Laserfiche WebLink
VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL <br />USE PERMIT (continued) <br /> <br />VA 70-5, MACCO CORPORATION - construct mobile home <br /> sales facility in the open in the C R District at 2970 South <br /> Main - APPROVED; <br /> <br />VA 70-6, CLARK - construct two story, 150 unit garden <br /> apartment complex in the C 4 District at 3050 South <br /> Bristol - APPROVED; <br /> <br />VA 70-8, MACCO CORPORATION - construct two story, <br /> 300 unit garden apartment complex in the R 1 District at <br /> 3251 South Birch - APPROVED; <br /> <br />VA 70-9, MACCO CORPORATION - construct a two and <br /> three story, 406 unit garden apartment complex in the <br /> R 4, LP and LP-B Districts at 2430 North Tustin - <br /> APPROVED. <br /> <br />TRAFFIC The report of control devices removed <br /> or installed, February 9, 1970 through <br /> March 2, 1970 was ordered filed, on <br />motion of Councilman Evans, seconded by Councilman Patterson and unani- <br />mously carried. <br /> <br />VARIANCE APPLICATION 69-102 The City Council considered report <br />CALLENS dated March 9, 1970 from the Plann- <br /> ing Commission reconfirming approval <br />of VA 69-102, filed by Joseph R. Callens, to construct a garden apartment <br />complex and commercial building in the R 1 District at 3771 South Greenville, <br />approved by the Planning Commission on January 26, 1970 and referred back <br />to the Planning Commission by the City Council on February 16 for recon- <br />sideration of the commercial building. <br /> <br />It was moved by Councilman Markel, seconded by Councilman Patterson, to <br />deny the variance, A discussion ensued, during which Mr. John Bellew, the <br />architect, explained that the design for the commercial building was for a <br />convenience center of 5~ 000 square feet, containing a small market, beauty <br />shop and cleaners, to be tied in with the child care center. The City Manager <br />explained that this type of development would be quite acceptable in C R zones, <br />but that it would be spot zoning in an R I District andwould be a danger to the <br />ultimate development of adjoining properties. The motion to deny the variance <br />failed adop!ion on the following roll call vote: <br /> <br />AYES: Markel <br />NOES: Evans, Patterson, Yamamoto, Villa <br />ABSENT: Herrin, Griset <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL -69- March 16, 1970 <br /> <br /> <br />