HomeMy WebLinkAbout75-134RESOLUTION NO. 75-134
CJL: po
8-29-75
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TItE
CITY OF SANTA A/~A P~E~-ERSING THE ACTION
OF TIlE PLANNING COMMISSION ON VARIANCE
APPLICATION NO. 75-46 ,DENYING SAID VAR~
IANCE APPLICATION AND APPROVING APPEAL
NO. 354 FILED THEREON BY J. OGDEi~ MAPJ~EL
Wq~EREAS, a public hearing was duly held before the
City Council of the City of Santa Ana on September 2, 1975,
on Appeal No. 354 filed by J. Ogden Markel in opposition to
the Planning Commission's approval of Variance Application
No. 75-46.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based on such
public hearing and the oral and documentary evidence submitted
therein, the City Council of the City of Santa Ana does hereby
reverse the action of the Planning Coz~uuission approving
Variance Application No. 75-46, and does hereby deny said
Variance Application No. 75-46 and does hereby approve Appeal
No. 354 filed thereon in opposition to the Planning Commission's
action.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby
adopts the attached findings of fact supporting denial of
Variance Application No. 75-46.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City
of Santa Ana at its re§ular meeting held on the 2nd
day of September , 1975.
ATTEST:
CLERK OF THE COUNCIL
STATE OF CALIFOrnIA)
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF SA2~TA ANA )
I, FLORENCE I. MALONE, do hereby certify that I
am the Clerk of the Council of the City of Santa Ana; that
the foregoing Resolution was introduced to said Council at
its regular meeting held on the 2nd day
of September , 1975, and was at said meeting
passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit:
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE TWO
75-134
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL~]:
COUNCIL~iEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Ortiz, Garthe,
Brandt
Ward, Yamamoto
None
Bricken, Evans,
CLERIC OF THE COUNCIL
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
KEITH L. GOW, CITY ATTOrnEY
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SANTA ANA FINDINGS OF
PACT SUPPORTING DENIAL OF
VA 75-46
APPLICANT: George Georgieff
ADDRESS & ZONING: 602 W. Edinger
AP 13-192-04
R 1 District
SDM 24-5-10
VA PURPOSE: To allow a dental laboratory in the R 1 District.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval
COMMISSION ACTION & VOTE: Approved 8/11/75
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners Yates, O'Dell, Ankrum
Commissioners Gosse, Winters
Commissioner Acosta
Commissioner Griset
DETAILS OF PROPOSAL:
1. Description of Proposal:
The applicant proposes to utilize an existing building (presently
converted to a church) for a private dental laboratory. The
laboratory will be used in conjunction with the dental offices
located on the corner of Parton Street and Edinger Avenue
to the West of the subject property.
2. Area Description:
A. Property:
The subject property is a rectangular shaped parcel consisting
of approximately 5,750 square feet with 50 feet of frontage
on the service street parallel to Edinger Avenue and 115'
in depth along Van Ness.
B. Surrounding Development:
north - across Edinger, single family residences
south - single family residences
east - single family residence
west - insurance building and dental building
C. Street System:
Edinger Avenue is a planned arterial highway. Van Ness
is designated as a local street.
D. Comparable Applications or Circumstances:
VA 67-54 permitted a medical office building on property
immediately to the west of subject property.
VA 2206 at 602 W. Edinger (subject building) permitted
the conversion of the grocery store into a real estate office.
George Georgieff
E. Surrounding Zoning:
See attached SDM
Present Use:
Property presently developed with a building 65' x 20'
being utilized as a church (permitted by CUP 69-5).
3. General Plan Compatibility:
The General Plan of the City designates the area as low density
residential.
4. General Findings:
(a)
There are no special circumstances applicable to the subject
property which would cause the strict application of the
zoning ordinance to deprive the subject property of
privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and
purposes of the Santa Aha Municipal Code Zoning Chapter 41!
and
(b)
The granting of the variance is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment for one or more substantial
property rights; and
(c) The granting of the variance will be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurous to surrounding property.
(d) The granting of the Variance will adversely affect the
general plan of the City.
5. Specific Findings:
COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA PROCEDUI{ES, NEGATIVE DECLARATION
VA 75-46 Page 2