06-06-1966 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Speaking in favor of the appeal was Walter Giles, 2R15 No Freeman and John Brewer, R209 N. Freeman who presented two additional signatures for the petition which had been filed in opposition to the variance; referred to a Declaration of Restriction on the properties within the subdivision, which included a statement that no fence exceeding ~' shall be erected or permitted between the street and the setback line; stated there were no other 6' fences in frout yards in the area and approval of this variance would be detrimental to other properties on Freeman. Bernard Glasser, 2206 No Freeman, stated the fence would be a traffic himirance. Eleanor Dorsey, Realtor~ Howard Rash, 2210 Freeman and Mrs o Ward also spoke in opposition. Variance applicant William Moss stated the fence would not d~preciate the area and that a landscaper had been engaged; Mr° Moss presented a petition in favor of the variance containing approximately 17 signatures° The petition was ordered filed on motion of Councilman Gilmore, seconded by Councilman Brooks and carried. Grover Collins, 944 Buffalo and Dean Harwood, 951 Buffalo stated they had no objection to the variance application. There being no further testimony, the hearing was closed. It was moved by Councilman Brooks, seconded by Councilman Herrin, that the City Council uphold the action of the Planning Cummission and instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution approving Variance Application 66-31 subject to conditions listed in the Planning Commission Finding of Facto The motion was adopted on roll call vote: AYES~ COUNCIL~N: Gilmore, Brooks, Burk, Nerrin, McMichael, Harvey NOES~ COUNCIIm%R~N: Markel ABSENT, COUNCILMEN: None TENT° PARCEL MAP 453 Council resumed discussion continued frc~ 5-16-66 on Tentative Parcel Map 453 wherein the Shell Oil Company had appealed a condition regarding dedication imposed in Council's approval of the map on 3~21-66~ The City Manager reported that the questions regarding the~ requirement for dedication for Grand Avenue have been resolved and reccmmended that the condition be cancelled. On motion of Councilman Rerrin, seconded by Councilman McMlchael and caxried, the City Council deleted Condition D-6 from the Planning Director's report dated March 9, 1966 which was adopted by the City Council on March 21, 1966. T~T. PARCEL MAP 466 Paul McKenzie, Real Estate Broker, representing Harry Ho Clark who filed Tentative Parcel Map 466 creating 3 parcels east of Newhope and north of Kent, objected to Condition fo regarding sewer facilities and to Condition ho regarding the improvement of Quigley l~e. The Plar~uing Director reported that the Municipal Code provides that if houses are within 200 feet of a sewer facility they must connect. The Public Works Director reported that he had been notified by the refuse collection contractor that equipment was being damaged because of the condition of Quigley Lane o He noted that on/y paving was being required in lieu of the normal requirement of a full 60~ street. It was moved by Councilman McMichael, seconded by Councilman Brooks and carried, that Tentative Parcel Map 466 be approved subject to the conditions in the Planning Director's report dated 6-1~66 with the exception of Condition 4-h which was deleted, and that the alley requirement be waived. Councilman Gilmore suggested that the Public Works Director inform the parties that if the road is not properly repaired refuse collection will not be made° OITX COUNCIL - 54~ - ~e 6, 1966