CCMIN071382 - Laserfiche WebLink

201 The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers Brandes, Mercer, Mohr, Wood, and Mayor Butler NOES: None ABSENT: None Adoption of Ordinance No. 1042 amendin~ the Growth Management Program Ordinance (Ordinance No. 1023) to exempt small multi-family developments (Intro. 6-22-82~ 4-Aye~.~ 1-Absent) Mayor Butler stated that Ordinance No. 1042 was introduced on June 22, 1982, by a vote of 4-Ayes, 1-Absent, and that it was now in order to adopt the ordinance. It was moved by Councilmember Wood, and seconded by Councilmember Mercer, that Ordinance No. 1042, amending the Growth Management Program Ordinance to exempt small multi-family developments, be adopted. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers Brandes, Mercer, Mohr, Wood, and Mayor Butler NOES: None ABSENT: None SPECIAL REPORTS There were no special reports presented at this meeting. REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Actions Taken by the Board of Adjustment and Planning Commission at their meetin~ of 6-24-82 Mr. Harris presented his report (SR 82:236) dated June 25, 1982, regarding this matter for the information of the Council. No action was required or taken by Council on this item. REPORTS OF THE CITY MANAGER Report on Request for Annexation; 3683 Vineyard Avenue (north side of Vineyard Avenue west of Linden Way) Will and Gladys Heinrich Mr. Warnick presented his report (SR 82:251) dated July 1, 1982, regarding this matter. Councilmember Mercer questioned the need for this annexation. Mr. William Hirst, Attorney representing the applicants, stated it offers the city an opportunity continue to annex the unincorporated property in this area. He stated there is sewer and water in Vineyard Avenue which would be available to service this property. Considerable discussion ensued regarding the fact that this property was in the Remen Tract and the residents in the area have long indicated their opposition to being annexed to the city. Mr. Hirst requested a continuance of this item to give him time to organize his arguments for the annexation. Council agreed that a continuance would be in order. The Council felt this might be a logical annexation but that all neighbors should be notified before any action of any kind was taken. Councilmember Mohr felt this item should be handled in the normal manner and made a motion to bring back a resolution for annexation, at the next Council meet- ing. Councilmember Wood seconded the motion. After discussion, Councilmember Mohr withdrew her motion, and Councilmember Wood withdrew his second to the motion. 9. 7/13/82