Laserfiche WebLink
Session 1725, Minutes <br />June 8, 1998 <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br />The applicant requests that the Barby Lane parking prohibition enforcement <br />responsibility be reduced to requiring the best efforts of the applicant. Mr. Ollendorff <br />said the proposal is from the City's leading corporate citizen and it has been an <br />outstanding center, which is allowed to expand under the comprehensive plan. <br /> <br />Ms. Nancy Holekamp, ¢¢19 Willow Hill, Ladue, says she is fighting this expansion <br />because of the $35,000 she stands to lose in her property. For the record, Ms. <br />Holekamp stated that if Council approves the conditional use permit as it stands, <br />Council is knowingly and willingly creating damage to her property. She realizes that <br />they will not be able to stop this, because Council went through too many hoops to see <br />this approved. She pointed out the City Manager's statement that the project is <br />sensitive to neighbors and their property. She said that this was a gross <br />misinterpretation of the facts. In the study done on the southern setback, it was <br />concluded by Mr. Ollendorff that there is not significant damage to adjacent property. <br />The Plan Commission said that the construction would not constitute significant <br />damage. The Plan Commission also said that the building met the Zoning code, which if <br />true, why the need to change the zoning code. Changing the Zoning Code for one <br />building is impropriety. Another example of impropriety was holding a special meeting <br />before the May 18, 1998 regular council meeting, to discuss the fact that the <br />amendment was not about the Gatesworth. If it was not about the Gatesworth, why <br />were the owners in the audience that night. She also thought it improper that the <br />zoning attorney for University City had worked for the owners in the past, but could not <br />work for the DeI-Price neighborhood because of a conflict of interest, because she had <br />worked for the Gatesworth owners in the past. It is a litany of shameful and <br />underhanded behavior from the University City Council. Ms. Holekamp submitted an <br />appeal to the board of adjustments to the City Clerk at this time. <br /> <br />Ms. Wendy Katz, 8708 W. Kingsbury, asked about the minutes approved at the meeting <br />this evening, in particular, the May 2nd study meeting minutes. The City Clerk gave Ms. <br />Katz a copy of the May 2® study meeting minutes. The Mayor explained that the study <br />sessions are used for Council to discuss many topics and legislative direction in regards <br />to these topics. No votes are taken at these meetings. She asked if agenda item ¢¢7 <br />dealt with zoning, and if it dealt with the zoning amendment bill. Mayor Adams said that <br />it was an explanation of the bill. Ms. Katz said that there was delays in getting the Plan <br />Commission's minutes from March 25th, because they had not been approved, and Mr. <br />Wagner had asked the City Manager to get them to her. She asked that this kind of <br />situation be looked into, so it could be avoided in the future. For the record, she spent <br />three hours at the Library this afternoon and was looking for material that was important <br />to this issue and this happened to be a public record in the library archives. If she <br />would have seen it before 4:30 this afternoon, she would have been able to contact the <br />City about it. It does not make sense to vote on a plan that assumes the vacating of an <br /> <br /> <br />