Laserfiche WebLink
APPEAL ~306 (Continued) <br /> <br />Application 72-46 be denied, and that the "B" parking suffix should remain in <br />this area to alleviate the parking problem for the South Main Street business <br />e s tab Ii shment s. <br /> <br />The Clerk reported no written communications had been received. <br /> <br />The following persons spoke in favor of the appeal: <br /> <br />Mrs. Kate Files, 721 Cypress, Santa Aha <br />Mrs. Harvey Hilliard, 730 Cypress, Santa Ana, <br /> <br />Proponents stated that they have lived in the area for many years; that there <br />is a great deal of dust blown to their homes from the parking areas; that this <br />appears to be a very good apartment and would benefit the area and the City <br />of Santa Ana; that it would also remove an old house; that beer trucks drive <br />back and forth through the parking lots at all hours of the day; and they are <br />used by people who patronize "Club Gardens" and "Beer Spa"; that they are in <br />favor of the apartment development. <br /> <br />Mr. Maurice Lebanoff, 13731 Carlsbad, Santa Ana, stated that this project is <br />the same as one approved in 1966 on which the variance was continued through <br />February 1969; that financing is now available and construction could begin <br />in approximately 60 days; that staff has recommended leight family units be <br />placed on the property which could represent 40people; that the complex he has <br />proposed could house a maximum of 32 adults; that the area contains five <br />establishments selling beer, wine, or liquor, and two allow dancing until <br />2:00 A.M.; that it is not an area suitable to families with children; that this is <br />a quality project; that the area has deteriorated; and that the proposed develop- <br />ment would enhance the area. He read a letter he had received from Ed <br />Jillson, President, South Main Busine s smen' s As sociation favoring the <br />development, and presented to the Council the letter and ~ petition signed by <br />14 adjacent property owners, concurring that the project would be desirable. <br />The communications were received and ordered filed on motion of Councilman <br />Herrin, seconded by Councilman Villa, and unanimously carried. <br /> <br />Mr~ Lebanoff further stated that the staff report was prejudiced and lacked the <br />facts; that staff required 50% open space as in R 4; that R Z, R 3 and R 3 H do <br />not have this require_ment; that above-ground open space was not counted, such <br />as balconies; that he is requesting that Council approve this project, deleting <br />only Condition #5 regarding the 50~0 open space; or as an alternate, allow 24 <br />units with 45~0 open space; or a third suggestion, to continue the appeal. <br /> <br />There were no opponents in the matter, and the public hearing was closed on <br />motion of Councilman Villa, seconded by Councilman Yamamoto, and unanimously <br />carried. <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL MINUTES <br /> <br />-Z89- <br /> <br />JULY 17, 1972 <br /> <br /> <br />