Loading...
PC 72-41o ~- RESOLUTION NO. PC72-41 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMM[SSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THAT PETI'TION FOR VARIANCE N0. 2330 HE DENIED WHEREAS, the City Planning Commit~lon of the City oE Meheim did receive e verlfied Petltion for Vadence from ANGELO and CARL A. ZABY, 1401 East 51st Street, Loe Angeles, California 90011, Owners; MOBIL OIL CORPORATION, 11001 Valley Mall, E1 Monte, California 91734, Agent of certain real prop- erty situatea in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described ati The North 175.00 feet of the West 175.00 feet of the northwest querter of the northeast quarter of section 27, Township 4 South Range 1.0 W~et, in the Rancho San Juan Cajon de Santa Ana, as said aection is shown on a map recorded in book 51 page 10 of Miacellaneoue Mape, in the office of the count:y recorder of said county WHEREAS, the City Planning Commieaion ~id hold • public headag at the City Hell in the Clty oE Anahnlm on March 6, 1972, ot 2:00 o'cloek P.M., notlce of said public hearing heving been duly p,iven as requlred by lew end In eccordance wlth tne provieions oE the Anaheim Municlpal Code, Chepter 18.68, to hear end consider evidence for end egalnat seid proposed voriance end to invesU~ate and make Eindings end cccommendetions in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, sald Commiesion, aEter due inspectlon, inveetlgedon, and sh~dy mede by iteelE end in lts behelE, and efter due conatderation oE ell evidenee and repeRs offered 3t aeld hearing, does Eind and detecmine the following facte: 1. That the petitioner requesta the following waivers from the Anaheim Municipsl Code: a. SECTION 18.37.040 B-1 - Maximum number of free-etending aigns. (1 pezmitted; 3 proposed) b. SCCTION 18.37.040(R-1) - Minimum distai~ce Uetween free-etandinq siQne. (300 feet required; 58 to 81 feet propoxed) c. SECTION 18.37.040(H-2-c) - Minimum heiqht of anv portion of a free-etandinQ ei~;n. (8 feet required; 2 feet, 4 inches proposed) 2. That the petitioner is propoaing to construct two "self-service" signs at the enda of the two pump ielands neareat the atreet frontages. 3. 'fhat the petitioner did not aubmit evidence to substantiate thaC there were exception- al or extraordinary circumstances or conditione applicabl~• to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that did noC apply generally to the property or class of uae in tiie same vicinity and zone. 4. That the petitioner wae proposing conaiderably more eign3 over and abeve signing permitted by the sign ordinance, end granting the request would be granting a privilege not enjoyed by similar operations in the City of Anaheim. 5. That the requeated variance ie not neceseary for the preservetion and enjoyment of a substani:ial property right poasessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, end denied to the pr~perty in question. Vl-D -1- ~~ ~ ~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thet the Aneheim City Plenning Commission does heteby deny subject Petition for Vetlence on the basis oE the eforementioned fEndings. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and epproved by me thia 16th day of March, 1972. i ' ~j~,~-..~.~i __ CHAIRMAN ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING CO7~M1fYSSYaN ATTEST: ~~~ i~L~ri/ / R~~!/~d SECRETARY ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STATE aF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) as. CITY OF ANAHEiM ) I, Ann Kre.bs, Secretery of the Clry Plenning Commission of the C:ty of Anahelm, do hereby ceRify that the fore- going resolution was passed and adopted et e meeting of the City Plenning Commiseion ofthe Ci!y of Anahelm, held on March 6, 1972, et 2:00 o'clock p.M., by the following vote of the membere thereof: AYES: ~OMMISSIONEFS: ALLRED, C.AUER, HERBST, KAYWOOD, RO'WIAND, SEYMOUR. NOES: COMMLSSIONERS: FARANO. ABSENT: COMMISSiONERS: NONE. [N WITNESS WHEREOF, I heve hereunto set my hend thin 16th day of March, 1972. RE~OLUTIJN NO. PC72-41 V 2-D _~~~Z~~~/'~G~/ SECRETARY ANASiEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION -2-