COUNCILMAN HULTQUIST: It’s not four (4); it’s number five (5) in the staff
report.
COUNCILMAN BECKER: Which thing are you on?
COUNCIL MEMBER PELOT: Yes, please
COUNCILMAN HULTQUIST: Staff report, 12d staff report; it’s page 3 of 4, under
Recommendation . . . If you look at number 5, “street tree planting requirements for all districts
should be changed to the following: a. One tree (min. 2 “ caliper) is required for every 5
parking spaces, to be planted in required islands or medians (b) Tree required for surface parking
. . .,” trees required for surface parking, I think that should say, …. “may be counted against the
minimum 8 trees (minimum 2 “ caliper) per acre open space.” I do not want to delete that
amendment. I want to include that amendment in the motion.
COUNCIL MEMBER PELOT: Number 5, correct?
COUNCILMAN HULTQUIST: Yes, number 5 in the Staff report. The other item
would be on the road . . . Number 1 under Recommendation, “The Regulating Plan should be
changed by adding language that indicates that the actual location and configuration of new
streets shown as “flexible road alignment” will be determined at the time of redevelopment of
the property.” I want to include that in.
The other three amendments, I want to remove, and this is my amendment of the
amended version. Going back to the original . . . the original ordinance as it came out of the
process and the oversight committee’s input. In other words, we would remove number 2 in the
that section under recommendation, “The minimum width of the River Buffer Setback in the
SW4 and SW 7 districts should be changed from 70 feet to 60 feet.” Remove that amendment so
that it stays at 70.
Number 3 - It says, “The maximum building height in the SW7 district should be
changed from 50 feet and 4 story maximum plus an additional 1 story maximum with 10 feet
setback to 100 feet and 9 story maximum plus an additional 2 story maximum with 10 feet wall
setbacks.” That is the amendment that MPC approved and my amendment would remove that
amendment. So, we’d go back to the original language on that, which would be 50 feet and 4
stories, plus an additional 1 story maximum, with 10-foot setback.
And, the other part of my amendment would be to delete number 4; remove number 4
amendment, which says, “The Maximum Building Height in the SW4 (District) should be
changed from 50 feet and 4 story maximum plus an additional 1 story maximum with 10 foot
setback to 70 feet and 6 story maximum plus an additional 2 story maximum with 10 foot wall
setbacks.” By amendment back, it would change it to read, “The maximum building height in the
SW4 should be changed from 50 ….,” no, “will be 50 feet and a 4 story maximum, plus an
additional 1 story maximum with 10-foot setback.” That’s the original language and it would be
amended back to that.
COUNCILMAN BECKER: Second
MAYOR HASLAM: Just to put that in plain . . . just so everybody understands, talking
about … what we’re doing . . . What the motion to amend is, is to take back the changes that
MPC made in the river buffer setback and in building heights and setbacks in SW7 and building
heights and setbacks in SW4, to leave in the tree planting requirement changes, and the language
relative to the flexible road alignment. So, everybody’s straight with where we are.
MAYOR HASLAM: So, the question before Council is, do you want to amend your
rules to hear all 8 of those speakers and ask them to be short and to the point and not repeat each
other, or would you like to…..
COUNCILMEMBER HULTQUIST: So moved.
COUNCILMEMBER RODDY: Second.
MAYOR HASLAM: Okay, all those in favor of changing the rules to allow all eight to
speak, and we will ask them to keep time in mind…..Vice-Mayor Brown.
Vice-Mayor Brown and Mayor Haslam made additional comments.
MAYOR HASLAM: All in favor, “Aye.” Opposed, “No.” Okay, thank you very
much. (Vote was unanimous in favor of motion). Amendment #1 was adopted.