My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2000-06
Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
PLANNING COMMISION
>
2000
>
2000-06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 12:56:21 PM
Creation date
1/11/2011 10:47:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PBA
Doc Type
Resolution
Doc #
VA99-08
Date
2/28/2000
Notes
5102 Westminster Av
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
GAS: 2/17/00 <br />RESOLUTION NO.00-o6 <br />A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION <br />OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING <br />VARIANCE NO. 99-08 FOR RELIEF FROM THE LOT <br />FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR A NEW MEDICAL <br />BUILDING LOCATED AT 5102 WESTMINSTER <br />AVENUE <br />WHEREAS, this Commission held a public hearing on February 28, 2000, on Variance <br />Application No. 99-08, for relief from the lot frontage requirement in the C 1 district, pursuant to <br />Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-373. <br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISION OF THE <br />CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: <br />1. Based upon the evidence submitted at the abovesaid hearing this Commission finds and <br />determines as follows: <br />A. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, <br />topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to <br />deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose <br />of the provision of the chapter. <br />The subject site is a rectangular shaped parcel and, due to its shape, does not meet the <br />minimum lot frontage standard set forth in SAMC Section 41-373. The strict application of <br />the zoning code would prevent development of the parcel thereby leaving two vacant lots <br />landlocked between an existing commercial development and a residential property. <br />Without the variance, the subject property would be denied privileges not otherwise at <br />variance with the intent and purpose of the Code. <br />B. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more <br />substantial property rights; <br />Granting the variance would preserve the property owner's right to develop the landlocked <br />vacant parcels that can meet the commercial development standards and the zoning code <br />requirements with the exception of the lot frontage. The variance provides relief from the <br />minimum lot frontage provision of the code and is necessary to preserve the applicant's <br />property rights. <br />1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.