Laserfiche WebLink
Motion: <br /> Member Mulder moved, seconded by Member Rhody to table <br />Proposal #3. <br />MemberKlausing asked why table the issue when denial would also be <br />effective. He would vote against the motion to table in order to close the <br />issue. A task force may cause more problems than it resolved. Member <br />Wilke agreed. <br />The motion was withdrawn. <br />Motion: <br /> Member Wilke moved, seconded by Member Cunningham, to <br />deny Proposal #3 to designate all lots facing Cleveland from County Road <br />D south to 3060 N. Cleveland Avenue from Low Density Residential to <br />Business. <br />On a roll call vote: <br />Ayes: 7, Klausing, Olson, Mulder, Cunningham, Harms, Rhody,Wilke <br />Nays: 0 <br />Motion carried 7-0. <br />Motion: <br /> Member Mulder moved, seconded by Member Cunningham, to <br />recommend that the Council consider the formation of a task force for the <br />larger neighborhood (not just Cleveland Avenue). <br />MemberMulder stated that the neighborhood should prepare a vision. <br />MemberRhody noted that the strip along Cleveland is potentially a <br />transition zone. He felt the Commission and the neighborhood should <br />provide direction regarding the transitional zone now rather than reacting <br />to another proposal. <br />Member Olson stated that the James Addition was reacting to a new <br />development. In this case (Cleveland Avenue) there is no development to <br />react to. <br />MemberWilke stated the timing is not right for a task force. <br />Member Cunningham stated that a task force should examine quality of <br />life as well as development potential and real estate value. The <br />neighbors should look out for what the future holds for them. <br />Chair Harms asked that the neighbors be notified of Council deliberation <br />on the need for a task force. <br />Member Cunningham asked if boundaries were necessary? (No, to be left <br />to the City Council). <br />7 <br />