Resolution-PC 2002-178~ •
RESOLUTION NO. PC2002-178
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 2002-04543 BE GRANTED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for
Variance for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California
described as:
PARCEL 1: THE NORTH 85.00 FEET OF THE EAST 240.00 FEET OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST IN THE
RANCHO SAN JUAN CAJON DE SANTA ANA, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM,
COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN
BOOK 51, PAGE 10 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
PARCEL 2: THE SOUTH 15.00 FEET OF THE EAST 240.00 FEET OF THE
NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 10 WEST, IN THE
RANCHO SAN JUAN CAJON DE SANTA ANA, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, AS
PER IV1AP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 10 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN
THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center
in the City of Anaheim on December 16, 2002, at 1:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been
duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code,
Chapter 18.03, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed variance and to investigate
and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by
itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing,
does find and determine the following facts:
1. That the petitioner proposes waiver of the following to permit two hotel identification wall
signs to be located on adjacent building elevations:
Section Nos. 18.79.146.010 - Hotel Sign Standards Matrix.
and 18.79.146.901 {Two hotel identificatio~ wall signs located on non-adiacent building
elevations permitted; two wall signs located on adiacent building
elevations proposed)
2. That the above-mentioned waiver is hereby granted on basis that strict application of the
Zoning Code would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other property within the Hotel Circle
Specific Plan Zone because the Candlewood Suites hotel, which is under construction, will be set back
further (30 to 46 feet) from Anaheim Boulevard than the adjacent Peacock Suites hotel (10 feet) which is
also located in the Hotel Circle Specific Plan Zone but was constructed prior to adoption of the Hotel
Circle Specific Plan, which requires a wider 20-foot setback along Anaheim Boulevard.
CR5513DM -1- PC2002-178
~ •
3. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property consisting of its location
and surroundings which do not apply to other identically-zoned properties in the vicinity because an
existing fence on the Red Roof Inn property to the north is located the same distance (approximately 20
feet) from the Anaheim Boulevard public sidewalk as the Candlewood Suites monument sign; and that
the location of the Peacock Suites building (10 feet from the sidewalk) and the existing Red Roof Inn
fence both constrain visibility of the Candlewood Suites monument sign, thereby adding ta the necessity
for wall signage.
4. That in the surrounding Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Zone, sign waivers have been
approved in the past where it was shown that at no point would wall signs on adjacent building efevations
be fully visible and legible at the same time (waivers were approved for two signs on adjacent building
elevations at the Holiday Inn and at the Staybridge Inn and Suites, both on Manchester Avenue); and
that the two proposed wall signs on the east and north buitding elevations of the Candlewood Suites hotel
will be consistent with the intent of the Code because only one sign will be fully visible and legible at any
one point along Anaheim Boulevard or Disney Way.
5. That there are exceptional 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 class
of use in the same vicinity and zone.
6. That the requested variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, and denied to the
property in question.
7. That the requested variance will. not be materiall.y detrimen.tal to..the public-welfar-e or -
injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located.
8. That no one indicated their presence at the public hearing in opposition to the proposal;
and that no correspondence was received in opposition.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: The Planning Director or his
authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of
Categorical Exemptions, Class 11, as defined in the State of California Environmental Impact Report
("EIR") Guidelines and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission
does hereby grant subject Petition for Variance, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to
be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety
and generaf welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim:
1. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with the plans and
specifrcations submit4ed to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the
Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 3.
2. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it
complies with the Anaheim Municipai Zo~ing Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal
regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the
request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby
find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicanYs compliance
with each and all 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 and void.
-2- PC2002-178
~ i
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
December 16, 2002.
" lt~~~ -
CHAIRPERSON, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
/~'~'s~-+-~
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning
Commission held on December 16, 2002, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BOSTWICK, BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, EASTMAN, KOOS, ROMERO,
VANDERBILT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NON.E . _ -
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 31s?'" day of
-~ec G v~-beJc~ , Zoo2.
~~~.-~. i~l?-~-a-~..~
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-3- PC2002-178