|
383
<br />
<br />!Amend. Appl. No. 376
<br />!Planning C~mw, ission
<br />Ordinance
<br />
<br />This being the date set for hearing on Amendment Application No. 376~ initiated by il
<br />the Planning C~ssi(m, amending Sectional District Map 12-5-10, to reclassify !I
<br />frc~ the R2, RS, P, C1, and C2 Districts to the P and CD Districts, property on
<br />both sides of Birch Street between Eighth end Tenth Streets and prOPerties on the
<br />
<br />north side of Eighth Street end on the south side of Sixth Street between Broadway
<br />and Flower Street, including the Civic Center area bounded by Eighth Street, Broad-
<br />
<br />way, Sixth and Flower Streets, all as shown on Exhibit A. A. B76A; no protests were
<br />
<br />received and the hearing closed. Council~n Heinly disqualified himself on this
<br />
<br />matter. On motion of Council~nn Hubbard, seconded by B~ewer and carried, the fol-
<br />
<br />lowing Ordinance entitled:
<br />
<br />"Ordinance amending Article IX of the Santa Ana Municipal Code to
<br /> change District Classification on Amendment Application No. 376
<br /> and amending Sectional District Map 12-5-10 (Exhibit A.A. 376A)
<br />
<br />Appeal Appl. No. 51
<br /> City Council
<br />Variance Appl. No. 1564
<br />~illi~m Wenke and
<br />Harry Tancredi
<br />Reso. No. 62-17
<br /> Granting Variance
<br />
<br />was introduced, considered and placed on file for second reading.
<br />
<br />Appeal Application No. 51 of the City Council was again presented on Variance Appli~
<br />cation No. 156~, filed by William Wenke and Harry Tancredi, to allow a "reading
<br />institute" in the professional district, at 2006 North Broadway. On December 18,
<br />1961, the City Council instructed the Planning Department to present to the Plannin~
<br />Commission the question of whether the use requested is a professional use. Ccmmmm~-
<br />cation was presented frc~ the Planning Commission submitting the determination thai
<br />
<br />the use requested on Variance Application No. 1564 is not a professional use. On
<br />
<br />motion of Councilman Heinly, seconded by Brewer and carried, the communication was
<br />
<br />received and filed. Attorney William Wenke, 2014 North Broadway, stated there is
<br />no parking problem either in the daytime or evening, and approximately 15 students
<br />attend the day classes 0 The Council having unanimously waived the reading of the
<br />
<br />Resolution, on motion of Councilman Heinly, seconded by Brewer and carried, the fol~
<br />lowing Resolution entitled:
<br />
<br />"Resolution No. 62-17 granting Variance No. 156h on Appeal Application
<br />No. 51 filed by the City Council after the Zoning Administrator had
<br />denied a Variance"
<br />
<br />was considered and passed by the following vote:
<br />
<br />~ppeal Appl. No. 53
<br />Harold E. and Irene Wilson
<br />,Variance Appl. No. 1583
<br />Garden Grove Development
<br />Co. Reso. No. 62-18
<br /> Granting Variance
<br />
<br />Ayes, Councilmen Royal E. Hubbard, Henry H. Schlueter,
<br /> Dale H. Heinly, Bob Brewer, A. A. Hall
<br />Noes, Councilmen None
<br />Absent, Councilmen None
<br />
<br />Appeal Application No. 53 of Harold E. and Irene Wilson was again presented on Vari~
<br />ence Application No. 1583, filed by Garden Grove Development Co., to build a one
<br />story 12-unit apartment house in the R-1 District, on property on the west side of
<br />the 900 block South Shelton Street, wherein the Appellant appeals the denial of the!
<br />Zoning Administrator. Attorney Walter Steiner, 309 First Western Bank Building,
<br />
<br />representing the Appellant, stated a new plot plan of 12 units in three separate
<br />
<br />structures has been submitted, that it includes more than adequate yard and parkingI
<br />space, and less than 12 units on a parcel of land 100 feet by 3O0 feet would not
<br />economically feasible. Dwight Mize, 11922 Comstock Road, Garden Grove, stated ther~
<br />
<br />i$ no restriction to two-story buildings in the R-1 Zone, so there should be no re-.~
<br />strictiont on these, the new plot plan, as submitted, is economically fea$ible~ andI
<br />
<br />makes good use of the land. ~ne Council having unanimously waived the reading of
<br />the Resolution, on motion of Councilman Heinly, seconded by Brewer and carried, thei
<br />
<br />following Resolution entitled:
<br />
<br />
<br />
|