Loading...
PC 71-180 ~v`~~ f J RESOLUTION NO, rC 71 ~l E10 A RESOLUTION OF TIiE C1'~'X PLANNINd CQMMIS5ION OF' THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THAT PETITION FOR VARiANCE N0. 2 2 91 B~ DENIED WNEREAS, the City PlanninQ Commi~~ion af the City of Anohefm did receive a verified Petltlon tor Variance from F:ENN ;~PFI Y, hiMES, 2323 North Broadway, Suite 420, Santa Ana, California 92706, Owner, C~'AL,Tk1R ~.. 9ROOKS, 2312 South Su~c~n StrPet, Santa Ana, California 92704, A~ent of cartui.n real property yi tnated .t.n the City of Anaheim, County of Oran~-te, State ot Cr~lifornia, na dascribed in Exhibit "A" attachad hereto and reterred to heroln as though set fortli in £ull; and ^- I . ,~i .;,;~ WHEREAS, the City Planning Commiedon d1d hold a public headng at the City Hall in the City ot Anaheim on ~~ :i er te r.•be z- E'. , 197 1, at 2:00 o'clock P,M., notice of said public headng having been duly given se required by ; lew end in eococdence with the provislons of :he Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.68, to hear and consider evidence for {;.;~ end againet eald ptopoeed vatience end to inventi~ete and make findings and recommendetions in connaction thecewith; ~; :, and - i; IVHEREAS, ^Qid Commiasi~n, aEtet aue lnapection, iavestigation, end study mede by itsel( and in ite beheif, ~ =~ and after due conslderation of ell evidence ond repoets otferad at seld heering, does flnd end detacmine the foll~wing fecta: ~, i' -,~ 1. That thepetiHoner requeat9 e variance from the Anehoim Municipel Code as follows ; : ~ ~, " ~, a. SEC'!'IOD' 1F.37.0_ 40(a) - Maximum a~gre2ate sign area (565 aquare feet ~~ propoaed; 342 square feer permitted.) i. ;n1 !~ b. ~f:,CT1(fN 18.37,UGOfb-3) -~',aximum area per sign (435 square feet proposed; '~~ 342 square feet permitted.) ,,,~ c. SECTION 18. 37.04U(b-1 j - i~laximum number of signs (2 proposed; 1 permitted. ) ~ - G ~ d. SGCTION 18.37.040(b-1) - Minimuro distance between ~iRr.s (7 feet proposed; 300 feel• required,) ~ . ~ 2. That the petitioner pruposes to establish a second free-standing eign on subject r; property by reloceting other existing free-standing signs to more close].y relate to the ex- ;i isting main identification sidn. i;: 3. 'f.hat no her~~ship had been proven by the petitioner thet he was Ueing denied a I: privilege enjoyed by other properties in this area, ~' ~ 4. That the petitioner in a previoua variance request had been required to incorpor- ate r.he Eest ~estern Motel sign at the base of the motel si.gn, however he elected to retain ' tt:e sign in its original position stating thst the pole was not of sufficient strength to allow attachment of ~''s sigr. which was rather large and cumbersome. ~ ~ ;~ ~ ~~ ~ * V 1-D .1_ ; ~ ~,e~ . ~ ,~ ~ ,.~a'r." . . _ : ~ . . - ( r h ~`f ~~ ,,;: ;. . ~ _. __. ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ) ,~ ,,~ << , ,, r „ . ,.~ ;:.,~.~_ ~3~~. , 1 ~. Ctr~ItAN~I'I~;I~, ., n~c-.._ 37?95~ _ ._..... __.._._.. ~.~ni~ii.rr~~ $.~.oo, ~o ... _.._ . ____.--... ~~~:i; s _?r.~_~.~~.._ . SECURITY TITLE INSUR,~,NCE COMPANY a ror~~or~ition. h~~rrin c~iillr~l ILc Com~~nn}~, CUAIiA ~~'I'I:I~;ti Exc}.x,L,-n~~ hcrci~i ciilli~~) Ihc A~siir~•d, ~i~;iiin,l ii~'IIIiII I(IKV ~int c~ccodiii~; Ihc lizil~ilily~ ~uuount 4t+itcd ubu~~c «~hich ihc A~aurc~l ~httll ~u~ti-in hy r~n,nn o~ un~• in~•orr~~c•Incs~ in Ilia n~vurt:n~•~~. ~rl furth in Snc~~lulc A. I.IAltll,l'1'Y I~:\c:Ll-SIO~S A\I) 1.1~11'I'A'I'IC)~S ~. 1V~~ ~,ucir;inlcc i. ~;iv~~n nnr linl~ilit}' +~:~•umril ~vilh rc•~u~i~t tu Ihr i~l~•~ility~ of :u~}• pnily n;inu~~l or refrrri~d tu in 5chr.~lulc A or ~~~ilh rec~~c~cl lo thc viili~lily, li~~ul cIT~-~•~ or ~~riurily i~( nny tnr~llcr c~ho~i~n Ihcrcin. 2. 'I'hr, Com~~;inp'K linl~ilily h~~rcundcr sh;~ll hc linii~cil t~~ Il~c ~imou~~t nf ~irlunl losg ,usLtincil I~y tlic As,in•cd becuu~c of rrliinu~c u~~ot~ thc u~:•tn•+incc4 hcrciii ~cl fr~rlli, hut i~i nu c~•cnl tihull thc Cotni~rinJ's litibility cxcccil thc liuhilily +u~u~unl ~cl forth uliot•~•. »;<<<a : ~1 u~u~ L 3, 2971 St~:c:l~lil'I'\' 'I't'1't.l; 1.'~l~liA~Cl~: c:cl\11'A1'1' r~j/~ / 1 / ~ // . ~t>~ - - _l''G~?~ r ~!1~7~~ ~-:''~ - -~-_..~~ef~'.~ Aui~~nrir. ~I Sihnatiu~~~ ~ ~~ 73 ~ ~ i ~ ~..' E ~ ~. ~ ~ Noi~rri'i ~ F~ddlemon,`' ~~~., ~• `~'~,, ~~ l1 ~C' 4~: ~C~,~,~ ~.9;~- CV ' > j ~J t~~ Oi ~~'~~ ~ `,J c:i I• ~: CI:fA (:u:irunlcc I~acc I':i~;c (11•Z9•(ii) ~;• c~' I'•'l!t (C.S.) ~~~1~~r~~~. ~~~~, ~G`~~-! . ____ _._ c"c:! ~ ~1`'% - ----~ _ _ ~~~ t,~'d _..-- ~ ~ a . ~ , ~ Thdt- p~rtion o.f the Nart•h~~rest c7uarter ~f t?ie N~rthr~est; quarter oi' Lhe S~ut;}~east quarLer ~f Se~L-i.on 2?_, Zbtvnsllip ~I South, I~an~c 10 l~lesL, in thc 1i~~ncha Sar~ Juan Ca~on de SanLz ~1na, C:Lty of /1nal~ei~, Count;y of Oraii~;e, SLaLe ai' C~~19.i'~i,ni~, as per map recox~ded I~i boolc 51, pa~e 10, pQ1..ceilan~~us P~Iaps, recoz,dy of said Oran~~ County, descr:Ibe~a as f ollotvs ; • Be~inn:Lng at a po~nt on the ~~Jest ].:Cne oi' sa~d Southeast quarter of Section 22, S~~.ith 0° 1~' 3Q" ~~5t 2~~i.~10 fcet from i:hc centcr oi' sald sccLions sald cenLer beia~g t-hc intc~r~ection of the center li.ne oi' Cerrit-os Avenue fr~m tihe YJe:~t wiL-Ii Lhe r1or~;h - South quart;~r vec tion line; ~he~ice Tl~rth £i~° 56 ~ 00" r,~st; 660.70 fect t~ a one-i.nch iron pl.pe, au 5ho6•~Yl on a ttk~j~ f il~d i~z b~o}c 15, pa~e 4 of Reeord of Suz~vcys in Lh~ of..fi.ce of the Count•y Recordex~ oi' said Coun~y; thence South 0~ 15' 00" Fa;~t 340.76 feet; L-o a one-inch iron pipe, a~ uho~an on ~aid ~urve5*; ~hence Soutl~ F39° 55~ 30" ~,1e~~ 660.7y f eet to a point on uaid l~Jest l~.ne of ~;he Southe~.~t quartier ;ou~h 0° J.~~ 30" East G39,2C i'cet t'r~m the ccnL-er of sa:Ld sectJ,on; Lhence North 0° 11~' 30" We~t 3L{0,8G recti tio ~h~ po:Li7t of' Ueg:tnnin~;. rE 'i' Lhc S~ut•h :1.70.~F0 fe~t ~hereof.. ~ ~ ~"':,~:,' . ~ _ . ~., -•. ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ f~~ 5. That if the propoaed aigniiig were approved and the program preaently under arudy for amortization of lacge non-conforming aigna~ particulerly in the commercial- recreation area, were a dopted the petitioner could c].aim a hardahip exieCed because of the conei d erable amount of money that would be expended on the proposed sign, 6, That the pres ent eigning eituation on this property is better than that proposed. NOW, TH~I2EFORE, BE IT RCSOLVED thet the Anaheim City Planning Commisaion does hereby deny aubject Petition for'Jsrience on the basis of the eCoremer;tioned findings. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION ia signed end approved by me this 16 th d ay o f S e p t e mb e r, 19 71. --~~/~~~ CHAIRMAN ANAHEdM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: ~ ~~ ~ I~,k SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PT ANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CAI.IFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. • CITY OF ANA~-iEIM ) r' A~~tl; Secretery of the City Plenning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify thet the fore- going resolution was pessed and adopted at e meeting of the Gity Plenning Commission of the City oE Anaheim, held on S e p t e mb e r 8, 19 71 ,at 2:00 o'clock P,M,, by the following vote af the members thereof: ~ AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ALLRtiD, FARANO, GAUER, HERBST, KAYWOOD. ': NOES: COMMISSIONERS: SEYMOUR. n ~ ; ABSENT: COMPAISSIONERS: ROFILAND. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 16 th d ay o f S e p t e mb e r, 19 71 . ~ ~ .~ --~~ ~9~r' ~ ~-~''L~/ - SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. P C 71-18 O V2-D _2_ , ~ . +~