Laserfiche WebLink
Public Hearing <br />1/9/95 <br />Page Two <br />Mrs. Cinco said Ordinance Review is studying, through Bernie Samac, a new ordinance <br />dealing with this kind of criteria. She believes the purpose of this meeting, as a Public <br />Hearing, is to determine whether or not to get this ordinance, as is, on the May 2nd <br />ballot. If there will be changes, it is her understanding it would not be on the ballot <br />until November. <br />Mr. Samac said this ordinance, in particular, and what we are addressing in it, is strictly <br />the overall height of a building and how you derive it. He thinks we should not try to <br />alter this ordinance in any event at this particular time, but to go ahead and pass it and <br />get it on the ballot. The other issues that were just raised fall under other sections of the <br />code; he believes they should be addressed separately. There is an Ordinance Review <br />Meeting scheduled for tomorrow evening. <br />Mayor Rinker said one of their concerns they had when this came up before, was if we <br />make too much noise about this that people may take advantage of the window of time. <br />We would be hard pressed to enforce this right now with its not having been put to a <br />ballot vote. Mayor Rinker asked if Mr. Samac was saying there is no reason to change <br />this. Any other additions would not be incompatible with it; we can add other things <br />that will meet the concerns that Mr. Flynn has. The question he has for everyone is <br />does it make sense to put this one on the May ballot. The question is, can we get the <br />other one on the May ballot. <br />Mrs. Cinco said we would not have time. T'he other one would have to wait until the <br />November ballot. Mr. Fixler asked Mr. Hanculak if public hearings are typically held between the second <br />and third reads. He asked if we are technically on our second read and will we still <br />have an opportunity on the third read to amend. <br />Mr. Hanculak said three reads are three reads; plus it was passed. <br />1VIr. Fixler said they could either go forward or they could rescind it. <br />Mr. Flynn asked if it had been referred to P&Z. <br />Miss Heath said yes; she showed Councilman Flynn the minutes of the Apri121,1994, <br />P&Z meeting where Ordinance No. 94-20 was discussed. <br />Mr. Fixler asked Mr. Flynn if he wanted to go forward with this one and have a follow- <br />up ordinance later on.