PC 81-63RESOLUTION NO. PC 81 -63
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THAT PETITION FOR VARIANCE NO. 3203 BE DENIED
WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified
Petition for Variance from VASILE KELEMEN AND DENISE KELEMEN, 700 South Euclid
Street, Anaheim, California 92802, owners of certain real property situated in the
City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as:
Lot 90 of Tract No. 2381, in the City of Anaheim, County of
Orange, State of California, as shown on a map recorded in book
69, pages 15, 16 and 17 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 City
Hall in the City of Anaheim on March 23, 1981, 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 a waiver of the following to permit a
free - standing sign:
SECTION 18.05.065.010 Permitted number, size and type of signs.
(one 8- square foot free - standing or wall sign
permitted for a residential structure being
used commercially in the CO Zone;
one 3-square foot wall sign existing
and one 75- square foot free- standing sign
proposed)
2. That the above- mentioned waiver is hereby denied on the basis that the
petitioner did not demonstrate that a hardship exists due to the size, shape,
topography or location of subject property, that approval would set an undesirable
precedent; and that the proposal deviates substantially from the applicable Code
standard.
3. That there are no 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.
4. That the requested variance is not 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.
PC81 -63
5. That the requested variance will be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone
in which the property is located.
6. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in
opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject
petition.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FINDING: The Planning Director or his authorized
representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition
of Categorical Exemptions, Class 3, as defined in the State 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 deny subject Petition for Variance on the basis of the aforementioned
findings.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is signed and approved by me this 23rd day of
March, 1981.
ATTEST:
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Edith L. Harris, 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 March 23, 1981, by the following vote of
the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES, BOUAS, BUSIIORE, FRY, KING, TOLAR
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: HERBST
1981.
/C66-6-6
CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM CITY PL NNING COMMISSION
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 23rd day of March,
SECRETARY, ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
-2- PC81 -63