Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Minutes - July 5, 2017.pdf 1 July 5, 2017 Mayor Jerry Merrill Council Members: Christopher Mann Jordan Busby Donna Benfield Tisha Flora Brad Wolfe Sally Smith City Staff: Stephen Zollinger – City Attorney Matt Nielson – Finance Officer Keith Davidson – Public Works Director Val Christensen – Community Development Director Scott Johnson – Economic Development Director Blair Kay – City Clerk 6:30 P.M. City Hall Council Member Benfield led the pledge. Police Chief Turman said the prayer. Roll Call of Council Members: Attending: Council Member Flora, Council Member Benfield, Council Member Mann, Council Member Busby and Mayor Merrill. Council President Smith and Council Member Wolfe asked to be excused. Council Member Mann indicated Mayor Merrill is running late to the meeting and asked him to cover the meeting until he arrives. Mayor Merrill arrived at 6:43 Public Comment: not scheduled on the agenda (limit 3 minutes); issues may be considered for discussion on a future agenda. Please keep comments on point and respectful. Presentations: None Staff Reports: A. Finance: Financial Reports- Matt Nielson 1. Review the Utility Rate Increases and set public hearing for August 2nd Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the power point of the utility rate increases on the overhead screen. They will meet with the City of Sugar City and Teton City on Monday to review their rate increase with them. He reviewed the sewer increase for the three cities first. The fixed base fee for sewer went up from $13.43 to $14.40 per 1000 gallons, which calulates to about an 8% increase. Sugar City and Teton’s sewer increase went up by 6.67% and Rexburg’s went up by 11.94%. Sugar City and Teton are billed per volume for what they use. Finance Officer Nielson said the sewer costs are divided into five different categorizes, some of the categorizes are not assessed to Sugar City and Teton. The capital expenses category is only billed to Rexburg because Sugar City paid a lump sum for capacity so they paid for the capital treatment costs at the beginning. 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Phone: 208.359.3020 x2313 Fax: 208.359.3022 blairk@rexburg.org www.rexburg.org City Council Minutes July 5, 2017 2 Finance Officer Nielson reviewed some of the reasons for the increase. Personnel was the main driver, then operations and depreciation. Council Member Busby asked about the cost Sugar City prepaid for capacity and if they continue to grow would the capacity they purchased be enough. Finance Officer Nielson explained Sugar City has sufficent capacity. He also charges them depreciation because things do wear down. Finance Officer Nielson explained the cost increase for water. Staff’s recommenation is to not take the full increase at once; it can be divided into two years because there is sufficent funds in the reserves. He said personnel was also the main driver for the increase, then operations and depreciation. The cost will continue to go up next year because depreciation will continue to rise. Finance Officer Nielson said unfortunately there is an increase in all three utilities: water, sewer and garbage. The garbage average rate increased by 5.34% with a larger increase for high volume users. The main drivers for the increased cost for garbage are adding an additional garbage route, a new garbage truck and personnel. A split position between the sanitation department and street department was added. The garbage tipping fees and the recycling cost did not change this time. Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the sample utility bills to show how the increases affect a residence and or commercial utility bill. He also reviewed the utility rate schedule and highlighted the items that had cost increases. Council Member Benfield asked Finance Officer Nielson to explain the reason for the high increase in utilites. Finance Officer Nielson said the two main drivers for the increase is water and wastewater. A new system to treat the wastewater at the plant was installed. The new system required additional maintenance, equipment and personnel on the collection side of the wastewater treatment process. Mayor Merrill mentioned the city was lagged with the wastewater collections because there were several people laid off during the 2008 recession. One of the wastewater collection department’s duties is to inspect the sewer lines. If the lines are not inspected on a regular basis it can lead to clogged lines with sewer backing up into people’s basements causing insurance claims and higher costs. He said hopefully with the new wastewater treatment system the city can save money by not having to dump the sludge at the Jefferson landfill. Finance Officer Nielson said he didn’t add the $80,000.00 spent to dump the sludge last month. He didn’t include the cost of dumping the sludge in the increase because they anticipate having less sludge to dump with the new system. Finance Officer Nielson said on the water system side the city hasn’t upgraded the system since the mid 1980’s. The city has brought up a significant amount of water lines, boosters and wells. With the addition of these items, additional personnel is needed. 3 Finance Officer Nielson indicated a City Council motion to set a public hearing for the utility rate fees increase is needed to publish the notice in the newspaper on July 18th and July 25th. 4 Council Member Benfield moved to set the Public Hearing for the utility rate fees on August 2nd, 2017; Council Member Busby seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried 2. (BILL 1170) Review amended budget for FY 17 and set public hearing for July 19th Finance Officer Nielson said there are five budget adjustments. The Legacy Flight Museum purchased an airplane. The funds for the airplane came from reserves, contingency, and the sale of a Corvette that had been donated to the museum. The second adjustment is from the street department for the Center Street project. Urban renewal has committed to add an additional $500,000.00 for the project. The third budget adjustment is from the Wildland Fire; they were deployed late into the fall and early into 2017. The revenues will cover the expenses at the end of the year. The sewer construction needs to be adjusted because the city will spend more than what was budgeted; however, the funds are available in the reserves. The last adjustment is for the streets department. Two streets were added to Local Improvement District 47 (LID). The streets that were added are Ricks Avenue and 2nd West from 1st North to 2nd North. 5 Council Member Busby moved to approve the budget amendments for fiscal year 2017; Council Member Flora seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried 6 Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the Budgeted Revenues and expenditures Report for fiscal year 2017. The total amendment for the year was $7,583,100. City Council will be amending the budget from $76,902,000 to $84,485,100. The Public Works Department takes up about 72% of the city’s budget with the Police and Fire Departments taking about 13%. Council Member Busby moved to approve to set a public hearing for the budget amendments for fiscal year 2017 on July 19th, 2017; Council Member Mann seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried B. Public Works: 1. Public Works Projects – Justin Beard 7 Public Works Assistant Director Justin Beard reported on some of the public works projects going on in the city. The work on LID 47 has started on North 2nd West. The water project that has been going on for a couple of years is nearing completion. The Center Street construction has started; the street has been torn out. Council Member Busby asked if the city has received any complaints from the businesses located on Center Street. Mr. Beard said there has been complaints regarding parking and with informing people that the businesses are open for business. These complaints have been resolved. Mayor Merrill said he and Public Works Director Keith Davidson visited with the dentist office on Center Street. The dentist’s office has been having issues with college students parking along side their building on property the city owns. To help them resolve this issue the city will add two hour parking signs. The City will also tear out some bushes that block some of the parking. Council Member Benfield said she saw a sign at the end of the street informing people that the businesses are open. Council Member Busby asked about the completion date for the Center Street project. Mr. Beard said the hope is to complete the work before the eclipse on August 21st. Mayor Merrill mentioned the businesses have been easy to work with and they feel good about the end results of the work that is being done. Discussion regarding the location of the Romance Theater’s sewer line. Public Works Assistant Director Justin Beard reported the wastewater department has started up the new pasteurization process for solid waste with recycled water. There are several items that need to be fixed before they add the sludge. They would like to start the entire pasteurization process in July. Council Member Flora asked if all of the sludge from last year has been removed. Mr. Beard said all of the old sludge has been hauled off to the landfill. There will always be a production of sludge; however, with the new process the smell will not be so noticeable. Public Works Assistant Director Justin Beard reviewed the bid results for the widening of 2nd East near the new Wal-Mart and US Highway 20. They received four bids with TMC Contractors being the low bidder. Council Member Mann moved to approve the low bid to TMC Contractors Inc.; Discussion: Council Member Busby asked if there is concern with such a large difference in the bid amount between TMC Contractors and the other bidders. Mr. Beard said they did not see a problem with TMC’s bid. Council Member Benfield seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann 8 Council Member Busby The motion carried Council Member Busby asked Mr. Beard to check the sidewalks on University Boulevard down to McDonald’s. A resident was running on the sidewalk and suffered an accident due to the amount of gravel on the sidewalk. Mayor Merrill said there are several spots throughout the city that need to have the gravel swept up. There is also a street light on Taurus that stays on all day. The timer may need to be repaired. C. Community Development: 1. New Construction Report – Craig Rindlesbacher Craig Rindlesbacher reviewed the Building Valuation Report. Council Member Benfield asked why the Freddy’s Restaurant is positioned the way that it is and why is the front of the building not facing 2nd East. Mayor Merrill replied the geometric shape of the parcel made it difficult to have the frontage of the restaurant face 2nd East. D. Legal: Ordinance Amendment discussion – Rob Wood, Deputy Prosecutor (City of Rexburg) City Deputy Prosecutor Rob Wood said he was asked by City Attorney Zollinger to present to City Council some of the issues the city has had with booting and to include recommendations from legal to City Council on how to alleviate these issues. In the process of his research he found that booting is illegal. City Deputy Prosecutor Rob Wood reviewed the alleged issues with booting. One of his main concerns with City Ordinance 911 is that it allows for a private citizen to seize another citizen’s private property without a warrant or court order. 9 City Deputy Prosecutor Rob Wood said under Idaho Code 49-229 booting is explicitly illegal. One of the reasons the city was not aware of this earlier is because of the name of the statute. Many statutes are named in such a way that you really aren’t going to know what is in the content of the statute until it is reviewed. City Deputy Prosecutor Rob Wood said some people may argue that by posting a sign stating you will be booted is consent; it is not consent it is a notice. The legal department’s recommendation to City Council is to remove any verbiage regarding booting on City Ordinance 911 because it is null and void per state statute. City Deputy Prosecutor Rob Wood indicated a letter will be sent to all the companies that boot to cease and desist from booting. The letter will have a date of when the booting companies will need to cease and desist. If the business continues to boot after the date on the letter, they will be charged with a misdemeanor per state law. City Deputy Prosecutor Rob Wood said in the past when a complaint from an individual who felt they were wrongfully booted came in, law enforcement was called out to help facilitate the exchange of information to try and get the boot removed. In these instances law enforcement was not successful in getting the boot removed. Law enforcement will no longer be helping to facilitate the exchange of information because that would make law enforcement complicit in violating Idaho Code 49-229. If anyone places a boot and will not remove it, law enforcement will remove the boot. Any individual that removes a boot will no longer be charged with petty theft or malicious injury to property, they do have the right to protect their property. He said even if the individual is parked in unauthorized parking. There are other remedies to deal with unauthorized parking. He indicated City Ordinance 911 allows a private citizen to seize someone’s property. 10 Council Member Busby asked if Mr. Wood plans to notify the apartment complex owners and BYU-Idaho. Mr. Wood said yes he plans to notify them. Council Member Mann said he is against predatory booting; however, he is concerned about the unintended consequences where the city goes from a predatory $50.00 booting fee to a predatory $180.00 towing fee. It’s the “predatory” booting that he doesn’t agree with. He is in favor of the ability for apartment complexes to manage their parking. The apartment complex owners should be involved in the management of their parking and not just hire someone to manage it for them. He said if the apartment complexes start towing, the problem has not been eliminated unless the apartment complex owners are required to sign off on the cars being towed. Mr. Wood said booting makes it easier for the owner to manage their parking; however, it is illegal. Council Member Benfield asked when Idaho Code 49-229 went into effect. Mr. Wood replied in 2008. She also asked if there is a legal recourse for someone that has been booted and spent money to remove the boot. What would happen? Mr. Wood said the bigger concern is that people have been charged with petty theft and malicious injury to property for removing the boot. They now have a misdemeanor on their record. Idaho has no mechanism to remove the petty theft misdemeanor from their record. The person can honestly say they have not been convicted of petty theft; however, it still shows up on their record. He is researching to see if there is a way to seal the record. Council Member Flora asked if the people that have been booted have any legal recourse against the booting company or apartment complex. Mr. Wood said they do; however, due to the legal cost involved, it probably wouldn’t be economical. City Clerk Blair Kay mentioned there is a tabled bill 1014 that could be amended to resolve the booting issues. City Deputy Prosecutor Rob Wood mentioned a title of the statute has no bearing on what the meaning of the statute is; it’s not the legally binding portion of the statute. Mayor’s Report: Mayor Merrill apologized for being late to the City Council meeting he had a family emergency. Public Hearings: A. 6:35 P.M. (First read BILL 1168) Annexation and Rezone approximately 20 South 12th West – Rural Residential 1 (RR1) to Community Business Center (CBC) for the east 250' as described in the legal description; the rest of the parcel remains Rural Residential 1 (RR1) – Ringel. Mayor Merrill opened the public hearing. Public Testimony in favor of the proposal (5 minutes limit): None Public Testimony neutral to the proposal (5 minutes limit): None Public Testimony opposed to the proposal (5 minutes limit): None Rebuttal: - NONE Mayor Merrill closed the public hearing for deliberations. Deliberations: 11 SUBJECT: Annexation & Rezone #17 00211 Ringel APPLICANT: Ringel Family Farm LLC 914 East Stable Way Washington, UT 84780 PROPERTY OWNER: Ringel Family Farm LLC PURPOSE: Requesting Annexation and Rezone as specified. The proposed annexation of 25 plus acres will retain the existing zoning of Rural Residential 1 (RR1), which is in the Impact Area for the City of Rexburg, except for 250 feet of property on the east side of the parcel adjacent to 12th West which would be rezoned to Community Business Center (CBC). A map is part of the public hearing notice. PROPERTY LOCATION: Approximately 20 South 12th West PROPERTY ID: RP06N39E260004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Commercial ZONING DISTRICT: The proposed annexation of 25 plus acres will retain the existing zoning of Rural Residential 1 (RR1), which is in the Impact Area for the City of Rexburg, except for 250 feet of property on the east side of the parcel adjacent to 12th West which would be rezoned to Community Business Center (CBC). I. BACKGROUND The subject property is an area of unincorporated property adjacent to the City of Rexburg. The applicant is asking to have the property annexed to the City of Rexburg. The parcel being requested for annexation is approximately 25 plus acres. II. SITE DESCRIPTION The site is located at the southwest corner of Highway 33 and 12th West (west of the Valleywide Coop. The subject property is approximately 25 acres. The surrounding neighborhood is predominantly single family residential to the north and west and agricultural to the south and the east. III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Commission take public testimony, and determine if the proposed annexation can be approved, denied, or approved with conditions. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the use for this property as Commercial. The zoning proposed for this area is compatible with the Comp Plan and is identified as a Neighborhood Commercial Node on the map. The nodes defined in the Comprehensive Plan are illustrated with multi-family residential adjacent to them. Developments transition away from the node with lower and lower density residential. Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council to approve the annexation of this property and rezone of the specified piece of the parcel to change from RR1 to CBC. Public Works Staff Review Comments Annexation & Rezone Application File #17 00211 – Ringel property Requesting Annexation and Rezone as specified. The proposed annexation of 25 plus acres will retain the existing zoning of Rural Residential 1 (RR1), which is in the Impact Area for the City of Rexburg, except for 250 feet of property on the east side of the parcel adjacent to 12th West which would be rezoned to Community Business Center (CBC). Property Location: Approximately 20 South 12th West Streets: Right of way will need to be acquired along 12th West upon development. Water: The City has a water line along 12th west and has adequate capacity to serve the area. Sewer: The City has a sewer line along 12th west and has adequate capacity to serve the area. 12 Council Member Mann said he understands there have been some concerns about traffic. There is a traffic light to the east of the annexation that will help with traffic flow. The main concern is additional traffic to the west underneath the underpass. This issue will need to be addressed with future growth. Council Member Flora mentioned during the Envision Madison study they showed the underpass completely blocked by 2020. The Envision Madison members suggested any consideration for future development in this area should be carefully evaluated. In the first proposal it was originally not going to be zoned Rural Residential 1 it was going to be zoned Medium Density Residential 1 or Medium Density Residential 2. She expressed concerns regarding the traffic flow underneath the underpass with the type of growth that will take place with the annexation of this property. City Planner Craig Rindlesbacher replied there is concern with the type of growth that will take place with the development of this area. The freeway creates a bearer because there is only two ways through the area. This causes concerns with putting too much density in that area; however, something to consider is the Comprehensive Plan, it identifies the property as a commercial node. There has been discussion between the applicant and planning with the idea of having the commercial node transition out to lower densities. Planner Rindlesbacher mentioned if the Comprehensive Plan and zoning process is used as a tool to keep the multi-family in close proximity to the commercial node and use it as transitioning tool to keep much lower density residential away from the commercial node. He said by following this process the city is achieving its planning goals. Mayor Merrill said the Idaho Transportation Department has mentioned there isn’t sufficient traffic on a consistent bases to warrant any changes at that intersection or the underpass. Council Member Flora said she didn’t have concerns with the commercial aspect of this annexation and rezone. Her main concern is the allowing of higher density. Mayor Merrill asked for a motion: Council Member Mann moved to approve and first read BILL 1168 the Annexation and Rezone at approximately 20 South 12th West – Rural Residential 1 (RR1) to Community Business Center (CBC) for the east 250' as described in the legal description; the rest of the parcel remains Rural Residential 1 (RR1); Council Member Benfield seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried B. 6:45 P.M. (First read BILL 1169) Tentative Appropriation Budget for 2018. Finance Officer Nielson reported on the tentative budget for fiscal year 2018. The city has been working on the tentative appropriation budget for several months. The tentative budget for 2018 will be $57,215,400 with $165,000.00 in the general fund for contingency. Mayor Merrill mentioned the budget went down from about 84 million dollars to 57 million dollars in large part to the completion of many major city projects. Mayor Merrill opened the public hearing. Public Testimony in favor of the proposal (5 minutes limit): None 13 Public Testimony neutral to the proposal (5 minutes limit): None Public Testimony opposed to the proposal (5 minutes limit): None Rebuttal: - NONE Mayor Merrill closed the public hearing for deliberations. Council Member Busby moved to approve and first read BILL 1169 the Tentative Appropriation Budget for 2018; Council Member Flora seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried Items for Consideration: A. (First read BILL 1167) Rezone 703 West 7th South – Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to High Density Residential 2 – Bron Leatham (Cook property) SUBJECT: Rezone Application - File #17 00219 – Bron Leatham (Cook Property) APPLICANT: Bron Leatham 1272 N Yellowstone Hwy Rexburg, ID PROPERTY OWNER(S): Karl and Molly Cook 703 West 7th South Rexburg, ID 83440 PURPOSE: The request is to rezone from Low Density Residential 2(LDR2) to High Density Residential 2 (HDR2) PROPERTY LOCATION: 703 West 7th South PROPERTY ID: RPRXBCA0360603 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Moderate-High Density Residential CURRENT ZONING: LDR2 PROPOSED ZONING: HDR2 SURROUNDING LAND USES Multi-family residential, businesses AND ZONING: HDR2, CBC (Community Business Center) APPLICABLE CRITERIA: City of Rexburg Development Code (Ordinance No.1115) § 6.13 Amendments to this Ordinance AUTHORITY: § 6.13 (E) “The Commission may recommend that the amendment be granted as requested, that it be modified, or that it be denied” I. BACKGROUND 14 The Rexburg Development Code allows for the Commission to make recommendations to the City Council regarding whether or not the property should or should not be rezoned based on the criteria found in section §6.13. II. SITE DESCRIPTION This requested change is a clean-up of a previous zone change. The parcel being changed is located on the southwest corner of the Yellowstone Highway and 7th South intersection. The total area involved in this re- zoning request is approximately 2.1 acres, which if approved will result in changing the zone from Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to High Density Residential 2 (HDR2). III. ANALYSIS If approved, this rezone will result in changing Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to High Density Residential 2 (HDR2). The request would require the Commission and City Council to review the proposal against one set of criteria, for the request to rezone. Below, staff has provided all the criteria listed by Ordinance No. 1115 (Development Code) that are required to be addressed, followed by staff’s analysis of each criterion. Criteria Rezone Requests (§6.13): a. Be in conformance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and the City Development Code. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the land use designation for the property as Moderate to High Density Residential. The HDR2 zone is allowed under this designation. b. The capacity of existing public streets, water and sewer facilities, storm drainage facilities, solid waste collection and disposal, and other utilities. See Public Works Review. c. The capacity of existing public services, including but not limited to, public safety services, public emergency services, schools, and parks and recreational services. See Public Works Review. d. The potential for nuisances or health and safety hazards that may adversely affect adjoining properties. The lot needs to be part of the new subdivision that is currently being created to the west and south of the property. e. Recent changes in land use on adjoining properties or in the neighborhood of the map revision. None. f. Meets the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. See paragraph a. IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff requests that Planning and Zoning recommend to City Council to change the above described property from Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to High Density Residential 2 (HDR2) with the following conditions: The lot shall be incorporated into the new subdivision that is currently being created to the west and south of the property. Public Works Staff Review Comments Rezone Application File #17 00219– Bron Leatham (Cook property) Property Location: 703 West 7th South - Requesting to change the zoning from LDR2 and HDR2 Sewer: The City has adequate capacity to handle the increased density for the rezone of this property. Water: The City has adequate capacity to handle the increased density for the rezone of this property. Streets: Because of the increased density to the area a roundabout will need to be installed at the intersection of Pioneer and 7 th South. Once the roundabout is installed, access to the property will only be allowed off of Cornelison Ave . 15 Council Member Busby asked about the location of the roundabout and how it will be used to help with traffic flow. He said the intersection on Yellowstone Highway and Pioneer is already congested. There is concern with added density at that intersection because it could cause a bottleneck for traffic. Public Works Assistant Director Beard said a traffic study was conducted to research what would work best; another lighted intersection or a roundabout. Council Member Busby asked about the new roads that will be built with the development of the property. Mr. Beard said the roads will be built on the west side and south side of the property. Council Member Flora moved to approve BILL 1167 to Rezone 703 West 7th South from Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to High Density Residential 2 (HDR2); Council Member Benfield seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried Council Member Benfield moved to suspend the rules and consider BILL 1167 to Rezone 703 West 7th South from Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to High Density Residential 2 (HDR2) third read; Discussion: Council Member Flora seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried B. Conditional Use Permit – 486 South 3rd West – to allow reduced parking. The applicant is requesting a parking reduction to 65% through the use of the Pedestrian Emphasis District (PED), per the Rexburg Development Code. The zoning for the property is High Density Residential One (HDR1) – The Roost 16 Jonathan McMullin presented the Conditional Use Permit for 486 South 3rd West (The Roost). Council Member Busby asked if the reduction in parking is approved, how does Mr. McMullin plan to manage any parking issues that may arise. Mr. McMullin said there are multiple apartment complexes in the PED operating well at 65%. He spoke with the university and they said about 65% to 69% of students, depending on the semester, drive a vehicle. They are working with Connection Property Management to manage their parking. The plan is for several apartment complexes in the surrounding area to work together to lease any extra parking stalls to each other. The apartment complexes that have an overflow of students parking would lease parking from those that have extra parking. The students would then pay the parking fees to the apartment complex leasing the parking stalls to them. Mayor Merrill said most of the booting issues come from out of town visitors parking in an unauthorized parking stall when they could have easily parked on the street. Jonathan McMullin indicated the university has been pushing for a pedestrian safe campus. The city and apartment complex owners need to push the students towards that direction, too. The amenities are within walking distance so students wouldn’t need to bring a vehicle. SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application, file #17 00236 – The Roost APPLICANT: Jonathan McMullin 534 Trejo Suite 16 Rexburg, ID PROPERTY OWNER: The Roost LLC 64 Ricks Rd Monteview, ID PURPOSE: Requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow reduced parking. The applicant is requesting a parking reduction to 65% through the use of the Pedestrian Emphasis District (PED), per the Rexburg Development Code. The zoning for the property is High Density Residential One (HDR1). PROPERTY LOCATION: 486 South 3rd West Rexburg, ID 83440 PROPERTY ID RPR000P0113611 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Moderate-High Density Residential ZONING DISTRICT: High Density Residential 1 APPLICABLE CRITERIA: City of Rexburg Development Code (Ordinance Code 1115) – § 6.12 Conditional Use Permits AUTHORITY § 6.12 (F) (7) “All other conditional use permits may only be granted after review and recommendation by the Commission and approval by the City Council…” IV. BACKGROUND The property was the location of a four-plex and a few homes. V. SITE DESCRIPTION 17 The location of the property is approximately 486 South 3rd West, Rexburg, ID. VI. ANALYSIS The following are the criteria for granting a conditional use permit. Some of the criteria are followed by staff’s analysis. A conditional use will: a. Constitute a conditional use as established in Table 1, Zoning Districts, Table 2, Land Use Schedule. A CUP is required to allow reduced parking and higher density. b. Be in accordance with a specific or general objective of the City’s Comprehensive Plan and the regulations of the City of Rexburg Development Code. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Map identifies the area as “Moderate to High Density Residential”. The use is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. Development Code (Ordinance 1115) Reduced parking and higher density is allowed with a “case by case” review and a Conditional Use Permit as per the City of Rexburg Development Code Chapter 9 Pedestrian Emphasis Overlay. c. Be designed and constructed in a manner to be harmonious with the existing character of the neighborhood and the zone in which the property is located. The closest neighbors to this proposed request are commercial, single family residential, dormitory and multi-family residential. The request is in-line with the existing uses. d. Not create a nuisance or safety hazard for neighboring properties in terms of excessive noise or vibration, improperly directed glare or heat, electrical interference, odors, dust or air pollutants, solid waste generation and storage, hazardous materials or waste, excessive traffic generation, or interference with pedestrian traffic. Staff does not feel the request creates any nuisance or safety hazard as described. e. Be adequately served by essential public facilities and services such as access streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer service, and schools. If existing facilities are not adequate, the developer shall show that such facilities shall be upgraded sufficiently to serve the proposed use. The City Engineer did not have concerns at this time. f. Not generate traffic in excess of the capacity of public streets or access points serving the proposed use and will assure adequate visibility at traffic access points. The City Engineer did not have concerns at this time. g. Be effectively buffered to screen adjoining properties from adverse impacts of noise, building size and resulting shadow, traffic, and parking. The Commission should discuss the possible impacts of noise and additional parking on the existing and adjacent properties. h. Be compatible with the slope of the site and the capacity of the soils and will not be in an area of natural hazards unless suitably designed to protect lives and property. There are height differences between parking lots that would preclude connection between them. i. Not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a historic feature of significance to the community of Rexburg. N/A VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff can support this request if the requirements identified in Chapter 9 are properly addressed. They are as follows: a. The parking ratio per student within “Area 1” as identified on the attached exhibit map shall be reflective of a market demand as determined by the applicant or land owner, but may in some cases be reduced to zero parking spaces. However, other parking (vehicle and bicycle) is required for guests and management as specified below in Sections 9, 10, and 11. N/A b. The parking ratio within the area identified as “Area 2” on the exhibit map shall be a minimum of 0.5 spaces per student. Other parking (vehicle and bicycle) is required for guests and management as specified below in 18 Sections 9, 10, and 11. Staff feels that 65% (including 6% visitor) is sufficient. The application does not identify how many students are being included (see Final Recommendation). c. Parking areas (parking spaces and maneuvering areas) shall not be located within the required front yard. This requirement is met. d. Existing parking areas that are located within the required front yard shall be eliminated and restored to landscaping that includes the use of trees and shrubs. N/A e. In order to be eligible for the reduced parking ratios as permitted herein, the resulting structure must have ten (10) dwelling units or more. However, structures with fewer than ten (10) dwelling units may apply for a conditional use permit in order to qualify for reduced parking. This ordinance is not intended nor shall apply to any structure originally constructed as a single-family or duplex residential structure. Furthermore, all underlying zoning standards shall apply (e.g. dwelling density, permitted land uses, etc). This project does not meet this requirement (see Final Recommendation). f. Landscaped areas shall, through the use of trees and shrubs, deter the use of the required front yard as parking during the winter months when vehicles are not allowed to be parked overnight on City streets. This project meets this requirement. g. Landscaped front yards and other required buffer yards shall be delineated from parking areas by high -back curbing that will further discourage parking in the front yard. This project will be required to meet this requirement. h. Each property that utilizes this parking reduction shall clearly specify on all rental contracts or agreements whether or not a vehicle parking space is provided for that individual tenant. Rental contracts will be required to be reviewed by the City Attorney. i. Bicycle parking, shall be provided on a ratio of One (1) space per every ten (10) resident beds, as follows: i. Spaces may be in an open-air environment, but shall be placed on a hard surface such as concrete, asphalt, pavers, or other. ii. A hard surface, such as concrete, asphalt, pavers, or other, shall connect bicycle storage area to either the internal parking lot, or a public right-of-way. Surface shall be a minimum of 5-feet in width or 6-feet in width if vehicle overhang will occur. iii. Spaces shall have lighting that is motion activated. Lighting shall in no way shine on to adjacent rights-of-way or adjacent property, but shall be directed downward on to bicycle storage only. The City’s lighting ordinance shall govern any other aspects not anticipated by this section. iv. Parking areas shall not be located within the required front yard setback. v. Signs shall be placed conspicuously that state that moped parking is allowed in areas of bicycle parking. Signs shall clarify that mopeds include either pedals, or have engines under 50cc. Bicycle parking meeting the above requirements is not shown on plans. j. One vehicle parking space shall be provided for on-site management and must be the City’s full-size parking space standard. This requirement will be required prior to a building permit being granted. k. Parking shall be provided for guest parking at six percent of occupancy. Guest parking shall be marked with signage that is clearly visible during all seasons of the year. These spaces shall not be included in the parking contract required to be entered into (see section #8 above). Guest parking spaces shall be the City’s full-size parking space standard. This requirement will be required prior to a building permit being granted. l. All sidewalks located along property shall be eight foot minimum, installed and maintained per City standards. This requirement is not met on the south side of project (see Final Recommendation). m. By utilizing this parking reduction provision, the property owner, and future property owners agree to participate in a joint sidewalk maintenance agreement with other property located in the PEZ overlay that may be established in the future. Sidewalk maintenance shall include repairs as needed, and snow removal and deicing, as needed. The P&Z Commission may want to comment on this requirement. n. Sidewalks shall be maintained for safe passage during all seasons of the year. In the case of snow removal and de-icing, this safe passage must be insured by 6:00 A.M. every morning and continue until 10:30 P.M. This requirement should be part of the CUP agreement (see Final Recommendation). o. Property owners are encouraged to work with adjacent property owners to allow pedest rian access easements over property if a more direct route for pedestrians to BYU-I campus can be achieved. N/A p. Lighting fixtures on the property shall not exceed 15-feet in height. This would include wall mounted lights as well as parking lot lights and walkway lights. Any lighting that exists at the time a property wishes to implement this PEO parking standard shall be brought in to compliance with this standard and any other lighting standards per the City’s lighting ordinance. This requirement will be required prior to a building 19 permit being granted. q. Every dwelling unit shall have a minimum of 150 square feet of gross floor area for every person living in dwelling unit. This requirement will be required prior to a building permit being granted. r. No applications for expansion of the PEO boundaries shall be accepted for five (5) years from the passage of this ordinance in the hopes that infill will be maximized within the boundaries. The current boundaries coincide with a quarter mile (1/4) radius, a distance with the strong likelihood of pedestrian activity. When the boundaries are revisited, if it is determined that this ordinance has been effective but needs more time to maximize infill then the boundary should not be expanded. N/A s. Qualifying developments cannot reduce their existing parking space ratio except to proportionally allow for additional on-site buildings, or for the restoration of required yard. N/A t. Qualifying developments shall be subject to future proportional share of pedestria n and vehicle enhancements implemented to facilitate movement to and from campus or businesses. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and publication as required by law. This requirement should be part of the CUP agreement (see Final Recommendation). FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS: a. This project needs to be combined with the existing Roost development in order for it meet the 10 unit requirement as well as the requirement for full size parking spaces. b. Staff recommends that the Commission recommend to Council the approval of this CUP with all of the Staff Recommendations listed from a. to t. Public Works Staff Review Comments Conditional Use Permit Application File #17 00236– The Roost Requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow reduced parking. The applicant is requesting a parking reduction to 65% through the use of the Pedestrian Emphasis District (PED), per the Rexburg Development Code. Property Location: 486 South 3rd West Streets: There is a section of side walk along the west side of 3rd West that is incomplete. Fire Department Staff Review Comments Conditional Use Permit Application File #17 00236 – The Roost Requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow a parking reduction to 65% through the use of the Pedestrian Emphasis District (PED), per the Rexburg Development Code. Property Location: 486 South 3rd West The CUP application request was reviewed. There were no concerns from the Fire Department staff at this time. 20 Council Member Mann moved to approve the Conditional Use Permit at 486 South 3rd West to allow reduced parking. The applicant is requesting a parking reduction to 65% through the use of the Pedestrian Emphasis District; Council Member Flora seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried C. Final Plat for Cantamere PUD (#17 00141) (Planned Unit Development). The property location is at approximately 630 South Yellowstone Highway. Kelly McCandless presented the Final Plat for Cantamere. Council Member Busby asked about the number of entrances to the development. Mr. McCandless reviewed the entrances and exits to the development. There are a total of two entrances and exits. SUBJECT: Cantemere Planned Unit Development (PUD) - Preliminary Master Plan/Preliminary Plat - #17 00141 APPLICANT: Kelly McCandless James Hirlinger PROPERTY OWNER: Cantemere LLC PURPOSE: Establishment of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) through the approval of a Preliminary Master Plan/Preliminary Plat. PROPERTY LOCATION: Approximately 630 South Yellowstone Highway Rexburg, ID 83440 PROPERTY ID: RPRXBCA0259306, RPRXBCA0259184 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Moderate-High Density Residential (just approved) ZONING DISTRICT: High Density Residential 1 (HDR1) APPLICABLE CRITERIA: City of Rexburg Development Code (Ordinance Code 1115) § 4.15 Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Chapter 12,Subdivision Ordinance AUTHORITY § 4.15(S)(1) The Commission shall recommend to the City Council that the proposed PUD be approved, approved with conditions, or denied. I. BACKGROUND The applicant has requested approval of a Planned Unit Development for purposes of clustering and variations from the standard side yard setbacks of the underlying zoning. This property is greater than the 1 acres required 21 by the ordinance. The PUD ordinance can be applied to any residential zone and is a permitted land use if it can be found that all applicable criteria for granting PUDs is met. Therefore, the City, upon receipt of a PUD request should review the proposal and either approve, deny, or approve with conditions. II. SITE DESCRIPTION The subject property is approximately 3.35 acres and is located behind Pioneer Village strip mall and west of the railroad tracks just north of University Boulevard. III. SUBSTANTIVE CRITERIA The following is a review of the minimum requirements of a PUD. Please refer to the PUD ordinance to view the entire description of each criteria, staff has only provided the headings followed with a review of each criteria. a. Uses Permitted- The applicant is requesting only residential uses; therefore this criterion does not apply. b. Minimum Area- The proposal is for 3.35 acres, which exceeds the minimum of 1-acres for a residential PUD. This criterion is met. c. Variations to Underlying Zoning- The applicant is requesting the following variations to the underlying HDR1 zoning: i. Side yard setbacks- The HDR1 zone requires a 6-foot setback from side property line or 12-foot between buildings. Under one ownership or as a condominium project, side yard setbacks would be would not be required. The owner wants to be able to sell the buildings individually. Thus the need to create the PUD. ii. Front yard setbacks- The HDR 1 zone requires 20’ setback when a landscape strip is provided. This proposal meets the requirement. d. Street Standards- Handicap Ramps are not shown at the street corners. . e. Density Determination- The proposal falls within the allowed density of 30 units per acre as required for the HDR1 zoning. f. Minimum Performance Standards- i. Single Ownership or Control- The development will need to remain under single control by the developer until such time as a homeowner’s association is established which will enforce the standards of this PUD and the material found in the covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs). ii. Scope of Plan- The entire parcel under ownership of the applicant is included in the application. iii. Natural Features- Staff’s opinion is that the land involved in the proposal does not include natural features that should be considered for preservation. iv. Utilities- All new utilities will be placed underground. v. Water Conservation- The final master plan should show how, in detail, the proposal will incorporate low volume irrigation systems throughout the landscaped areas of the d evelopment (see proposed conditions of approval). vi. Refuse Bins- Individual trash bins should be screened from the public right-of-way on days of no trash service in the neighborhood. Any future trash receptacles intended for trash service pick-up placed in the common areas such as the proposed park areas must be screened in a manner that is similar in material and character of the neighborhood. This should be incorporated in the CC&Rs (see proposed conditions of approval). vii. Glare Reduction- The proposal must adhere to the City’s lighting standards which require glare reduction and respect the safety aspect of lighting as well as recognition of the valuable night sky (see proposed conditions of approval). g. Common Open Space i. Required Common Open Space - This standard requires that each PUD provide at least 10% of the gross area as open space and recreational area. The Planning Commission should determine if what is being proposed meets the intent of the PUD ordinance (see proposed condition of approval). ii. Section a. of the PUD states “The planned unit development approach is intended to provide more desirable environments by encouraging creative site planning and building designs. The P&Z Commission should identify if these requirements are met (see proposed conditions of approval). iii. Maintenance- As the common areas are proposed to be private rather than public, the homeowners association will be responsible for common space maintenance, as stated in the proposed CC&Rs. Until such time as a homeowners association is established, the applicant shall be responsible for all maintenance of common areas and all unsold lots (see proposed conditions of approval). iv. Hardscape- Staff was unable to determine hardscape percentages, as the final landscape plans are not yet submitted. Only preliminary plans are required at this time; the final landscape plan should be submitted for review and approval with the final master plan application (see proposed condition of approval). v. Common Activity Areas- This area needs to include playground equipment or pathways with benches and tables through natural or landscaped areas. The Commission should determine if this requirement is met. This requirement should be shown on the final landscape plan to be submitted with the final master plan/final plat application (see proposed conditions of approval). vi. Landscaping Per Unit- The applicant has provided a landscape plan. The final master plan should identify type of tree, caliper and type and gallon of bushes. The Planning and Zoning Commission should determine size, type and spacing of trees that are buffering the project from the Old Yellowstone Highway. In addition, the final CC&Rs should have the ordinance requirement written into the CC&Rs (see proposed conditions of approval). The final la ndscape plan needs to consider solar access as required by the PUD ordinance in the placement of deciduous and evergreen trees. vii. Water Conservation- The final landscape plan should incorporate this requirement by identifying what drought tolerant species are being used and where zones are located within the common 22 space areas that can maximize water conservation by incorporating plants that have similar water usage demands (see proposed conditions of approval). IV. ANALYSIS To approve a planned unit development certain criteria must be addressed and met. Below are those established criteria followed by staff’s analysis. a. The proposed planned unit development is in compliance with the City’s comprehensive plan and will be substantially compatible with existing development in the surrounding area; and undeveloped land in the surrounding area can be developed in a manner substantially compatible with the proposed planned unit development. The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this area as Moderate to High Density Residential; therefore the proposal is in compliance with that component of the Comprehensive Plan. i. Traffic impacts See Public Works comments by the City Engineer. ii. Street lights and exterior lights A condition of approval should be that as part of the final master plan/final platting, proposed lighting, whether they are street lights, park lights, or other, should show how they comply with the City’s lighting ordinance and are Dark Sky compliant (see proposed conditions of approval). . b. Construction of the development can be accomplished in a manner that does not create unreasonable negative impacts on the area surrounding the development or in the city. In order to assure the avoidance or mitigation of negative construction impacts on the area surrounding the development or in the city, the planning commission and Council may impose conditions including but not limited to: i. Prohibitions of open burning on the site during construction; ii. Time restrictions on construction noise; and construction traffic. The Commission should explore this criterion after public testimony and determine if any conditions of approval should be applied. c. Street, water, sewer, drainage and drainage pre-treatment, storm water detention, and other similar facilities in the area surrounding the development and in the city are or will be adequate to provide for the health, safety and welfare for the development's population densities and the type of development proposed. Street, water, sewer, drainage and drainage pre-treatment, storm water detention, and other facilities are either located in the immediate area or will be extended for use of the site by the applicant. The applicant is intending to connect to all City services. Based on the availability and installation of infrastructure in the vicinity this criterion is met. d. The proposed number of residential units does not exceed the maximum permitted number of residential units. The applicant has not requested any density bonuses. The acreage for the PUD is approximately 3.35 acres. The HDR1 zoning allows a maximum of 30 units per acer. There are 84 units proposed. The 3.35 acers would allow 100 units. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Commission take public testimony and determine if the proposed planned unit development can be approved, denied, or approved with conditions. Following this determination, the Commission should make a recommendation to the City Council accompanied with findings that support such a recommendation. Should the Commission choose to recommend approval with conditions, staff has provided conditions of approval for consideration (see below). City Staff will require that the conditions of the PUD as outlined in The Rexburg Development Code are followed. The Commission should determine if a revis ed preliminary master plan/preliminary plat needs to be submitted if major/substantive modifications are needed before a determination approval status can be made. Proposed Conditions of Approval General 1. The final master plan/final plat application shall include all required submittal standards and incorporate all conditions of approval. 2. Language shall be clear in the CC&Rs that no approval granted by the HOA or Architectural Committee shall violate City Code (e.g. accessory structures, building heights, fencing, location of building on lot, etc.). 3. The final CC&Rs shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director prior the recordation of a plat. 4. Requirement of the underlying zoning prevails where no specific requested variation has been considered and granted in this PUD request. Performance Standards 5. Utilities- All new utilities must be placed underground. 6. Water Conservation- The final master plan for each phase shall show, in sufficient detail, how the proposal will incorporate low volume irrigation systems throughout the landscaped areas of the development. 7. Refuse Bins- Trash bins must be screened. 8. Glare Reduction- The proposal must adhere to the City’s lighting standards, details shall be provided with the final master plan/final plat. 23 Common Open Space 9. Maintenance- As the common area is proposed to be private rather than public, the homeowners association shall be responsible for common space maintenance. Until such time as a homeowners association is established, the applicant or owner of record shall be responsible for all maintenance of common areas and all unsold lots. 10. Creative site planning and building designs - The Commission should determine if creative site planning and building designs are incorporated. 11. Landscaping Plan- The applicant has not fully addressed this requirement during the preliminary master plan/preliminary plat application process; therefore the final master plan shall reflect this on the landscape plan. In addition, the final CC&Rs shall have the PUD ordinance requirement written into the CC&Rs. The final landscape plan shall consider amount of trees and bushes, landscaping buffer for parking lot and solar access as required by the PUD ordinance in the placement of deciduous and evergreen trees. Public Works Staff Review Comments Planned Unit Development File #17 00141 – Cantemere PUD To establish a Planned Unit Development (PUD) through the approval of a Preliminary Master Plan/Preliminary Plat Property Location – Approximately 630 South Yellowstone Highway Streets: The Buildings need to be set back 20’ from the property line. The sidewalks need to be set against the property line and the width of the street needs to be 55’. The street needs to be deeded over to the City in deed form or it ne eds to be included in the plat and dedicated to the City. Water: Water is stubbed to the property line Sewer: Sewer is stubbed to the property line Fire Department Staff Review Comments Planned Unit Development (PUD) File #17 00141 – Cantemere PUD – Preliminary Master Plan/Preliminary Plat To establish a Planned Unit Development (PUD) through the approval of a Preliminary Master Plan/Preliminary Plat. Property Location – Approximately 630 South Yellowstone The PUD application was reviewed. There were no comments from Fire Department staff at this time. Council Member Flora moved to approve the Final Plat for Cantamere Planned Unit Development located at approximately 630 South Yellowstone Highway; Council Member Busby seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried D. Approval of a new street called Turin Way connecting to Handcart Lane and Trejo St. - Staff 24 Council Member Mann moved to approve the new street called Turin Way connecting to Handcart Lane and Trejo Street Council Member Benfield seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried E. Preliminary Master Plan/Preliminary Plat for a Planned Unit Development at 398 Pioneer Road (Rocky Ridge PUD) – Chad Richards Chad Richards presented the Preliminary Master Plan/ Preliminary Plat for the Planned Unit Development at 398 Pioneer Road. They would like to increase the density from 13 to 17 four- plexes. In order to increase the density the units will be placed closer together and they added additional amenities. Mr. Richards reviewed the Density Bonus Points that allowed them to go higher density. From the look of the structure to the landscaping of the development they earned 87 points which allowed them to go from 13 to 17 four-plexes. 25 Council Member Mann asked if the four-plexes face each other and if there is covered parking. Mr. Richards replied the four-plexes will face each other and no, there will not be covered parking. Council Member Flora asked if the playground has a playground structure. Mr. Richards replied there is not a playground structure. She said adding a playground should be part of the point system. Council Member Mann asked if the four-plexes will be individually owned. Mr. Richards said yes the intent is for the four-plexes to be individually owned. Discussion regarding the landscaping of the development. 26 Council Member Flora moved to approve the Preliminary Master Plan/Preliminary Plat for a Planned Unit Development at 398 Pioneer Road with a condition to add a playground structure; Council Member Busby seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried Calendared Bills and Tabled Items: A. “LAND USE ACTION” – Bills Recommended/Approved in a Land Use Public Hearing Procedure (Recommend Suspension of the Rules): – NONE B. BILL Introduction: – NONE C. Second Reading: Those items which have been first read: – NONE D. Third Reading: Those items which have been second read: 1. Delay 3rd Reading for corrected legal: BILL 1160 – Annexation and zone change from Rural Residential One (RR1) and Transitional Agriculture One (TAG1) to Low Density Residential Two (LDR2) for property in the Impact Area for the City of Rexburg. This property is located at approximately 950 Barney Dairy Road, Madison County, Idaho 2. BILL 1165 – Amend the Compensation and Benefits Package for Mayor and Council. Council Member Benfield moved to third read and approve BILL 1165 to amend the Compensation and Benefits Package for Mayor and Council; Council Member Flora seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried 3. BILL 1166 to Rezone approximately 154 South 3rd West from Medium Density 1 (MDR1) to High Density Residential 2 (HDR2). 27 Council Member Mann moved to third read and approve BILL 1166 to Rezone approximately 154 South 3rd West from Medium Density 1 (MDR1) to High Density Residential 2 (HDR2); Council Member Busby seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried Mayor’s Business: Rexburg Urban Renewal Agency - Ratify appointment of Traci Peterson to the Urban Renewal Agency replacing Richard Smith. 28 Council Member Mann moved to ratify the appointment of Traci Peterson to the Urban Renewal Agency with the condition that she lives in the correct impact area; Council President Busby seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried Discussion regarding the Open Meeting Law. Consent Calendar: The consent calendar includes items which require formal City Council action, however they are typically routine or not of great controversy. Individual Council members may ask that any specific item be removed from the consent calendar for discussion in greater detail. Explanatory information is included in the City Council’s agenda packet regarding these items. A. Minutes from June 14th, 2017 meeting B. Approve the City of Rexburg Bills Council Member Busby moved to approve the Consent Calendar containing the minutes and city bills; Council Member Benfield seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Flora None Council Member Benfield Council Member Mann Council Member Busby The motion carried Adjournment 8:37 APPROVED: ____________________________ Jerry Merrill, Mayor Attest: _______________________________ Marianna Gonzalez, Deputy City Clerk