are exceptiona) or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to the property or ctass of use in the same vicinity and zone. 4, That the requested variance is necessary for ehe preservatlon and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to the property in question. 5. That the requested variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the proFerty or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. 6. That no one tndfcated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subJect petitiun. PCCi1-221 ENVIROtJMEtlTAL 111PACT FIIJDING: The Planning Director or hts authorized representative has determined that the proposed proJect falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 3, as defined in Paragraph 2 of the City of Anaheim EnvPronmental Impact Report Guidelines and is, therefiore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIF. • PlOI•!y THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVF~ that the Anaheim City Planning Commtssion does hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary ~rerequisite to the proposed use of the sub.ject property in order to preserve the safety and general weifare of the Citizens of the City oP Anaheim: 1. That subject property shali be developed substanttally in accordance with plans and specifications on ftle with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 3. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby ftnd and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant~s compliance with each and ali of the conditions hereinabove set forth. 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 3nd void. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTIOtJ is signed and approved by me thts lst day of December, 1980, v ~~~.. CHAIRMAPJ, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNI"JG COMMISSION ATTEST: ~~~~ ~ SECRETAR ,~NAH[ 1 T~I C tTY PLAFttJ i NG COMM ISS ( ON STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Edith L. Harris, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commisston, do hereby certify that the foregoing reso2ution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on Decemher i, 19b0, by the following vcte of the members thereof: AYES; COMMISSIONERS: BARNES, BOUAS, BUSHORE, FRY, KING~ TOLAR NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: HERBST !N WITNESS WHEREOF, 1 have hereunto set my hand thts 1st day of December, 1980. /ai~1 a'~ „ ~ ' SECRETARY~ ANAHEIM C TY PLANNING OMM~ ~SS~pN -2- PCAn-221