Laserfiche WebLink
That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject <br />property, including size, shape, topography, location or <br />surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found <br />to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at <br />variance with the intent and purpose of provisions of this Chapter. <br />The subject site is located within 110 feet of an existing <br />entitled check cashing facility which directly violates the <br />purpose and intent of Ordinance No. NS-2412 which was to <br />require a 1,000 foot separation between check cashing <br />facilities in order to prevent their over-proliferation within the <br />City's commercial areas. No special circumstances applicable <br />to the subject project exist to justify the granting of this <br />variance. <br />2. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation <br />and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. <br />The granting of this variance would allow the property owner <br />the ability to operate a check cashing business at this location; <br />however, the property's location within the General <br />Commercial (C-2) zoning district allows a variety of office and <br />retail uses which are unconditionally permitted in this zone and <br />similar in nature to the proposed use. <br />3. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to <br />the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. <br />The Santa Ana Municipal Code was amended in 1999 to <br />require a 1,000 foot separation between check cashing <br />facilities as a way to prevent the over proliferation of this type <br />of use and the potential for illicit activity associated with check <br />cashing uses. The approval of this variance and subsequent <br />conditional use permit has the potential to be detrimental to <br />the public welfare in that by allowing a second check cashing <br />facility within 1,000 feet of another facility will only increase the <br />potential for illicit activity. <br />4. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General <br />Plan of the City. <br />The granting of the variance will adversely affect the City's <br />General Plan by opposing several of the General Plan Land <br />Use policies, including Policy 2.2 by allowing an additional <br />conditionally permitted use in an area which is already <br />accommodated by an adequate amount of banking services. <br />Resolution No. 2009-11 <br />Page 2 of 9 <br />31 B-32 <br />