|
i. The Planning Commission does find as follows:
<br />a. Notice has been given as required by law,
<br />b. The circumstances required by Section 19.1003 of Ord. No. 309
<br />do exist.
<br />Z. A five foot variance from the front yard setback provisions of
<br />Section 6,5, Ord. No, 309, as amended, is hereby granted,
<br />3, A copy of this Resolution shall be seat to the interested parties.
<br />Chairman Lozano then opened the public hearing on the request of Mr. Bernard T.
<br />Gerton, 62S St, Mary St., for a variance from Section 18.603 of Ord. No. 309, in
<br />order to construct a fence five feet, ten inches in height along the Division
<br />Street property line, in an R-1 (single-family residential) District. Mr. Gerton
<br />was present in the audience. Secretary Fales stated the basic intent of Sect.
<br />18.603 of the Zoning Ordinance was to serve a two-fold purpose: eight distance
<br />in terms of traffic safety, and aesthetics. City Engineer Sypher said the only
<br />place where the fence would be critical would be an obstruction to one of the
<br />neighboring residential garages. Mr. Gerton pointed out this is a one-way street,
<br />and he had spoken to the neighbor who owns the garage in question, as well as other
<br />neighbors, and had encountered no objection. Chairman Lozano said if anyone had ob-
<br />jections they would be expected to have been present at this public hearing. On
<br />motion by Commissioner Antonini, seconded by Commissioner Wipfli, the following
<br />resolution was unanimously adopted:
<br />RESOLUTION NO. 177
<br />WIiBREAS, the application of Mr, Bernard T. Gerton, 628 St. Mary Street, for a
<br />variance of two feet, four inches from the provisions of Section 18.603
<br />of Ord, No. 309, in order to constzuct a fence. in the required corner lot eide-
<br />yard setback at 628 St. Mary Street, in an R-1 (single-family residential) District,
<br />having come before this Commission on July 5, 1962, under Ord. No, 309, as amended,
<br />the Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows:
<br />1. The Planning Commission does find as follows:
<br />a. Notice has been given as required bq law.
<br />b. The circumstances required by Section 19,1003 of said Ord.. No. 309
<br />do exist.
<br />2. A two foot, four inch variance from Section 18..603, Ord. No. 309, as
<br />amended, is hereby granted,
<br />3. A copy of this Resolution shall be sent to interested parties.
<br />The public hearing was then opened by Chairman Lozano on the request of Mr. Louis
<br />J. Baptista, 4380 Mirador Drive, for a Conditional Use Permit in order to operate
<br />an upholstery shop and warehouse in a building located to the rear of 660 Main
<br />Street and served by an alley from Spring Street, in a C-C (Community Commercial)
<br />District. Mr. Baptista was present in the audience. Mr. Paul Loretz, speaking
<br />from the audience, inquired regarding the traffic problem 1n the alley. Mr. Baptiste
<br />said he would be using the alley in the evenings. Mr. Fales stated that 1n grant-
<br />ing a Conditional Use Permit reasonable conditions may be attached. After di~cus-
<br />aion, upon motion by Commissioner Antonini, seconded by Commissioner Wipfli, the
<br />following resolution was unanimously adopted;
<br />RESOLUTION N0. 178
<br />WHEREAS, the application of Louis J, Baptista, 4380 Y+lirador Drive, for a Conditional
<br />Use Permit in order to operate an upholstery shop and warehouse in a build-
<br />ing located to the rear of 660 Main Street and served by an alley from Spring Street,
<br />fn a C-C (Community Commercial) District, having come before this Commission on
<br />July 5, 1962, under Ord. No, 309, ae amended, the Planning Commission does hereby
<br />resolve as follows:
<br />
|