Resolution-PC 96-66. ~
~
RESOLUTION NO. PC96-~
A RESOLUTION OF THE NNAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSIUN
AMENDING RESOLUTION NO 94R-59,
ADOPTED IN CANNECTION WI7H
VARIAN~E N0. 4245
WHEREAS, on Apri 12, 5994 the CRy Counc~ adopted Resolution No. 94R-59, appraving
Variance No. 4245 for waNer of permitted h~Pe of shoPpin9 cemer iderrtiNcatlon signs in the Scenic Cor~idor
Overlay Zone to construct two 6a sq.it., IMemaI~Y Qluminated, freestEnding~ monumerrt signs dis~laying up
t~ sbc tenant names or logos: and that Condition No. 6 of said resduNon specifies the fdlowing:
'6. That subJect sign variance is hereby approved t~.' a Period of two (2) years uMii Ap~l t2,
1996 ai which time thls variance shail expfre.'
WHEREAS, sub~ect properry fs developed with a commercfal retail shopping center zoned
CL (SC) 'Commerclal, UmltedScenfc Corridor We~tay Zone' •
WHEREAS, Harry 5. Weinroth, representingthe property owner, has submitted a letterdated
April 30,1996, requesting modfflcation or deletion of said Condftbn No. 6 in orcle~ to retatn the twa exist(ny
monumerrt signs.
WHEREAS, the City Plannfng Commission did hdd a pubiic hearing at the Civic Center fn
the City of Anaheim on JWy 8, 1996, at 1:30 p.m., notlce of said pubUc hea~fng having been duly given as
required by Iaw arod in accordance with the provisions of t~~ ceia oii pe igate and make flndings
hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed
a~d recommendations in connectbn therewRh; and
WHEREAS, sald Canmtssion, after due inspection, irnestigation and study made by itself
arxi in ks behalf, and after due consfderation of alt evidence and reports offered at satd hearfng, does flnd
and determine the fdlowing facts:
1. That petftioner hes irnested fn the construction and mairttenance of the two previously-
approved monument signs, and has complied wfch all the candRions of approval adopted in conJunction wfth
the graMing of subject Vartance; and further that the petftfoner ind~ates that business activity wfth(n the
shopping center has demo~strated a marked Improvement att~ibuted, in part, to the visfbNfty of the signs
and fdentfNc;aUon d tenants; and
2. That no a~e indfcated their presence at said public hearing ~n opposkian; and that no
correspondence was received In opposkion to subJect pecition•
~IFORNIA ENVlRONNJ~ 1~' (~~ ~llALm! ACT FIN I~: The Pianning D(rector or his
authorized represeMatNe has determ~r~eri that the proposed prc~Ject fails withln the deflnftbn oi Categor(cal
ExempUons, qass 11, es deflned !n the State EIR Guidelfnes W~ Is, theretore, categoric~llly exempt irom
the requlremerrt to prepare an EIR.
~ NOW THEREFORE BE R RESOLVED that the Anahelm Cfty Planning Commisslon does hereby
delete Condftkm No. 6 of Resolution No. 94R-59, edopted In connectlon wlth Co~dnional Use Pertnk No.
4245.
CR2~2DM.WP -1- PC96f6
~
~~
BE IT FURTHER ~sESOLVED that the Anaheim Ciry Pianning Comm~ ~ g~md~nce wiih
anci determine that adoption of +.hi.g RasoluUon is expresslY Predicate~ upon appl
each and all of the condritons hereinabove set fort.ment ofu'an ncourt of competent jurisdlctionh th~ tt-~is
dedared irna!!d or uner~force:ible by ,hs final Judg Y
Resolution, and any approvsis heroin contained, shali be deemed nuil and void.
THE F~?RE~O~NG RESOLUTION was adop ed at the Planning Commtssfo~ meeting of
July 8, 1996. ~~ ,,~ `
~~cui"r / /~'~
CFL RM.4N, PRO TEM RE
ANAHEIM CITY ?LAN ING COMMISSION
AT~EST: L~
SECRETARY, EIW1 CITY PLANN{NG COMMISSION
STATE OF GAUFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
i, Margarica Sdorio, Secretary of the Anahefm City Planning Commission, do t~ereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meetf~a of the Anaheim City Planning
Commission held on July 8, 1996 by the following vote of the members thereof:
AY~S: COMMISSIONERS: BOSIIMGK BOYDSTUN, BRISTOL, HENNINGER, MESSE, PERAZA,
P~OES: COMMISSIGNERS: NONE
iwSEi~ i . w' ~~dISSIONERS: MAYER
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have h~rounto set my hand this ~~~ day of
~~._.__
1996. ~
SECRETARY, NAHEIM CITY PIANNING COMMISSION
-2-
PC96~'i6