Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council passes parking ordinance, advances zoning and adds stop-sign locations to code
Summary
Council approved a parking- and a zoning-related set of ordinances: final passage of a parking regulation (Chapter 69) passed 6-1; second reading of a zoning change for the Steve G project (to R3) passed 7-0; first reading to add stop-sign locations (Chapter 65) passed but a motion to suspend rules for final passage failed, so second reading scheduled.
The council took several land-use and traffic-code actions on April 13.
Parking ordinance: Council completed the third and final reading of an amendment to Chapter 69 concerning parking regulations affecting the 200 block of Second Street NE (near the old library). Members discussed whether to retain a handicap space and proceeded to a roll-call vote; the ordinance passed 6-1 (O'Laughlin voted no).
Zoning — Steve G project: Council conducted the second reading of an amendment to Chapter 170 to change zoning associated with the Steve G project to R3 (the first reading had occurred March 23). The second reading passed on a roll-call vote, 7-0. No motion to suspend the statutory rule for final passage was made at this meeting.
Stop-sign code additions (Chapter 65): Council introduced a first reading to amend Chapter 65 to list specific stop-sign locations for streets in a recently completed subdivision (Cardinal Court & Spruce, Goldfinch Court & Spruce, Bluebird Court & Sixth Avenue, Cedar Drive & Bluebird Court). The first reading passed 7-0. A subsequent motion to suspend the statutory rule for final passage was put to a roll-call vote and failed (Appleby and Hannah voted no; the motion did not secure the required six votes), therefore the second reading was scheduled for April 27/April 27/April 27 (dates in packet noted).
All three items were introduced or advanced as part of the city's regular ordinance process; the meeting record shows the votes and scheduling outcomes but limited additional debate beyond clarifying questions about handicap markings and whether the post office uses the handicap space in the parking-item discussion.
