10-03-1966 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~quire~[ by law, with evidence thereto on file~ and that no c~maunications ~ been received, ~rs. ~osiarz, 120~ E. Avalon~ applicant, Spoke in support ef the'abandonment. There being no further testimo~, the hearing was closed. i% was m~ved By Councilman Nerrln, seconded ~y Comnci~w~. Gilmore, that ~ESOLUTION 66-1B~ ORDE~G TNE VACA~20N OF CERTAIN RIGRT OF WAY ON ~1~t 8I~E OF AVALON AVEN/~E,' EAST OF ~TEAWAT STRE~£, RE~ER~I~G AN EASEMENT ~e~mEIN ~ PIYBLIC ~TILITIES, be e~lol~ed~ without further teasing. On roll call vote: Councilmen Gilmore, Brooks, Burk, Herrin, l~-kel, Narvey None Councilman NcNichael APPEAL 180 ~ D.A.V. I%' Stating a conflict of interest, ~ayor Variance 66-67 Earvey relinquished the Chair to Vice Nay~r Gilmore and left t~e C~uncil Table. Hearing was c~ened on an Alrpeal filed by the Disable~ American Veterans T~ri~t Store fr~a the Zon~-E A~ministrator's Aenial of Variauce 66-67 to permit outAoor retail sales at ~29 E. 5th Street. The Clerk of the Council rel~rted that Notice of the Nearing was mailed as required by law, with evidence thereto on file, and that no written c~ica- tions had Been received. $~eaking in favor of the Variance Application were V. B. West, attorney representing DoA.V., Robert Ellison, 1602 Louise, an~ Wendell Finley~ that parking for approximately 6~ cars is available directly across the alley, that there were 3 people at the hearing fr~ 36 notifie~, and the ~ indicated they wo~ld have no objection if the area were surrounde~ l~y fence~ which the applicaut was wi!ling to do~ that there was also a lc~c or 60' away which could be used for another ~0 cars. T~elma Townsend and Ruth J~lian, residents of the area~ atate~ no el~ositiun if a brick fence or block wall was constructed. Noting that the decision of the Zoning A&ministrat~r had been reviewe~ by ~he P~ C~ssion ~ ~ous~ a~i~ed~ the PI~ D~ct~ ~te~ out ~o~side~2i~ ~s base~ up~n:(a) ~r~v~e~ 9f t~ ~a, ~ ~a~ no p~s ~ file in~ic~e~ ~ ~ of p~sical ~row~t~ (b) c~it- able ~ti~, ~ a detonation h~ n~ bee~ ~e ~f the ~e of ~ proceeds t~t go to c~ritable ~oses~ ~ (c) c~ acti~ of the O~issi~ a~ Co, oil to de~ ~2~r sales. ~r. West noted there were no stockholders and no pr~cee~ls to a~ individu- als, except empl~yees$ that on the original applicati~u a atatmaen~ was maple that whatever wall was required woul~ be built. Mr. Finley asked that the Findings of Fact of the Zoning Administrator, declarim~ tha% Nfs. ~uliau an~ Mrs. Townsend state~ at the hearing ~hat it won~ create a Aisturbauce, be corrected, to which the p~a-~lug Director a~. There being no f~rther testimo~, the hearing was close~. A motion by Couucilman ~rooke, to uphol~ the ac~iem of the Zoning A~ministrat~ amd dem~ Variance 66-67, was lost for lack of a second. 1% was moved by Councilman Burk, seconded by Councilman Herrin, that the City $~uncil ~verrule the decision of the Zon~n£ Administrator and alm~rove Variance ~-67, subject to the building of a 6' masonry wall, or a substitute acceptable to the Planning Department, around t~e sales area.