RES-9225 Upholding Appeal No. 471RESOLUTION NO. 9225
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ORANGE OVERRULING THE DECISION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION AND UPHOLDING APPEAL
NO. 471, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX FOOT NINE-INCH
FENCE WITHIN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK OF
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 296 AND 302 NORTH THORA
STREET.Appeal No.4
71 Variance No.
2067-99 Applicants and Appellants: Ta Nguyen and
Thang
Cao RECITALS:WHEREAS, on November 15, 1999, the Planning Commission of the City
of Orange conducted a public hearing as required by law to consider an appeal of
the Zoning Administrator's decision denying Variance No.
2067-99; and WHEREAS, the proposed Variance was to allow the construction of
a six-foot nine-inch high fence within the front yard setback area, exceeding
the maximum 42-inch height permitted,upon property located at 296
and 302 North Thora Street; and WHEREAS, the subject property consists of
two single-family lots commonly known as 296 and 302 North Thora Street
and is more particularly described as follows:ORANGE
COUNTY ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 379-112-08 AND 379-112-09;
AND ALSO DESCRIBED AS LOTS 54 AND 53 OF TRACT 8235
AS FILED WITH
THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE; and WHEREAS,
by Resolution No. 74-99, the Planning Commission
denied the appeal, thus denying Variance No. 2067-99 with certain findings; :md WHEREAS,
Appeal No.
471 was timely filed by the appellants, Ta Nguyen and Thang Cao; and
WHEREAS, the City Council heard the
appeal of appellants by conducting a public hearing on January 25,2000; and WHEREAS, at
said public hearing, the City Council heard the testimony of one
of the applicants/appellants and two members of the public, considered
1. The proposal is categorically exempt from the prOVlSlons of the California
Environmental Quality Act per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(e).
2. This specific location and surroundings of this property are unique in comparison
with other properties due to its location on a corner lot and adjacent to a corner lot, which make
these properties particularly susceptible to increased potential of traffic problems related to
vehicles turning the corner too quickly and property crime; to wit, this property has had
numerous instances of malicious mischief and crime perpetrated against it.
3. Because of the unique location of the property, the strict application of the Zoning
Ordinance regarding fence heights in front yard setbacks would deprive this property of the
privilege enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical R -1- 7 zone
classifications, namely the privilege of adequate security and privacy; to wit, a number of homes
in the general vicinity have walls whose height exceeds the maximum allowable under the
zoning code.
4. The granting of Variance No. 2067-99 would not permit a use otherwise
not permittc;:d in this zone; to wit, walls are permitted in the front yard
setback.5. Variance No. 2067-99 is subject to the following conditions which will
assure that the authorized adjustment does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent
with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is
located;
to wit:1) Construction of the fence shall occur in substantial conformance with plans as
submitted for approval by the City and
conditions herein;2) The applicant shall install an approved automatic gate to provide access for
vehicles entering the
driveway; and 3) If not utilized, Variance 2067-99 shall expire two (2) years from
the approval date.NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Orange that Appeal No. 471 is upheld and Variance No. 2067-99 is approved
for the following reasons:1. The foregoing recitals
are true and correct.2. The findings required by Orange Municipal Code Section 17.1 0.
040.E are met.ADOPTED the 22nd
day of February, 2000.
ATTEST:
aw~~ (};(A,,_u~Cassandra
1. Cadi , City Clerk of the CIty of Orange I
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council
of the City of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the 220d day of February,2000,
by the following vote:AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
COUNCIL
MEMBERS: MURPHY, COONTZ, SPURGEON COUNCIL
MEMBERS: SLATER, ALVAREZ COUNCIL
MEMBERS: NONE COUNCIL
MEMBERS: NONE 4A~
1 .~
t4~
Cassandra
1. Cathc. , City Clerk of the City of Orange MEB
3
Reso No. 9225