Laserfiche WebLink
RECESS At 5:45 P.M., the meeting was <br /> recessed to 7:30 P.NI., at which <br /> time it was reconvened with all <br />Councilmen present. Following the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, the <br />Invocation was delivered by the Reverend Galal Gough of the First United <br />Methodist Church. <br /> <br />HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION Mayor Griset introduced the newly <br /> appointed members of the Human <br /> Relations Commission who were <br />present, and the Clerk of the Council administered the oaths of office. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING Mayor Griset stated that a <br />A.A. 657 - HOLT7. written request had been received <br /> from the applicant, requesting <br />withdrawal of the public hearing on Amendment Application 657, filed by <br />Henry A. and Elvira A. Holtz, proposing amendment of Sectional District <br />Map 5 - 5-9 by prezoning from the A 1 District to the R 4 District property <br />located on the east side of Grand Avenue between Fairhaven Street and Santa <br />Clara Avenue. <br /> <br />On motion of Councilman Markel, seconded by Councilman Yarnamoto and <br />unanimously carried, the request to withdraw Amendment Application 657 <br />was granted. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL 233 Mayor Griset stated that a <br />VA 70-12 request had been received from <br /> the Planning Commission to <br />refer Variance 70-12 back to the Commission prior to Council's consideration <br />of Appeal 233, filed by the City's Department of Public Works; and that the <br />request had been made to enable the Planning Commission to consider <br />evidence by the Department of Public Works not available to the Commission <br />during its hearing on the Variance Application. <br /> <br />It was moved by Councilman Villa, seconded by Councilman Evans, to refer <br />the matter back to the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />In response to Councilman Evan's question, the City Attorney stated that <br />the Municipal Code made no express provision for referral to the Planning <br />Commission; that this had been done in the past; and that it would be proper <br />if in so doing the Commission would be considering new evidence which could <br />assist the Council in making its determination. <br /> <br />Fred Forgy, Jr., attorney for the applicant for the Variance, A.H. Allen, <br />objected to the referral back to the Planning Commission and questioned the <br />legality of the staff's right to appeal the Planning Commission decision. <br />Riley Marquis, of Marquis and Associates, also representing A.H. Allen, <br />similarly objected. <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL -124- May 4, 1970 <br /> <br /> <br />