11-04-1963 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Caldwell stated applicant has failed to show exceptional circumstances, that variance is not a requirement for preservation of substantial right, that it would be injurious to other property owners with 40 units on 1.97 acres. The Planning Director noted original plans have been reduced to 50~ land coverage. Mr. Caldwell asked for continuance until final plans approved. Warren Proctor, 115 W. 15th Street, agent for variance applicant, objected to a contin~,~nce inasmuch as Planning Commission approval was subject to submission of a revised plot plan approved by the Planning Director which calls for 50%laud coverage. Thomas Russell, t23~2Adele, Oarden Grove, applican$ noted property is now a nuisance and needs to be developed. There being no further testimony, the Mayor closed the hearing. 0n motion of Counc4~m~ Harvey, seconded by Counci~ma~ Gilmore and carried, the Council upheld the decision of the Planning Commission and instructed the City Attorney to prepare a resolution approving Variance 1836. Councilman Hubbard res~m~ed his place at the Council table. ~w~RING - APPEAL iO~ Councilman Hubbard asked that he be dis- KO~ROSKY qualified from discussion and action in the following matter because of a conflict of interest, and left the Council Chamber. Mayor Hall opened the hearing on Appeal Application 104 filed by Julie ~mmrosky (for the Vuicich family) from the P3-n~tng C~ission's approval of Variance 1837 (Bailie & Brooks) +~ construct a 56 unit, 1~ buildf-g, 2 story apartment complex on A 1 property located at 3922 and 3930 W. 5th Street. The Clerk reported that notice of the hearingwas given bythe Planning Depart- merit with evidence on file, and that no written commmmications or objections had been received. Norman Caldwell, 2020 N. Broadway, attorney representing appellants~ protested that number of units proposed is not in confo~,~_nce with R 4 regulations, and two stories is attempt to make an R 3 development of the property. Warren Proctor, 115 W. 15th Street, attorney representing the applicaut~ stated arguments would be same as for Appeal 103. Mrs. Cecilia Bailie, 3922 W. 5th Street, applicant, spoke on behalf of herself and Alberta M. Brooks. There being no further response to the Mayor's call for testimony, the hearing was closed. O~motion of Councilman G~mnre, seconded by Councilman Earvey and carried, Council upheld the decision of the Planning Cc~mtssion and instructed the City Attorney to prepare a resolution approving Variance 1837. Councilman Eubbard re~ad his place at the Council table. PETITION - TRASH 0u motion of Councilman Hubbard, seconded TRANSFER by Counc~lm-- Gilmore and carried, Council received from Joseph Davis, 9355 Laurel Street, a petition with approximately 83 family signatures which protested the presence of a trash transfer point in Montgomery Park, and referred the matter to the staff for investigation and report. ORD. NS-691 ORDINANCE NS-691 AMENDING ARTICLE IX OF A. A. ~60 TH~ SANTA ANA MUNICIPAL CODE TO CHANGE ENGLISH DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION ON AMEN-~NT APPLICATION NO. 460 AND AMenDING SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 11-5-10 (EXHIBIT AA ~60 C) was read by title. It was moved by - e33 - November 4, 1963