Item 4: Ordinance Concerning Noise Disturbances

Home Browse Search

Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to initiate amendment of the Metro Plan, the Jefferson-Far West RefmementPlan and the Land Use Code to limit the subject area to lo\v-density Residential development. In addition, to direct the City Manager to make this task priority # 1 on the Planning Commission \vork plan and pull resources from the other high priority \vork program items to accomplish this as quickly as possible ,,,iilin the parameters of the amendment process. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Pape, moved to amend the motion by deleting the sec- ond sentence of the motion entirely and re\vording the end of the first sentence as follows: "Move to initiate anlendment of the Metro Plan, the Jefferson-Far West Refinement Plan and tbe Land Use Code to limit the subject area to 101,,"1 density residential development low- to 111edtum-density residential as described in the re- ~finement plan. In adaition, to direct the Cif)Y Manager to mal{e thistasl( priority #1 00. the. PlatmingCoIllmission\vork plan ana pull. resources from the otber high pri orit)' viork program itell113 toaeoomplish this as quickly as possible ,;vithin thepa rwn.eters of the amendment precess. Mr. Kelly explained that he was not interested in allowing upzonings to 28 units per acre in the area but was interested in allo\ving selective increased density under site revie\v and as described in the refinement plan to a middle ground above 10 units per acre. He deleted the second sentence because the work plan bas been developed in great detail and opportunity siting \vas identified as a high priority. He said there\vere numerous tasks in the \vork plan on \vrnch the council ,vould expect to see progress. Referring to statements that the neighborhood \\ras very dense, he noted that the refmement plan stated tbat ID.Area .15 the average lot size \vas 8,200 square feet, \vmen \vas a density of five units per acre. Ms. Bettmanreminded the council that the refinement plan ,vas developed in 1983. She said she \vould not support the amendment because it increased density \vithout the infill standards and cited a section of the refinement plan relating to encouraging and increasing residential density \vhile maintaining the character of the neighborhood. She said a commitment by the City to rehabilitate existing housing stock through public and private investment had not occurred. She said the motion \vould accomplish half of the opportunity siting strategy to increase density as high as possible in certain appropriate sites and at the same time do~nzoning and preserving existing residential neighborhoods. Mr. Kelly revised the language of his motion to amend. as foUo\vs: Move to initiate amendment of the Metro Plan, the Jefferson-Far West Refinenlent Plan and the Land Use Code to.limitthe subject area to IOYl'vdensity residential developulcnt.low- to mediun2-densifJ.J residential as described in the refinement plan to be consistent with the policies of the refinement plan "for Area 15. Mr. Pape, as thesecond~ ac- cepted the revised language. Ms. Jerome clarified that the motion \vould require a tex.t amendment to the Metro Plan, not just a diagram amendment, and did not address the neighborhood's concern about interpretation of the. meaning oflo"v to medium density as the refinement plan policy itself \vas the issue. Mr. Kelly further clarified his at11endment as follows: Move to initiate amendment of the Metro Plan, the Jefferson-Far West Refinement Plan and the Land Use Code to linlit the subject area to lo~.vdensity residential de"-ytelopment low- to medium- density residential as described in therefirzement plan to be . consistent with the policies qf the re.linement .plan .for Area 15 and lvitlt maximum densities higher MINUTES-City Council Work Session August 16, 2006 Page 6