Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES MAY 06, 2010 1 Commissioners Attending; City Staff and Others: Winston Dyer – Chairman Val Christensen – Community Development Director Ted Hill Thaine Robinson Natalie Powell - Compliance Officer Gil Shirley Jedd Walker Elaine McFerrin – P&Z Coordinator Dan Hanna Scott Ferguson Jake Rasmussen – I.T. Intern Chairman Dyer opened the meeting at 7:02 pm. Roll Call of Planning and Zoning Commissioners: Jedd Walker, Gil Shirley, Winston Dyer, Thaine Robinson, Ted Hill, Dan Hanna Richie Webb, Mary Ann Mounts, Nephi Allen and Josh Garner were excused. Minutes: 1. Planning and Zoning meeting - April 15, 2010 Dan Hanna motioned to approve the Planning & Zoning minutes of April 15, 2010. Thaine Robinson seconded the motion. None opposed. Motion carried. 2. Planning and Zoning work meeting – April 22, 2010 Thaine Robinson motioned to approve the Planning & Zoning minutes of April 22, 2010. Gil Shirley seconded the motion. None opposed. Motion carried. Public Hearings: Chairman Dyer explained the procedure that is followed for public hearings. The applicant or representative will present the proposal. The Commission may then ask the applicant and staff any clarifying questions. Public input will then be heard, followed by the staff evaluation. The Commission will then deliberate and come to a decision. 7:05 pm – Rezone – Wayne Robertson – 577 South 5th West – Medium Density Residential 1 (MDR1) to Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR2) Dan Hanna, 850 East 7th North, representing Wayne Robertson, presented the proposal. Mr. Robertson has entered into a tentative purchase agreement with the owner of the subject property, William Forsberg. It is contingent on approval of this rezone request, and eventually site plan approval. The property was shown on the overhead screen. It is on the corner of South 5th West and West 6th South. Mr. Robertson currently is finishing up the building of a 9-plex as part of Lincoln 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Phone: 208.359.3020 Fax: 208.359.3022 www.rexburg.org Planning & Zoning Minutes May 6, 2010 2 Townhomes, adjacent to the subject property. There will be a park to its east. There is room for additional development on the .70 acres of this rezone request. The current Medium Density Residential 1 zone would allow 3 units; however, there would be room for another 8 –plex if the rezone request is approved. The existing 8-plex then would need to have sufficient parking and landscaping to bring it up to code. The added development could be either two 4-plexes or one 8- plex of townhomes. West 6th South is now having roadwork done to accommodate all the building in this area going east toward the L.D.S. Temple .The subject property has not been very well maintained. This rezone would be an opportunity to allow the site to be fully developed and to eliminate an eyesore. Thaine Robinson asked the current zoning of the surrounding Lincoln Townhomes. The zoning is Medium Density Residential 1 (MDR1). The subject property is surrounded by MDR1. There is High Density Residential 1 further north, Medium Density Residential 1 to the south, High Density Residential 1 to the east, and High Density Residential 1 and Community Business Center to the west. Thaine Robinson said that this subject property would be the only MDR2 in that block. Dan Hanna stated that was correct. He said Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR2) would allow 24 units per acre, so on this parcel there could be a total of approximately 16 units. The current zoning would allow only 3 additional units. The property is currently zoned for 11 units; the requested zone change would allow 5 additional units. Chairman Dyer asked about the shared parking agreement with Lincoln Townhomes. Dan Hanna said they found that was not necessary. They will have room for sufficient parking on the north. The current 8-plex would also be brought into compliance regarding its parking spaces and landscaping. Chairman Dyer asked the schedule of the bridge being built across the canal. Val Christensen said the bridge to the east is part of a Local Improvement District (LID). Dan Larsen, who is involved in that issue, said the bridge will be completed by this fall. Dan Hanna recused himself; he presented the proposal and does not have direct interest in the Wayne Robertson Rezone, but he stated that he preferred to stay neutral. Chairman Dyer asked Val Christensen if staff had any comments to help the Commission understand this rezone proposal. Val Christensen said the applicant originally wanted to rezone to High Density Residential but staff suggested Medium Density Residential 2 based on what the lot can support and the surrounding areas. Chairman Dyer opened the public input portion of the hearing. In Favor: None Neutral: None Opposed: None Written Input: None Chairman Dyer closed the public input portion. He asked for the staff evaluation. 3 Val Christensen stated that City Engineer John Millar has given his approval for this rezone request. This request is in conformance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. No serious potential transportation problems were found. There will be a new road that will connect all the way up through to 2nd West from 6th South, which should be completed this year. The planned townhomes would be in harmony with what already exists near the subject property. Staff feels this rezone request will clean up the area and make it attractive. Chairman Dyer clarified that this rezone request is a land use proposal and not a development proposal. Val Christensen said the existing building has landscape and parking issues that will need to be addressed, as was stated in his staff report. Dan Hanna clarified for Gil Shirley that the plan is to have one additional 8-plex or two 4-plexes. Currently there is one 8-plex of townhomes on the property - this 8-plex building will remain there. Ted Hill felt the rezone was good for the area and would fit in well. There was consensus of the Commission. Chairman Dyer said the request is consistent with the plan to densify closer to the University. The City is opening up a new transportation corridor right to the University to include 10-foot sidewalks for pedestrian traffic. Chairman Dyer stated the question before the Commission is shall a change in zoning from Medium Density Residential 1 (MDR) to Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR2) be recommended for approval or not? It is a land use decision. It would allow 16 units with MDR2 rather than 11 units with current zoning of MDR1. Thaine Robinson asked about the 2 conditions stated in the staff report regarding landscaping and parking issues for the existing 8-plex and if they are appropriate with the zone change or if they would be addressed at the time of development (building permit). Chairman Dyer said technically these two issues would be addressed at the time of development unless the Commission had neighborhood impact concerns. Jedd Walker motioned to recommend to City Council approval of a zone change from Medium Density Residential 1(MDR1) to Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR2) for the property located at 577 South 5th West (Wayne Robertson Rezone). Gil Shirley seconded the motion. None opposed. Motion carried. Dan Hanna returned to his seat on the Commission. 7:20 pm – Rezone – Kartchner Homes – approximately at 5th South (west of Willowbrook Subdivision off South 12th West) Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to Low Density Residential 3 (LDR3) Dan Larsen, 231 South 300 East, Logan, Utah, and representing applicant Troy Kartchner, presented the proposal. They came before the Commission late last year to request a rezone from Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to Low Density Residential 3 (LDR3) for property adjacent to tonight’s rezone proposal. The L.D.S. Church bought that piece of property. He is requesting the rezoning just to the west of the planned church location and going north. The size of the rezone 4 would be 23.95 acres. There are plans for 5th South coming through. The rezone would be to do twin homes to the west of the Kim Weimer property (located at the northeast corner of subject parcel). He pointed out the area of the proposed rezone on the vicinity map on the overhead screen. Everything south of the planned new road would be twin homes. The north area has not been platted. The original Planned Unit Development (PUD) had been all Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2). Val Christensen explained the PUD was done a couple years ago. The density and park space was calculated as part of the PUD master plan. Chairman Dyer asked why Low Density Residential 3 (LDR3) is needed for twin homes. Dan Larsen said they would like LDR3 because of the affordability. The lots will be very small. Val Christensen said this rezone request would allow an additional 34 units (not based on twin homes and taking 20 percent out for roads) for the project. Dan Larsen said they do not yet have a project planned for the entire 23.95 acres of this requested rezone proposal. Ted Hill asked the units per acre. Val Christensen said there could be 4.35 units per acre. The total number of twin homes would be about 104.5. A conditional use permit would be necessary to build twin homes. Chairman Dyer said the rezone request is a land use decision, but they are also trying to determine the potential impact to the neighborhood. Thaine Robinson said there is Low Density Residential 3 zoning all over town. None of it has moved forward toward building. He asked when they would start developing the property. Dan Larsen said they would like to do this project this year. It has taken them awhile to get off the ground at times. He pointed out that they have never used all the density that has been approved for past projects. With this PUD, they are way below what they could have done in density. He feels that LDR3 zoning would make this project work. Val Christensen stated that where the similar rezone of adjacent property had been done before, and that land was then purchased by the L.D.S. Church for a BYU-I stake center, he felt it was worthwhile for the applicant to pursue this rezone. Chairman Dyer opened the public input portion of the hearing. In Favor: None Neutral: None Opposed: Steve Kimpel, 2313 West 440 South. He lives just north of the subject property and west of the Kim Weimer property. If the zone is changed from Low Density Residential 2 to Low Density Residential 3 there may be more people and more houses. It will open the door. Why do this change? What is the impact going to be? How are the people that already live there going to benefit from this change? Mr. Kimpel also wanted clarification of where a new road is supposed to go. He thinks it will be to the east of his property. He feels it is a bad idea to put a road through someone’s 5 existing property. He asked the Commissioners to take into consideration how they would feel if they lived there. Would they want to see a high density living situation? (Chairman Dyer clarified that the Commission cannot get into question/and answer discussion at this part of the hearing – they can only take public input). Iris Hoglund, 2179 West 440 South. She understands they are planning to put a road through their property. How can they do that? (Chairman Dyer clarified that the road issue is not a part of this proposal, but is something being looked at on a future map). She stated she is definitely opposed to the zone change. The residents have 5-acre lots, and someone wants to come here in their back yard and make such small lots on 23 acres. Paul Scholes, 1118 Coyote Willow Way. His opposition is the lack of detail that the developers have for this property. When he purchased his property, he knew what was to be there on the Planned Unit Development. For the community, keep this area rural and less dense. Chandra Scholes, 1118 Coyote Willow Way. She objects to increasing the numbers so significantly in that one little spot that does go up to other property where the residents have more space and people desire to live in the country. She realizes that the City is growing. There are many other areas of higher density in the City. As a new realtor, she has seen many of these properties for sale. To pack this development into one little spot in a master plan that she thought was a great plan because of its variety of housing that was to be available, is not a good idea. This is not a demand that the City cannot already provide. It would be a significant density increase to this country area. She objects to the rezone. Kathy Parson, 298 South 12th West. She stated it was said tonight that with the new church coming, they would need more people. The area is already bursting at the seams. She does not think they need it anymore dense than it is now. It is a nice community. She is opposed to the rezone. Rebuttal: Dan Larsen addressed a couple of mentioned concerns. The future roadways are more for connectivity. They do not want to put a road through it; the road is the City’s plan. Yes - there are other areas of the City, but they are just replacing what land the church purchased to the east of this proposal that had been rezoned to Low Density Residential 3 (LDR3) several months ago. Regarding 12th West, in their meetings with staff, the thought is that street will be a major collector and arterial road. Large residential lots along an arterial road are not often seen in other cities across the nation. It is where density usually is put. There is the high school and the elementary school. Density makes sense. It makes sense instead of having to travel across town. The large church will serve many. It makes sense to bring the people to the amenities they are going to use. Written Input: None Chairman Dyer closed public input for this hearing. He asked for the staff evaluation. Val Christensen said the rezone request is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The City Engineer did indicate his approval. The subject area is directly west of the planned L.D.S. Stake Center. The applicant is asking for more LDR3 than what they are replacing; it does butt up to other properties that are zoned Rural Residential 2. The rezone request is of larger acreage this time. It would be up to the Commission to determine its impact on the surrounding residents and the community at large. Chairman Dyer said that the question before the Commission is, shall this subject property (23.95 acres) be rezoned from Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to Low Density Residential 3 (LDR3)? 6 The deliberation before them is: with the public input and the code standards, what kind of impact would this rezone have? Is it an appropriate land use for this location? Jedd Walker stated by right there could be 104 single family homes in the LDR2 zone and 138 single family homes if the zoning were LDR3 – an increase of 34 units. Under LDR2 if a conditional use permit were granted there could be 166 units/ or 83 twin home structures; under LDR3 if a conditional use permit were granted, there could be 208 units/ or 104 twin home structures - ( if all of the subject 24 acres were built out). Dan Hanna said impact is relative to traffic conditions. . Thaine Robinson said he was a bit uncomfortable with this proposal. LDR3 has not worked in other areas of town. To move it this far away from the commerce center and other heavily residential areas of town, is like putting people right next door to each other out in the country and several miles from the City. It does not fit here. He does not feel it is a good buffer up against Rural Residential 1 (properties on the north). When the previous rezone for LDR2 to LDR3 was approved, that rezone location was away from the Rural Residential 1 properties to the north and down along the road where the Church will now be. Another concern is traffic. Residents on the west side of the freeway go to the east side of the freeway to work or shop, etc. To add that much more density is problematic. The current residents of this area want to keep a residential feel of bigger lot size. Even the current LDR2 zoning allows more density. Other LDR3 areas in Rexburg were looked at. Chairman Dyer stated he was torn. A big church is coming to the area they are discussing; it will serve BYU-I. The neighboring properties are zoned Rural Residential 1; the residents want to preserve that. He hears their concerns. He agrees with Mr. Robinson. If there is going to be densification, bring it up against roadways or other natural buffers and not the residential homes. Jedd Walker wondered if they could rezone just part of the request. Dan Hanna feels the size of the area they are requesting to be rezoned to LDR3 is bigger than it needs to be. He too would consider a smaller number of acres for this rezone, a portion of it. Ted Hill said if they were to take the LDR3 zoning straight west back behind the planned church and away from the existing residential properties to the north that may solve some issues. Leave the zoning to the north as it currently is. There was a strong consensus for this idea. Scott Ferguson arrived at 8:15 pm. Dan Hanna said there is the issue of affordability. Chairman Dyer asked if this location was the right place to have LDR3. Ted Hill said that the location is as good as anywhere in town, but he is troubled by its size and its impact on the neighbors, who have expressed concerns tonight. He reiterated that if the area running east to west directly west adjacent to the planned church could be the specified area to be rezoned to LDR3, it could temper the affect on the neighbors and would help address their concerns. 7 Chairman Dyer asked Dan Larsen if this rezone request were specified as such if that would be acceptable. Dan Larsen said he would need to check further, but he feels they would rather see that than a “no”. The Commissioners discussed tabling the rezone. Jedd Walker said he is not necessarily concerned about the size of the proposal, but he is concerned about a buffer to the surrounding residential 5-acre lots. There should be a transition. Ted Hill said if they recommend approval of the rezone as he suggested, it would be one step further ahead if the developer accepts it than if they tabled the request. It is for the developer to accept or not. Jedd Walker motioned to recommend approval to City Council for a portion of the Kartchner Homes Rezone request at approximately 5th South (West of Willowbrook Subdivision off South 12th West) – specifically the portion south of the north line of the planned L.D.S Church and extended west - to be rezoned from Low Density Residential Two (LDR2) to Low Density Residential Three (LDR3), which would be approximately 13.5 acres rezoned to LDR3 rather than the requested 23.95 acres. Ted Hill seconded the motion. Ted Hill stated in regard to 12th west traffic that the traffic issue is brought up every time the subject properties are near it– it does not need to be part of each discussion. Chairman Dyer said that 12th West is going to be built to accommodate the growth. Those in Favor Those Opposed Ted Hill Winston Dyer Thaine Robinson Gil Shirley Jedd Walker Dan Hanna Scott Ferguson abstained due to not being present for the public input portion of this hearing. Motion carried. Chairman Dyer asked Dan Larsen to let Val Christensen know their decision. He clarified to Dan Larsen that they have the right to accept or appeal tonight’s decision directly to City Council. Unfinished/Old Business: None New Business: None Compliance: None Non controversial Items Added to the Agenda: 1. Jayson Cotter – Trent Birch project - 357 and 371 West 4th South Jayson Cotter, Eagle, Idaho, on behalf of applicant Trent Birch, presented the issue of having an offsite parking lot for this project. They have been trying to determine how they can get what was approved on this site. They have run into a few setbacks. They have run into difficulty with the parking situation. The property is in the Pedestrian Emphasis Zone 2 (PEZ 2). The code specifies .6 stalls per student. They are asking for the ability to 8 accommodate parking stalls on site and off site - parking a block or so away. They have met with the University, who were in favor of the applicant exploring these options. This is probably the only way for them to make the project work. Originally, the design included a podium that was underneath the building for the planned underground parking. The podium design was 57,000 square feet; it will not work. Tonight they would like feedback on which way to go. If their request is reasonable they would like to pursue it. If it is not a reasonable request, they need to know so they can plan accordingly. Chairman Dyer asked what they have done with the unit size. Are they the same size and number? Mr. Cotter said they took the approved footprint and looked at what could fit. It is strictly a question of parking. The size of the units would be the same. Currently there are about 125 parking stalls on site, with 462 beds. Chairman Dyer said the .6 figure for parking is based on numerous surveys that the University conducted indicating that there is an average of .62 vehicles per student. They applied it to the PEZ2 zone because they saw that as what the demand would be and in relation to being market driven. Mr. Cotter said they would like to have a lot adjacent to the project for parking, but there is not enough room available. They have identified two locations they would like to look into, but they do not want to move forward until they have gotten input. They would do the parking lot separately from having one in conjunction with the University. Scott Ferguson asked if it was unrealistic to adjust the size of the project to fit the lot. Jayson Cotter said it is economic issue. If they were to shrink to fit, it would not be economically viable. Chairman Dyer clarified that this issue is not an application but a “what if”, exploratory discussion. Val Christensen suggested that one thing the Commissioners may want to look at is the location – there are some developments in PEZ1 that are similar in distance to the main part of campus. Mr. Cotter clarified that the 125 parking spaces is just surface parking only. They have found that underground parking cannot be large enough to accommodate what is needed. By the time support columns would be in place, there would not be sufficient room. It was stated that before the .6 standard, the ratio was one to one (one student to one parking space). Ted Hill asked if there is another development in Rexburg that has parking away from its project. There is not. This project would be the first. Dan Hanna said offsite parking does not seem unrealistic. The question would be how close the parking would need to be to the development. This project is close or closer to the campus than some of the facilities that are in PEZ1. Jedd Walker asked the process to get the area changed to PEZ1. Val Christensen said there is a clause stating that boundary changes cannot be done for 5 years. Chairman Dyer said they could consider changing conditions. The PEZ2 zone is defined. However, there was a lot of hard work put into the current PEZ document to make it as it is now. How are they going to (or are they going to) take every proposal that comes before them and negotiate on it? 9 Jedd Walker asked Mr. Cotter the location of the parcels they are looking at to accommodate the necessary parking. Jayson Cotter said the property is located on the opposite side of West 4th South about a half block away. Chairman Dyer said they are interpreting this issue before them in two ways: 1. A future change in the PEZ zone that would allow some variation, which is not what the developers are really asking for, or 2. Have offsite parking meet the requirements, which is what the developers would like. Jayson Cotter said that was correct. He showed them a design drawing of the project. Ted Hill said he is really struggling with offsite parking. Thaine Robinson asked, in lieu of not having the planned underground parking, is above ground multilevel parking too expensive? Jayson Cotter said they have evaluated that, but it would not work space- wise. The Commissioners expressed concern with lots of people crossing West 4th South to get to their cars. Chairman Dyer said the Commission is struggling. It does not appear that there would be support for offsite parking Dan Hanna said he could see offsite parking as a viable option with the right conditions. Jayson Cotter asked if it was viable to cut down the parking needed by having “no parking” contracts. Chairman Dyer said it would need to be down to 60 percent and would be indirectly stretching the boundaries. Jedd Walker said one of the main issues he sees is if offsite parking is allowed for developments outside of PEZ1, they start to undermine what they are trying to achieve in PEZ 1. Val Christensen commented that if this specified property was not in the PEZ Zone, would they consider offsite parking for a project? Jedd Walker said the other problem he sees with offsite parking is that in reality the students are going to park on the street. Ted Hill felt if they start allowing offsite parking, they will be creating problems. Dan Hanna said the PEZ zone is for pedestrian enhancement. Offsite parking would encourage pedestrian activity. Chairman Dyer said in his opinion they looked carefully at what would work best for the community. They try to facilitate all they can for the developer. He reiterated they are considering 2 questions; 1. Is there room for or a need to change perimeters in PEZ2? 2. Would the Commissioners consider allowing offsite parking, in this case in PEZ2? There was more discussion. 10 Chairman Dyer said he struggles with the fact that this is a single project they are looking at. Dan Hanna said he has no problem with the perimeters, with some flexibility (such as offsite). It is a market decision the developer has to make. Val Christensen said that his concern at the time the PEZ zone was laid out was with why PEZ Zone 1 did not go farther to the west. He struggled with the locations and how it was done. Chairman Dyer said their hope was to see PEZ1 development. They did not want things too spread out. Thaine Robinson struggles with the size of this building on the lot and that the project would be the first one with offsite parking in PEZ2. Chairman Dyer thought that there was not enough consensus from the Commission on these 2 issues (offsite parking, changing perimeters). They are not ready. The problem may be one of timing. Dan Hanna asked that a vote be taken regarding offsite parking being viable. The Commission took a vote on the following: 1. Those willing to consider offsite parking within 2 blocks in PEZ2 – None within 1 block(600 feet) - three Commissioners out of seven within half block – four Commissioners out of seven 2. Those willing to consider changing perimeter of PEZ2 - None Chairman Dyer reiterated there is not a lot of support from the Commission. Val Christensen said that he struggles with the boundaries around the campus. Parts of PEZ 1 are as far away from campus as this subject project. Scott Ferguson commented that the center of the University campus is going to eventually become the Manwaring Center. Could there be a transition area for PEZ overlay? Ted Hill said this issue may be seen as possible sometime in the future. They need to see if there is development in these areas and see the number of developers that come before them requesting changes or variances. If that happens, then that is the time down the road to look at those boundaries, but not at this point. Lots of time and effort went into the PEZ Zone ordinance together. To start to change things with this first possible proposal, is just not the time. Jedd Walker brought up the possibility of a variance to the 200-foot parking distance necessary for such development. Chairman Dyer said there is a process for variances. They are not given often. Val Christensen said a variance is required to show a hardship (geological feature, etc). Dan Hanna agreed with Jedd Miller on the 200-foot parking issue. He stated that West 4th South is not a safe crossing, but they do have pedestrians crossing it at different times during the day. It needs to be made safe. Chairman Dyer commented that a Hawk signal may be costly. Chairman Dyer asked Val Christensen if the Commission could direct the issue to City Council. 11 Val Christensen said that was an option. He feels that until vacant land has been filled, they probably will not see developers tearing down houses to rebuild. He feels this project in its location has a lot of merit, if it can be made to work. Thaine Robinson agreed, but this would set precedence. Jayson Cotter thanked the Commission and will work with Val Christensen on the possibility of going to City Council. The Commission thanked Jayson Cotter. 2. Comprehensive Plan Map – In regard to the April 22nd P&Z Comprehensive Plan map work meeting, Chairman Dyer said they want to continue to move forward on this issue. Val Christensen gave out a map of proposed changes to the Comprehensive Plan map that were suggested by the Commissioners at the work meeting and a corresponding number sheet for the areas of the map that they wished to be changed. He did not do the physical changes to the map. He asked the Commissioners to go over this map, and it will be addressed at a future meeting. Chairman Dyer clarified that the numbers on the map correspond to the Comprehensive Plan Map (Preferred Land Use) designation suggested changes. 3. Design Review Committee meeting – report This week a Design Review Committee meeting was held for the Summerfield L.D.S. Church #2 (8 ward stake center). Thaine Robinson said it was one of the conditions of this applicant’s conditional use permit to have the project come to design review. They met under the new format for Design Review meetings (P&Z Commissioner, Councilman, Professional, along with staff). Those at the meeting were Brad Egbert, Thaine Robinson, Brett Johnson, Scott Nielson. The issue was the very long roof line. The applicant/ architect, Scott Nielson of NBW Architects, agreed very willingly to take the 3 planned dormers and raise them in height in order to break up the roof line. Chairman Dyer expressed two concerns about the new format of attendees: 1. In order for the meeting to be effective and to emphasize the City’s perspective in the design proposal, the P&Z Commissioner representative should lead and guide the meeting, clarify its purpose and what they are trying to accomplish, and keep the meeting focused. 2. The new pool of attendees may have no knowledge of Development Code 1026 standards and what can and cannot be done. Val Christensen said a Design Review Committee meeting is a give and take situation. They meet if there is an issue outside the box. They do not just give away – they get something in return. A compromise may be made. The committee is willing to look at possibilities. It is key for the Planning & Zoning member to explain what they are trying to do at the beginning of the meeting. Chairman Dyer said the Commissioners should never lose sight that they are here to represent and do the very best they can for the community. Report on Projects: None Tabled Requests: None Building Permit Application Report: None Heads Up: May 20 – Rezone –MDR1 to MDR2 – 248 West 3rd South and 249 South 3rd West The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 pm.