05/16/1973 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

at one point that an Initiative was not proper for the subject of zoning, he now would have to amend that to say, 'probably' zoning matters are not subject to Initiative." The City Attorney affirmed the correctness of Mrs. Magruder's understanding of his statements in this area. MOTION, SECONDED AND CARRIED: Councilman Miller moved, seconded by Council- man Kubby and carried unanimously, to approve the Minutes of May 2, 1973, as amended. 2. MOTIONS FOR ADOPTION: a. Motion approving election officers and polling places for Special Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, June 26, 1973. Speaking from the floor, and requesting that her remarks be Included In the record, Mrs. Harold Schick requested a copy of the list showing proposed election officers and polling places. Mrs. Schick received a copy of the list from the City Manager. MOTION, SECONDED AND CARRIED: Councilman Miller moved, seconded by Deputy Mayor Davey and carried, with Councilman Kubby abstaining, to adopt the motion approving election officers and polling places for Special Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, June 26, 1973. C. CURRENT BUSINESS: I. Appeal from Denial of Variance for Tennis Court by Planning Commission on April 25, 1973 (V-377-72), by Mr. Dale Junta. The City Manager presented the Staff Report pertaining to the Junta appli- cation, which report recommended denial of the application. Speaking from the floor, the applicant, Mr. Junta, spoke on behalf of his application for variance. Speaking from the floor, and requesting that his remarks be Included In the record, Mr. William Magruder, speaking as a member of the Planning Commisslon, stated that he was the only dissenting vote on the Planning Commisslon at the time denial of the application was voted (April 25, 1973). Mr. Magruder stated that his opposition to the denial was based on his feeling that the tennis court was not a direct violation of the law In not complying with the six requirements required by the or,;inance, but rather that the six requirements are subjective, and that a common sense analysis of the area in question Indicates that the tennis court should be placed where the applicant has Indicated. Mr. Magruder further stated that no objections to the placement of the tennis court had been received from neighbors, and that he has stood with other Planning Commissioners in defending the requirements of the ordinances, but that the 30' setback Is not a sacred rule, but rather a hypothetical figure, and that aesthetic values and the wishes of neighbors are some of the other variables requir- ing consideration. Following discussion by the Council, the following motion was adopted: -2-