Laserfiche WebLink
<br />• .I I , • <br />April 12, 1966 - Pa.go- 5 <br />? to do so, sa Iau= asking thi:; Committee tonight to ressurect our_ <br />forrner r.equesC to you ar:d to place Ehat: i.n an active status again. <br />? for reconsideration, and t_hat the p,.)sGihil.ity of a joint meet.ing of , <br />this Committee, or certain de5igiidrF?d members of ir., "ind the City <br />Planning Conffr,ission and my clic3nts :iiid thie P4101)1e that reprrs+ant <br />NorChern Land D;.vt?lopers tc) see what c-an i-.o uut on r.his <br />. particular zoning. <br />MR. PROKASY : May I ask :ahy the reyu?.s t', i. bE? lir ve in ;?;+.?r <br />case of your clients we have acted on Cheir rF?yuest,. This is a tip?- c- <br />ific and separate request that we are considerint; anci our actian can <br />be either one of two things : the same as it was i_n your case, eittier <br />approve or reject. <br />MR. SCANLON; We're asking for a i-econsidei-atien by the Ylan- <br />ning Committee at this time. <br />MR. PROKASY : Uf your cliertts? <br />MR. SCANLON: Of the formal proposal that you have declined to <br />a.pprove. We're asking that that be reconsidered. <br />MR. PROKASY: Mike, I don't know. what the legal situaeion is <br />qn it. Our Law Director isn' t here this everyinK, but i t wauld be <br />my opinion that wauld not serve a purpose at this ti.nle t.o reconsidE,r <br />q proposal that we have only recently re,jected. <br />MR. SCANLON: In light of the other proposal thar -s presently <br />being considered, we ask that this be reconsidered in 1ight of that, <br />? the two of them jointly be reconsidered. Ours was considered prior <br />to this one. Now, you have a similar request which you are considex- <br />ing. It you are to be consistent, you should atitomatically reject <br />this one. <br />MR. PROKASY: I don't think a rejection of your clients was <br />4utoma.tic, Mike, and a rejection is not automatic in this case, eithex'o <br />M.R. SCANLON: I say, tnat since vou have formed a decisioi-i ot: <br />the request of my client's instance, their request is similar, then ir- <br />seems to me rejection also shoulci be f.orthcoming, tsut it is not for:_::- <br />caning anci we ask that you reconsider vurs again. Now, I'm asking <br />this orally and verbally; I'll put it in writing if you lik.e, or, if <br />your answer is it will not be reconsidered, I will then submit a new <br />application. <br />MR. PROKASY: I think if this is what you care to do, this is <br />the way to proceed. If you want to proceed on a new application to <br />ihis Cammiitsion in w-ritting, please do so. We' 11 place it on the <br />agenda. <br />MR. SCANL0N: You refuse to accept my verbal request this <br />evening; is that correct? <br />MR, PROKASY : That' s corre c t. <br />MR. SCANLON: But you wi11 consider MR. PROKASY: If you want to submit a wriGten application for <br />? appearance befre the Planning Cocnmission, we raill consider it at that <br />? i.me . <br />MR. SCANLON: We will proceed on that basis then and we ask