PC 79-233RESOLU?ION N0. PC79-233
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NQ. 3121 BE GRANTED, IN PART
WHEREAS, the Ananeim City Planning Lommission did receive a verified Petition
for Variance from EUCLID SHOPPING CENTER, 2293 West Ball Road, Anaheim, California
92804, owner, and LUMINART NEON CO., 4550 East Olympic Boulevard, Los Angeles,
California 90022 and RTM WEST INC./ARBY'S, 4920 Campus Drive, Newpart Beach,
California 92660, agen[s, of certain real property situa[ed in the City of Anaheim,
Co~nty of Orange, State of California described as:
Parcel 5 as shown on a Parcel Map recorded in book 27, page 41 of
Parcei Meps, in the office of the Lounty Recorder of Orange County
Catifornia.
~HEREAS, the City Planning Commission did schedule a public hearing at the
City Hall in the City of Anaheim on November 19. 1979. at 1:30 p.m., no[ice of said
public hearing having been duly given as r~quired by law and in accordance with the
provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and ~onsider
evidence for and against said proposed variance and to investigate and make findings
and recommendations in connection therewith; eaid public hearing having been
continued to the Planning Commission mee[ing of December 17, 1979~ and
WHEREAS, said Comnission, after due inspection, inves[igation and study made
by itself and in its behalf, and af[er due consideration of all evidence and reports
offered at said hearing, does find and deterrnine the f~llowing facts:
~, That the petitioner proposes waivers of che following to cons[ruct a free-
standing sign:
(a) SECTION 18.05.093.021 - Maximum number of free-standin si ns.
1 permitted; 2 proposed
(b) SECTION 18.05.093.023 - Permit[ed location of free-stanJing si9n.
(c) SECTIQN 18.05.093.0231 - Minimum distance be[ween free-standin~ signs.
(3QQ.feet required; 2 2 feet proposed
2. That the above-mentioned waivers (a) and (c) are hereby granted on the
basis of the unusual shape of the property and denial would deprive subject property
of a privilege being enjoyed by other property under iden[:cal zoning classification
in the vicinity.
3. That the above-mentioned waiver (b) is hereby denied on the basis th~t
revised plans were submitted indicating conformance with the Code regulation pertaining
to permitted locatio~ of free-standing signs tnereby eliminating the need for thi~
waiver.
Pt79-233
4. That there are excep[ional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicab;e to the proper[y involved or to the intended use of the property that
do not apply 9enerally to the property or class of use in [he same vicinity and znne.
5. That the requested variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoy-
ment of a substantial property right possessed by other proper[y in the same vicinity
and zone, and denied to the property in yuesrion.
6. 7hat the requested variance will not be materially detrimentat [o
the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such viclnity
and zone in which the proFerty is located.
7. That two persons indicated their presence at said 'public hearing on
November 19, 1979 ~n opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition
to subject petition.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAC7 FINDING: The Planning Director or his authorized repre-
sentative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of
Categorical Exemptions, Class 3, as def:ned in Paragraph 2 of the City of Anaheim
Environmental Impact Report Guidelines and is, [herefore, categorically exempt from
the requirement to preparc an EIR.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission
does hereby grant subjec[ Petition for Variance, u~on the following conditions
wh;ch are hereby found to be a necessary prerPquisi[e to the proposed use of the
subject property in or•der to preserve the safety and general welfare of [he
Citizens of the City ~f Anaheim:
1. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file with the City ef Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos.
1 and Revision No. 1 of Exhibit No. 2.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Ananeim City Pla~ning Commission does hereby
fi~d and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon
applEcant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabcae 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, ~hen this Resolution,
and any approvals herein contained shall be deemed nuli and wid.
THE FOREGOING RE50LUTION is signed and approved by me this 17th day of
December, 1979.
(..~2 ~-~.~~ I s!J ~ - ° _ -
CHAIR4lOMAN, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING LOMMISSION
AT7EST:
~A~~ `,~ "L19Aw ~
SEGRE7ARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
_2_ PC79-233
STA7E OF CALIFORNIA ~
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Edith L. Harris, Secretary of the Anaheim City Pianning Commission~ do
hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopeed at a meeting
of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on December 17, 1979, by the following
vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES, DAVID, FRY, HERBST, KING
NOES: LOMMISSIONERS: B~SHORE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: TOLAR
1979.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 17th day of December,
-~~ ~°- ~--
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-3- PC79-233