Laserfiche WebLink
In Re <br />Variance <br />Lilli~n M. Miller <br /> <br />In Re <br />Variance <br />Morley Greathouse et ux <br /> <br />In Re <br />Variance <br />Charles W. Patterson et ux <br /> <br />In Re <br />Variance <br />Quentin L. Richard <br /> <br />In Re <br />Variance <br />Murray A. McDonald et ux <br /> <br />In Re <br />Variance <br />David H. Dixon et al <br /> <br />In Re <br />Variance <br />Juanita Cannoy <br /> <br />be erected on the rear of and along th~ setback line on Fairview Avenue. <br /> <br />On motion of Councilman Dahl, seconded by Narkel and carried, the recommendation of <br />the Planning Commission was approved and the variance of Lillian N. Niller was grante <br />to permit the use of front room of existing building on property at 1323 W. 1st First <br /> <br />Street for barber shop, subject to the provisions of the PK Ordinance. <br /># <br /> <br />On motion of Councilman Jerome, seconded by Dahl and carried, the recommendation of <br />the Planning Commission was approved and the variance of ~orley and Ua-y R. Greathous <br />was granted to permit the use of existing building on property at 516 E. Washin~gton <br />Avenue for a doctor's office, subject to conditiona aet forth by the Con~ion. <br /> <br />On motion of Councilman Dahl, seconded by Narkel and carried, the recommendation of <br />the Planning Commission was approved and the variance of Charles W. Patterson et ux <br />to permit the use of pYoperty directly south, and adjacent to, 21~ S. Lyon Street <br />for a giftware plant on rear part of the lot, and an apartment house (four to eight <br />units) on the front part of the lot, was granted subject to the provisions of the <br /> <br />PK Ordinance. <br /> <br />The recommendation of the Planning Commission was read, approving the variance appli- <br />cation of Quentin L. Richard to permit the use of property at the southwest corner of <br />Flower and Edinger Streets, for a major service station, with signs, to be located at <br />the northeast corner of subject property, with a modern shopping center immediately <br />to the south, and a drug store on portion to the west of the service station, subject <br />to conditions. On motion of Councilman Heinly, seconded by Jerome and carried, the <br />variance was referred back to the Commission for re-posting and re-hearing due to the <br />fact that the affidavit of posting does not conform to the uses shown on the plot pl~ <br />On motion of Councilman Jerome, seconded by Narkel and carried, the recommendation o.~ <br />the Planning Ccmmission was approved and the variance of Nurray A. NcDonald et ux <br />was granted to permit the use of the front part of existing building on property at <br />1~6 S. Nagnolia Avenue, for professional offices and the rear part of~a real estate <br />and insurance office or barber shop, with suitable signs, subject to the conditions <br />set forth by the Commission. <br /> <br />On motion of Councilman Heinly, seconded by ~arkel and carried, the recommendation <br />of the Planning Commission was approved and the variance of David H. Dixon et al, <br />was granted to permit the use of property at the northwest corner of Edinger and <br />Flower Streets for establishment and operation of a service station for the Richfiel <br />Oil Corporation, with standard Richfield sign as shown on plot plan, subject to the <br />conditions set forth by the Ccmmissiono <br /> <br />The communication of the Planning Cc~mission was read, submitting without recommenda <br />tion the variance of Juanita Cannoy to construct a 35 unit apartment court at the <br />southeast corner of Fruit Street and the Santa Ana Freeway. Attorney Royal Hubbard <br />spoke on behalf of property owners in Cameo Park and presented a petition objecting <br />to the variance, which was received and filed on motion of Councilman Heinly, secon- <br />ded by Dahl and carried. Attorney Delbert Larsh and property owners also voiced <br />their objections stating that the apartment court construction would devaluate their <br />property. George Freuhling speaking on behalf of the applicant contended that the <br />property was unsuitable for single family residences due to the proximity of the <br />Freeway. On motion of Councilman U=~kel, seconded by Dahl and carried, the variance <br />application of Juanita ~annoy was denied by the following vote: <br /> <br />Ayes, Councilmen J. Ogden Narkel, William Jerome, Nilford W. Dahl, Courtney R. <br /> Chand1~ r <br />Noes~ Councilmen Dale H. Heinly Absent, Councilmen Nor~. <br /> <br /> <br />