Laserfiche WebLink
^,r?? ? .?._ <br /> <br />April 12, 1966 - page 6 <br />• that wizen yori receive the written application, which wi11 he forth- <br />coming waithin the Liext few days, that :it be jointl.y befo-re Lhe. Com- <br />? missiun.a <br />MR. PROK.ASY: It iNi11 be considered whetl it ccsznes ina <br />MR. SCANI.,ON: Join.tly with the other or;e? <br />MR. PROKASY: I can't answer that. It wi..11 be cansider.ed <br />cahen it comes ir?a <br />IrIR. SCANL0N: Wei1, we ask that, but I.' ve also usked Uhat it <br />be cansidered jointly. <br />MR, PROIZASY : Put thy S i.n your reque z, t. <br />iARa SCANL.Oh1: And the r_e(luest wil?_ a]_so car-.-y ?s PrOposal <br />which the Regional Plannircg Conu-iiission suggcsted, ?iiar. Vecause of <br />the nature of that land out ther.e <ind of the lack nf dcveloprnAnt, <br />that thi5 Planni.ng Conunission riieet with the landuw-teers aLid Regiona1 <br />Planning Comnisszon to see if there isn' t some SalUtion other tharz <br />the courts. '1"his is the only reason we`re raalcing this request is <br />one more chance to see if it can be worked out in ar: arbitration <br />ar'd negotiation manner; otherwise, we have no regress except lzgal <br />action. It's not a threat but it is a proposal. Wc're trying to <br />see if somewhere this ciZy we can nat woxk out a proposal that woLild <br />bring the tax duplicate change which this P lanni.ng Ccniuni ttee and <br />varous members have repea,tedly stated, Lhey want indiistxy, they want <br />? comcnercial errterprise -- we have proposed that for sDnie time now. <br />We are held up by the construction season, so we'11 make one more <br />request and see whether or not we can't have aanicabl:e settlement in <br />this respanse. <br />A'1R a PROKASY a Mike, I mighg s tate , as IrecaIl there` s no <br />question that we woald encourage commercial arad/or indu5trial developw <br />ment within the Ci,ty, and there is no question that yaur clients could <br />have gone right ta the Building Department and gotten a permiL far <br />crnnanercial use in any canmercial area, but that land `VaG purchased <br />with the knowledge of its zoning at that time, wha.ch LaG,S ?rdustiial, <br />which the industrial code does not considex at this time. <br />iMRm SCAIVLON: We11, those are ehe legal argrxments thaL- a coz.art <br />of laia -- <br />MR. PROIZASY: This is not a raatter of legz 1 aYgumerFt. !.'he <br />7,.oning existed, period. <br />MR. SCANLLON,o But it had ?aeen a. pra_or zoning. All we're asking <br />is that this partzcular parcel be rezaned back to its prior zonirig that <br />it helrl pre-,,,iouslyo <br />M'R, PR0KA5Ye Fi.ne, WEIlD malce yhc aT * )p1ication; submit it <br />as a new applicatian and we' 11 considvr it at this ti.mc. <br />? T`here was sanne furt.?e?r discuss?_on recween ?Ir. ??usa.a1 aI1d <br />Mre Scanlora,