CC Min 1997-11-17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

City Attorney Sehrieker said, "This is on the introduction. The adoption of the ordinance will require six affirmative votes" at a subsequent meeting. A simple majority tonight is all that's required. Couneilman Claire said, "My problem with the ordinance is looking at the Specific Plan. That Specific Plan, the General Plan, has been there forever. I would not have a problem with requesting this ordinance if in fact our intent was to look at other mitigation measures, construction of the sidewalks, evaluation of cross street traffic, evaluation of safety devices at those cross streets, and review it from that point of view. I could not support your motion if it were to look at the Specific Plan and rezoning, because I think that would be inappropriate, and I think that would open us for an immediate lawsuit, and I think we could lose it. And that's why I am voting against it." Couneilman Hartnett said, "I expect the motion is going to pass, but I am going to vote against it. But I would indicate that it is important, as Mr. Schricker stated, that whatever we do we need to do quickly. And certainly I think the developer should know that if something isn't worked out in a positive way in a short period of time, a 4-3 vote tonight introducing the ordinance does not mean that there won't be at least six votes on the moratorium when that actually has to be voted on." Councilman Ira said, "If the intent here is to try to get the concessions from the developer, and try to get as much here as possible, why don't we here from the developer. If we pass the motion it appears that we would be incurring additional costs for both ourselves and the developer. So, is there a possibility of listening to the developer first and seeing what he has to recommend and to offer, and put on the table before we vote." Mayor Howard said, "When we discussed the moratorium... my understanding was that it would be in line to vote for a moratorium if you felt there was a true health and safety issue in relation to the Project. I could be proven wrong, but when I know that traffic will be going west to east primarily in the morning, when those children are going to school, and there are no sidewalks and I know for a fact that they jump up and down off the curbs because there is no real sidewalk to walk on, and they are cutting across the street at all angles.... Granted that is not the developers fault. But it becomes for me a real health and safety issue when you are going to be having an increase in traffic suddenly coming into an area that is not prepared to handle the children that are there now. So I consider that a real problem and would like to see that addressed. And I feel that a moratorium would be in order to discuss these very issues, not just looking at the Specific Plan, but the hazard of having our children trying to get to school when they don't have adequate sidewalks, and the traffic will be primarily be going right in that direction right where they are walking." Mayor Howard asked Max Keech if there was anything he wanted to add at this point. He indicated no. A short discussion ensued regarding which motion to consider first. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTE BOOK NO. 56 NOVEMBER 17,1997 MINUTES Page No. 068 PAGE 37