07-18-1977 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

opposition seems to be a result of the growth of the church and the impact of this growth on neighborhood traffic; that he prays the church will continue to grow; that the church is making an effort to alleviate the problems and be a good neighbor; and that he hoped Council would approve the day-care center. Ruth Martinez, 1814 West Third Street, spoke in opposition to the center. She stated that she resides and represents the residents in the immediate vicinity; that the day-care center will in no way contribute to the general well-being of the residents; that none of the residents in the area need the center services or will bene- fit from them; that it will be detrimental to the community because of the increase in traffic which creates a hazard and risk to the neighborhood children; that the street is narrow and unsuitable for on-street parking, and the church parking is inadequate; that day sleepers will be inconvenienced by the noise; that there is already an adequate day-care center in the immediate vicinity (Franklin School); that the residents do not want or require a day- care center; and that they urge rejection of the proposal. In rebuttal, Rev. Lewter stated that the traffic problems are experienced on Sundays; that the church parishioners are not causing the problems; that the church wants to work with the neighbors to find solutions to these problems; and that there adequate parking for the day-care center program. is There were no other speakers; the Clerk reported there were no new written communications; and the Mayor closed the public hearing. During the Council discussion which followed, Councilmen generally agreed that it will be desirable for the church and the residents of the area to work together to rectify traffic and parking prob- lems; and that Council is sympathetic to both sides. Councilman Ward's motion, seconded by Councilman Bricken, to approve and file the Negative Declaration; to approve Conditional Use Per- mit No. 77-8, affirming the decision of the Planning Commission; to instruct Staff to monitor the parking and traffic activity in the neighborhood for one year, and to report the results to Council in August, 1978; and to instruct the City Attorney to prepare the appropriate resolution; carried on a 6:1 vote, with Councilman Yamamoto dissenting. CA 13.4A PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL NO. 380 Mayor Evans announced VA 77-24 - 2101 W. EDINGER that this was the time REFERRED and place for the public hearing on Appeal No. 380, filed by Hal Davis, of the Planning Commission denial of his Variance Application No. 77-11, to allow a twelve-unit apartment complex at 2101 W. Edinger Avenue in the Ri District. Planning Director Charles Zimmerman stated that the Planning Commission had denied the Variance because the proposed twelve units, with a minimum of 17% open space, is more than the land can absorb; that Staff could support the conversion if four units were deleted. Proponent-Applicant Mr. Hal Davis stated that he is the owner of the property; that the developer withdrew after the Planning Commission decision; that the property, originally a medical center, has been vacant for four years; that he would now like to convert the building to apartments and he requested Council to refer the Application back to the Planning Commission to consider a revised building plan. There were no other proponents or opponents and no written com- munications, and Mayor Evans closed the public hearing. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 263 JULY 18, 1977