|
223
<br />dents; however, as stated, there is no guarantee to this because under HUD regu-
<br />lations housing is available to all that are in need and that apply.
<br />Mrs. Millie Herrera, 1405 Pennsylvania Avenue, Colton, stated she wanted to make
<br />certain there is no disparity shown when it comes to housing opportunities between
<br />people of low and moderate incomes and those of higher income brackets. Mrs. Herrera
<br />said she feels the City should keep in mind the people of low and moderate incomes
<br />are what qualifies the City for supplemental funding, and they are entitled to this.
<br />Mrs. Herrera stated this is safe and sanitary housing, it is badly needed in our
<br />community, and the City Council should address this problem, not ignore it.
<br />Moved by Councilman Rehrer, seconded by Councilman Hayes, to continue the Public Hear-
<br />ing to consider the proposed Cooperation Agreement between the City of Colton and the
<br />Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino, and further requested clarifica-
<br />tion on existing contracts between the County and the City and the proposed Coopera-
<br />tion Agreement. Vote was unanimous.
<br />Zoning
<br />P. C. Res. No. 904
<br />Mayor Gonzales declared the -Public Hearing open.
<br />0) City Clerk: Ramos submitted the Affidavit of Publication and reported that no pro -
<br />co tests or objections had been received.
<br />CD Planning Director Gonzales advised that the applicant, Mr. Albert Field, requested
<br />a change of zone from C-1, Neighborhood Commercial, to R-1, Single -Family Residen-
<br />tial, on property located at 1220 North La Cadena Drive, and also adjacent property
<br />Q to the west, at 1356 North 9th Street, to construct a three-bedroom, single-family
<br />residence at the La Cadena Drive address. Mr. Gonzales stated there is an existing
<br />single-family residence located at the North 9th Street address.
<br />Mr. Gonzales said the subject properties are designated as low-density residential
<br />therefore, the requested zone change would be consistent with the City's General
<br />Plan and the surrounding area, which is primarily single-family residential devel-
<br />opment.
<br />Mr. Gonzales concluded the Planning Commission, at a public hearing held February 13,
<br />1979, recommended approval of the zone change request, as outlined in Planning Com-
<br />mission Resolution No. 904, and Staff, therefore, recommends First Reading of Ordi-
<br />nance No. 1560, approving the zone change.
<br />Mayor Gonzales asked if anyone desired to speak on this matter.
<br />Moved by Councilman Hayes, seconded by Councilman Rehrer, to terminate the Public
<br />Hearing. Vote was unanimous.
<br />Moved by Councilman Rehrer, seconded by Councilman Hayes, to adopt First Reading of
<br />Ordinance No. 1560, and waive further reading. Unanimous vote.
<br />ORDINANCE NO. 1560 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLTON AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 9645
<br />First Reading) AS AMENDED, AND PROVIDING FOR CERTAIN ZONE RECLASSIFICATIONS.
<br />PLANNING CDMMTSSTON RFPORTS ANF) RFrnMMFNnATTGNS
<br />Va ria nra
<br />P. C. Res. No. 907
<br />Mr. Gonzales reported on a Variance application, requested by Ernest Gileno, to con-
<br />struct a single-family residence with the required fron and side yard setbacks, but
<br />provide only a 14 foot rear yard setback, which is contrary to the 35 foot rear yard
<br />setback requirement.
<br />Mr. Gonzales stated the subject property is a corner lot with approximately 72 feet
<br />of frontage along Mohave Drive, and 112 feet of frontage on Laurelwood Avenue, with
<br />a 30 foot wide access strip located along the western boundary of the subject property.
<br />Mr. Gonzales advised that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter,
<br />March 13, 1979, and after reviewing certain findings, approved the Variance application,
<br />as outlined in Planning Commission Resolution No. 907.
<br />Moved by Councilman Rehrer, seconded by Councilman Temby, approving Planning Commis-
<br />sion Resolution No. 907. Vote was unanimous.
<br />MAR 2 01979
<br />
|