02-16-1971 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PUBLIC HEAl{lNG The Director of Public Works APPEAL NO. 259, VA 70-83 reported as follows on the GEOI{GE A. PICKELHELMER conditions of approval 8, 9, 10 and 11 of Variance Application 70-83 which were appealed by the applicant on the basis of financial problems: Condition 8: This would require no outlay of, cash on the part of the developer; it requires only a signature to a deed of dedication. Condition 9: One way this could be approached is to require each parcel to provide a street light. We try to prorate the cost so that eventually, when the Edison system goes underground, funds will be available from all the property owners; in this case the to~l cost to the applicant is $99.90. Condition 10: The Public Works Department's position is that this condition cannot be waived because it is required by the Municipal Code. The approximate cost to the applicant would be $405. for the front water main, plus whatever side service he requires. Condition 11: The sidewalk could be installed now, but it freight be difficult to get it to fit the future curb grade when Harbor Boulevard4s widened; a bond may be posted now, which the Public Works Department estimates will approximate $400.0o. The Public Works Director stated that the estimated total outlay of cash for the applicant'would be $500 to cover the four conditions appealed; that this should not pose a financial burden for the property owner. The public hearing was opened by the Mayor. Mr. George Pickelheimer, 1122 North Harbor, Santa Ana, was present to represent the owner of the property, Mae A. Bull. He stated that the reason for the appeal of these four conditions was that the cost of these conditions in addition to the cost of other conditions which he is not appealing will create a financial problem. Mrs. Mae A. Bull also spoke, ~ating that the sidewalk requirement was appealed because there is presently black top all the way to the curb. The Clerk reported there were no written communications received on the matter and there being no further proponents or opponents, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Patterson's motion, seconded by Councilman Markel, to uphold the action of the Planning Commission and instruct the City Attorney to prepare a Resolution denying Appeal No. 259 on Variance Application 70-83, carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Herrin, Markel, Patterson, Villa, G~iset Evans, Y~mamoto None CITY COUNCIL -60- February 16, 1971