04/24/1972 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mrs. Hubert Sears, 660 East, 22nd Avenue, predicted problems with loading and unloading fof,-'a - de';'elopment of tqis type in that vicinity and asked 'whether the 1990 Plan was taken into consideration in the recommendation. - Earl and Virginia Gillmore, 2182 Hflyard Street, questicned whether the YMCA has the legal right to request rezoning of public lands. They said that property was pur- chased with money from the Century Fund and they feel the land cannot be used legally for commercial enterprise. Mrs. Gillmore said she feels the rezoning is a violation of the intent of agreement between the School Board (District 4J) and the YMCA on use of the property. Michael Sprague, 231 East 12th Avenue, asked what plans there are for commercial uses in the area. Consensus of the Council was that more information is necessary about agreement be- tween the School District and the "Y" on use of the property, and whether there is a question on the legality of the YMCA's requesting rezoning. Mrs . Campbell also questioned whether parking and traffic were taken into consideration in the Commission's recommendation, and noted rezoning of public lands to allow con- struction of the Amazon housing units. Manager replied that the site review condition was added to the R-G request in order to provide review of specific plans by the build- ing department with regard to parking, access, traffic control, and buffering around the proposed facility. He said at the time the Amazon housing was built, the State'was not subject to City zoning ordinances. . Mrs. Beal said she would like to see some report also on the impact on parking, and ingress and egres,s for the. "Y" building itself. Manager, answering MI'. Sprague and Mrs. Sears,. said there are no other' rezoning applica- tions at the present time for either commercial or industrial uses in this general area, 'and that the rezoning- proposar does conform to the 1990 ~lan. Councilman Teague called attention to his abstention from the discussion and said he would not vote on the issue since he is an active member of the "Y" and was a member of the Board for School District 4J at the time the agreement with the "Y" was made. Mrs. Campbell asked if the planned community center in Amazon Park would take some of the pressure and congestion from the YMCA and whether that would help the financial position of.'the "Y" or if the proposed 'apartment complex would still be necessary to the "Y's" operation. Bill Theiss, 970 East 44th Avenue, manager of the YMCA, said the center in Amazon Park will not necessarily relieve the 'congestion since it will be a different type facility. He said so far as the financial situation of the "Y" is concerned, it is the same as any other institution because of the inflationary trend, and although a modest increase in membership is maintained, they are still pressed to keep up with expenditures. ,J' .' Mayor Anderson remarked that the YMCA financial position has no bearing on 'considera- tion of the rezoning issue, and ruled the discussion out of order. He alsO ruled out of' order Councilman McDonald's question ,as to, whether' the"Y" prop,erty is on the tax rolls. Mr. Mohr moveq. seconded by Mrs. Beal that the council bill be read the second time by council 'bill nuTnberonly; wi. th unanimous consent of the.. Council', and that ,enactment be considered at this time. Councilman Mcbonald asked if under the Council's ,regulations this item could be sent back to the Planning Commission with some of the testimony given at this meeting. Mayor Anderson said it would seem desirous to have more information from the staff, then decide whether to refer back to the Planning Commission. MI'. McDonald ques- tioned further the action should the motion not obtain unanimous consent, that is, would it then be automatically referred to the Planning Commission. There being some question as to whether the action would not be unanimous, Mr. McDonald moved to amend the motion to send the item to the Planning Commission...for.more information regarding, legality of the rezoning request and other questions raised. There wa::; no second. . A vote was taken on the motion as stated, and motion was defeated, no councilman present vot ing aye. Further discussion resulted in another motion by Mr. Mohr, seconded by Mrs. Beal, that the I council bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, 'and that enactment be considered at this time. All councilmen present voting aye, except Councilman Mohr voting 'no', the bill was held' for second reading. Joa 4/24/72 - 3