Resolution-PC 96-89~ ~
RE L iON NO. PC96-89
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLAINNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 4296 BE GRANTED
WHEREAS, the Anahefm City Plannfng Commfssfon did rec~ive a verifled Petition for
Variance fos cercain real properry sftuated ir the Ciry of Anahefm, County of Orange, State of Caiffomfa
described as:
LOT 68 OF TRACT NO. 3812, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 146,
PAGES 1, 2 AND 3 OF MISCEL•~NEOUS MAPS, RECARDS OF ORANGE
COUNTY, CAUFORNIA
WHEREAS, the Ciry Planninfl Cort~misslon did hdd a public hea~ing at the CNfc Center in
the Ciry of Anaheim on September 4, 1996, at 1:30 p.m., r~~tice of said Publ~ heartng having bee~ duly
given as required by law and in accordanoe with the provisicu~s af the Anaheim Muntcipal Code, Chapter
16.03, to hear and conslder evidence for and against sakl proposed varlance and to irnesttgate and make
findings and recommendations fn connection thsrewfth; arxi
WHEREAS, said Comntssion, aner due fnspection, irnestigatlon arx! study made by ftseif
arxi in fts beha~f, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at safd hearing, does flnd
and determine the fdlowing iac:ts:
1. That the pet~ioner proposes waiver of the fdlowing to con.stnuK a 35-foot high freestandfng
identffication sign for a proposed restaurarrt:
S~r(nnc ~a.o5.093.0241 - Maximum helaM gf freestand~~a s~un.
and 18.44.067 (~3S@8I P~ttnitted wtthin 750 fee~ of re::.'~lerrtial uses~ ~`,i~@I P~'oPo~ ~
~ hom muictpte-famUy residertial dweilings to the west)
2. That the gbove-merrt~oned waNer is hereby grarrted on basis that there are special
circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography~ location and surroundings whlch
do not apply to other identically zoned properry In the samd viclnlty; and that su(ct application of :he Zoning
Code deprives the properry of P~vile9es anJoyed by ather properties in the IdeMical zone and classffication
in the viclniry;
3. That there are excuptf~ or extrao~d~-~ary circumstances or condi.!^.~~s appiicable to the
property ~mdved or to the Intended use ot the proparry that do not apply generaliy to the property or dass
of use in the same v~infry and zone;
4. That the requested varfar-ce ~ ~n the samef vic ne P and onbe,n und denied to ~e pr pertyiin
propeRy ~9m Po~~ by other property hY
question;
5. That the requested var~ance wUl not ~e materiaily detrimerttal to the pub~~ welfare or
in~urious to the property or improvernents (n such viciniry and zone in whfch the property is located;
6. That subject business (Norrfy's restuararrt) was displac.~d by the I-5 Freeway wtdening; and
that relocation of the ex(sting slgn (reduced to 35 (eet high} allows for cust~ {dentitY d the new sfte and
wUl also af~ow apProximately Me (5) mar9 years for the Iffe of the s(gn; and
CR2727DM.WP _1- P~$~
~ ~
7. 'ihat no one indicate,~i their presence at said puWic hearing in opposttion; and that no
conespondence was receNed In opposftion to subJect petftfon.
CAUFORNIA EMJIRG?~MFNTAL DUALI'tY ACT FlNDING: The Planning Director or hfs
authorized represeMatNe has determined that the proposed proJecc falls within the de8nftion of Categorical
Exemp2lons, ~ass 1 t, as tiefined iri the State EIR Guidelfnes and i~, therefore, categorically exempt ftom
the requirement to prepare an EIR.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVFD that the A~ahetm Ciry Planning Commfssion does
hareby graM subjecc Petition for Yariance, upcn the fofi~wing cond~inns whlch are here~~y found to be a
necessary prsrequlslte to the propased use of the su~(ect property Ir order to preserve the safety arxi
genetal welfare of the Cftizens of the City of Anahefm:
1. That prbr to Iss~anr.e of a sign perm~t, the proper.ry owner shall sub~nit a slgn relocation agre~3meM
fc+r the raview and approvel of the Raal Prop~rty Sec4lon of the Pubiic Works DepartmeM. Said
agreemerrt shall specify that when Eudid Strest [~ v+ridened, subJect freestanding slgn shall be removed
arxl replaced wN.h ~ stgn confarrning witl~ the Anaheim Zaning Code and Cfty standarcJs in efEect at that
time, at the property owners experwe.
2. That subJect property shall be developed substantially in accordance wRh plans and specfficattons
submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitfoner arxi whtch p~ans are on file with the Pianning
Depanment marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2.
3. That wfth~n a period of onA (1) vaar from the date of this resolWon or prior to flnal buliding and zoning
inspections, whichever occus Nrst, ~ondition No. 2, abov~-montloned, shali be ca'n~ltad whh.
Extenslons for further Ume to complete said condftions may be granted in accordance with Sectfon
58.03.090 of the Anahelm Municipal Code.
4. That approval of this application constftutes approval of the proposed ~'equest only to the exterrt that
ft complies with the Anahetm Municipal Zoning Code and any other a~plicabie Cicy, State and Federal
regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to complfance or approval of tha
request regard!ng any othar apdicable ordinance, regulation or requiremsnt.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVEl7 that the Anaheim Cfty Planning C~rnmission does hereby ftnd
and determine tF~t adopHon o~ this Resolution Is expreasly pred~cated upon applic~arrt's compllance with
each and all af the condfttans herelnabove set forth. Should any such cwnditicn, ar any part thereof, be
dedared irnalid or unenforceable by the ftnal JudqmoM of any court of comaatent Jurisdictfan, then this
Resolution, and any epprovals herein contafned, sF~ll bo deemed null and vo(d.
THF FOREGOING RESOLUTIO
September 4, 199G.
ATTEST:
SECRETARY, IM CITY PLANNIN~a COMMISSION
N was adopted s~t Planni Commissfon meeting of
l~
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM CI PLANNING COMMISSION
CR2727DM.WP -2- P~'~
~ ~
STATE OF CALJFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY JF ANAHEIM )
I, Margarita Sdorb, Secretary of the Rnaheim Cfy Planning Commissfon, do hereby certfy
that the foregoing resdution was passed and adopted at a meettng d the Anahefm Ciry Planning
Commission held on Septembes 4, 1996 by the following vote of the mFimbers thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRIS70L, HENNINGER, MAYER, MESSE, PERAZA,
NOES: COMMISSlONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ~~ ~day of ~~'t"__
1996. /1/I~,~~~VlMw ~~
/ ll
SECRETARY, EIM Cf7Y PLANNING COMMISSION
CR2727DM.WP ~- P~'~