Laserfiche WebLink
327 <br /> <br />Variance <br />J~mes E. Serven <br />Reso. No. 57-242 <br /> <br />Variance <br />Orange County <br />Finance Company <br /> <br />Variance <br />Karl A. Hoeppner <br /> <br />Variance <br />Lyle W. Bryant <br /> <br />Variance <br />Raym0~d W. Kerr <br />Reso. '57-243 <br /> <br />Petition <br />Crossing guard <br />and school crossing <br />signs ~#~d <br /> <br /> Communication was read from the Planning Cnmm~ ssion recr.~.~.~ending denial of variance <br /> application of James E. Serv~n to permit conversion of existing accessory building <br /> on property at 319 East Narwood Place, presently used as a gu~ shop, into a single- <br /> family dwelling, decreasing the rear-yard requirements to five feet, in an R-1 <br /> District. The Council having unanimously waived the reading of the Resolution, on <br /> motion of Counctlme~ Eubbard, seconded by Markel and carried, the following <br /> Resolution entitled: <br /> <br /> "Resolution No. 57-242 granting Variance on application of <br /> James E. Serven where Planning Commission recnmmended denial" <br /> <br /> was considered and passed by the following vote: <br /> <br /> Ayes, Councilmen Royal E. Hubbard, Stanley C. Gould, Jr., <br /> J. Ogden Markel, Dale N. Eeinly <br /> Noes, Councilmen A.A. Hall <br /> Absent, Councilmen None <br /> <br /> On motion of Coulle~lma- Hubbard, seconded by Markel and carried, the recommendation <br /> of the Pla~tng Cc~mtssion was approved and the variance of the Orange County Finan¢ <br /> Company granted to permit construction of buildings on property at il20 North <br /> Sycamore Street, in an R-3 District, deleting the rear yard and the north side-yard <br /> requir-m~nts, the b,~!]dings to be used to house the Orange County Finance Company, <br /> Personal Property Brokers and ventures which could be located in a C-1 District, <br /> sub~ect to conditions of the Commission and the Department of Public Works. <br /> <br /> On motion of Councilman Hubbard, seconded by Hall and carried, the recommendation <br /> of the Planning Con~aission was approved and the variance of Karl A. and Doris E. <br /> Hoeppner granted to permit construction of an addition to existing single-family <br /> dwelling on property at 438 South Baker Street, in an R-1 zone, decreasing the rear~ <br /> yard requirements 2 feet six inches. <br /> <br />On motion of Councfl~an Hubbard, seconded by t;~11 and carried, the recommendation <br />of the Planntng Con~ission was approved and the variance of Lyle W. Bryant granted <br />to permit construction of four triplex units on property situated at 2201-2205 <br />Kilson Drive, and 2202-2206 Hickory Street, in an R-1 Zone, subject to condition of <br />the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />Commnn~cation was read from the Planning Co~m~asion recommending denial of variance <br />application of Raymond W. and Bertha Kerr for permission to construct a second <br />single-family residence (25' x 29' in size) on rear part of lot at 2229 Cypress <br />Avenue, in an R-2 zone. Co~a~uication was read from Raymond W. Kerr requesting <br />favorable consideration of the variance application. The Council having unanimousl <br />waived the reading of the Resolution, on motion of Councilman Gould, seconded by <br />Hubbard and carried, the following Resolution entitled: <br /> <br /> "Resolution No. 57-243 granting Variance on application of <br /> Raymond W. Kerr where Planning Commission recnmmended denial" <br /> <br />was considered and passed by the following vote: <br /> <br />Ayes, Councilmen Royal E. Hubbard, St-,ley C. Gould, Jr., <br /> A.A.Wall, J. Ogden Markel, Dale H. Heiuly <br />Noes, Councilmen None <br />Absent, Councilmen None <br /> <br />A petition was presented signed by forty-nine persons requesting appropriate school <br />crossing signs and a Guard at Fair, iow and Douglas Streets, for the safety of school <br />children attending Smedley Junior High and Monte Vista Grammar School. On motion <br />of Counc~m~n Gould~ seconded by Hubbard and carried, the letter and petition were <br />received and filed. Two persons gave reasons why a Crossing Guard should be <br />stationed at the intersection. On motion of CoUnci~m~n Gould, seconded by Hubbard <br />and carried, the matter w~s referred to the Manager and Traffic Engineer for report <br />at the next meeting. <br /> <br /> <br />