6/16/1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

JUN 16 1982 9009 50 PAsE 68 Acting Chairman Lyons stated that he also felt badly about hearing this matter without the applicant present, but noted that Mr. Childers was aware his request for continuance might not be granted and he had every - opportunity to be represented. Mr. Lyons, therefore, believed it would be unfair to the public not to hear it at this time. In regard to the petition supporting the rezoning, he commented that it seems those favoring the rezoning primarily live across the divided highway from the property while those opposing it, live right next door. Commissioner Bird asked if Mr. Lyons felt it would be unfair to continue the public hearing. He noted that the people who are here have had their say, and there may be more present next time. Acting Chairman Lyons pointed out that many people find it difficult to attend these meetings and he did not feel we should ask them to do this twice. Considerable discussion ensued regarding continuing the hearing to give the property owner a chance to make his presentation, and Commissionpr'Wodtke asked the ladies present if they had any objection to the Commission listening to the applicant at a later date. Mrs. Friberg stressed that those present today cameout in a pouring rain be be here, and she felt they should have been notified if there was to be a change. Commissioner Wodtke then expressed concern that if this appeal were taken the the courts, a No vote for the Motion to deny the appeal might be construed as a vote in favor of the proposed rezoning. He noted that, although he would not necessarily vote for the rezoning, he would like to have the opportunity to hear the applicant state his case. Attorney Brandenburg did not feel a No vote for denial of the appeal would be so construed, and it was generally