Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07.18.19 P&Z Minutes_exppdf1 City Staff and Others: Scott Johnson – Economic Development Stephen Zollinger – City Attorney Natalie Powell – Compliance Officer Tawnya Grover – P&Z Administrative Assistant Chairman Rory Kunz opened the meeting at 6:30p.m. Roll Call of Planning and Zoning Commissioners: Present: Melanie Davenport, John Bowen, Rory Kunz, Kristi Anderson, Keith Esplin, Vince Haley, Todd Marx, David Pulsipher. Absent: Bruce Sutherland, Greg Blacker, Steve Oakey. Chairman Rory Kunz reviewed the public hearing procedures. Minutes: From Planning and Zoning meeting – June 20th, 2019 MOTION. Motion to approve the minutes for June 20, 2019., Action: Approve, Moved by Kristi Anderson, Seconded by Vince Haley. VOTE. Motion passed (summary: Yes = 7, No = 0, Abstain = 1). Yes: David Pulsipher, John Bowen, Keith Esplin, Kristi Anderson, Rory Kunz, Todd Marx, Vince Haley. Abstain: Melanie Davenport. Both regularly scheduled meetings for the Planning & Zoning Commission are canceled due to no applications being received in time. However, there will be a work meeting with the City Council. Public Hearings: 1. 6:35PM (19-00339) – 106 E 1st S & 113 S 1st E – Conditional Use Permit to allow Dormitory-style housing in a Mixed Use (MU) zone. (action) – Devin Durrant Devin Durrant – 2000 N Canyon Rd, Provo, Utah, & son, Ryan Durrant – 130 S 2nd E, Rexburg, ID – They thanked the Commissioners for their service. This is a Mixed Use area in the Pedestrian Emphasis District Overlay. The Durrants have walked the property with the University housing representatives., who approve of the use of this property if it meets the city’s approval. This is a redevelopment area, but development may be a few years away. They are hoping to improve cash flow while working toward redevelopment. He has submitted a Parking Plan for 12 students in the blue roof home in 106 E 1st S and 5 students at 113 S. At one time, the blue roof had 20 students living there, which caused the loss of the dormitory use. He does not plan on putting anyone in the basement, because it does not meet the height requirements. 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Phone: 208.359.3020 Fax: 208.359.3022 www.rexburg.org Planning & Zoning Minutes July 18, 2019 2 He owns proximity of these two properties where parking could be used. The students will need to get a parking permit, so he can monitor parking closely. Kristi Anderson asked about additional parking. 2 spaces are located at 113 S., 2 spaces are next door at 110 S., 6 spaces are at 106 & 7 spaces are available at “B” leaving 4 for tenants, and at “A” across Princeton Ave. 7 additional spaces are located in an open parking lot. There are people living at each of these sites, but these are additional spaces. If the Durrants tied everything available together, there would be 24 extra spaces total. Vince Haley asked if the applicant owned the properties. He does. Rory Kunz asked, how far the empty parking lot is from the subject property? Devin has not measured this distance. Staff Report: Natalie Powell – The two properties for this proposal are identified as Neighborhood Commercial/Mixed Use on the Comprehensive Plan Map and they have a 3 zoning of Mixed Use. The distance is about 500ft. from the parking lot to the subject properties. In the Mixed Use zone, Dormitory use is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. The questions for the Commissioners to answer is, Is this a good location for dormitory? In addition, this property qualifies for reduced parking. Staff will review a site plan and a parking plan. Building issues are not a concern here tonight. The Building Department will do a walk- through to make sure the home meets Building Code requirements. David Pulsipher asked if it is permissible to move parking to another site. Natalie Powell answered, in Chapter 10, it talks about the parking in the Pedestrian Emphasis District (PED) zone. The parking plan would have to be reviewed and approved by staff. Parking can be reduced to 60%, which in this case would be ten parking spaces required. There is a sunset clause that the applicant must develop this area within four years. The applicant also owns properties on this block along 2nd E and those properties have to be developed within two years in the Princeton Court and Greenbrier properties area. Vince Haley asked on the application, it states that the property was formerly used as Dormitory Housing. Natalie Powell answered, the Dormitory Housing use was lost and changed to single-family home. Natalie walked through the home with the inspectors this spring to identify what would be needed to make it safe for a single-family to live there now. Chairman Rory Kunz clarified that Dormitory Housing is allowed in the Mixed Use zone as a Conditional Use if approved by this body. The Commissioners will recommend this application be approved by City Council or not. Chairman Rory Kunz asked the Commissioners if they had any conflicts of interest or had been approached by any parties relative to this particular subject. If you believe your prior contact with respect to this subject has created a bias, you should recuse yourself, otherwise at this time please indicate the nature of your conversation or contact. Chairman Rory Kunz opened the public input portion of the hearing at 6:46 p.m. Favor: None Neutral: Aaron Romney – 53 S Mill hollow – He owns Mill hollow up the street on 1st E. He is basing his comments on his experience with Pinnacle Point across the street from him. Pinnacle Point has adequate parking, but there is a stretch of 1st E that is not regulated for parking. The Pinnacle Point students have learned from Carlson to 1st S the parking is not regulated. There is typically 8-10 cars of Pinnacle Point residents that use the street as their permanent, full-time parking, even though there is adequate parking behind their building. These cars will sometimes not move for days. His concern is that as this request moves ahead, the parking on the street is freed up for downtown businesses. He suggests possibly, no overnight parking on the street. He looks forward to the development that can occur in the area. Opposed: None Written Input: None Chairman Rory Kunz asked if anyone else would like to speak? He closed the public input portion of the hearing at 6:50p.m. 4 Rebuttal: Devin loves Mill hollow. He had lunch there today and it was delicious. He shares Mr. Romney’s concern. Devin has parking permits, which can help them address those parking incorrectly. Kristi Anderson feels this is a logical place for development. MOTION: The Planning & Zoning Commission recommends City Council approve the application for the Conditional Use Permit for Dormitory Housing, because it fits the area, has been dormitory in the past, and it is in close proximity to campus., Action: Approve, Moved by Vince Haley, Seconded by Todd Marx. Commission Discusses the Motion: John Bowen feels this is a good use of the property. David Pulsipher feels as long as there is adequate parking this should be approved. VOTE: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8). Yes: David Pulsipher, John Bowen, Keith Esplin, Kristi Anderson, Melanie Davenport, Rory Kunz, Todd Marx, Vince Haley. 2. 6:40PM (19-00351) – Amending the Comprehensive Plan Map in the City of Rexburg. Multiple parcels are being changed in the city’s Impact Area and within the City’s boundaries to reflect the needs and future growth of the city of Rexburg. An interactive map can be found at http://www.rexburg.org/pages/public-notification-and-agendas (action) Staff Report: Tawnya Grover – There is an effort moving forward to update the Comprehensive Plan: both the goals in the text, some of the explanatory text and the map. The items were brought to a Strategic Planning meeting and one of the first items of discussion were a couple of the descriptions, including “Rural Cluster” which says, “This Comprehensive Plan designation includes lands where residential development is allowed at an overall base density but clustered onto smaller lot sizes, while maintaining large tracts of open land. Again the desire of the community is to preserve the rural character of the City, and maintaining large open spaces in critical view areas are essential to ensure this openness is preserved.” After discussion with staff, it was determined the city is not actually trying to preserve large open spaces, but our goal is density in the center. We will have spaces designated as parks but, we do not want large, open tracts of land. We want areas to develop in close proximity to the city. Staff proposed this designation for the Comprehensive Plan Map be removed from the text. There is also a designation called “Agriculture.” This description says, “This Comprehensive Plan designation includes lands used primarily for grazing, crop farming, hobby farming, and other related uses. These lands are intended to remain in their customary agricultural use for the foreseeable future.” In the City, we don’t really want agriculture lands. Those uses are better bordering the city or present out in the County. For city planning, the city is not striving to plan for agriculture. The same idea is present in both designations; as a city, we are not looking for large, open spaces to remain large, open spaces. The current designations on the Comprehensive Map were shown, especially those who have a Rural Cluster or Agriculture designation. If these descriptions are removed, the land would have to have a different designation. One of the designations is “Single Family Residential,” which allows for many different Residential designations. Single Family Residential has been used in place of Rural Cluster and Agriculture. In addition, other places are developing in the city. One of these places is along 12th Street on some higher land along the road; this land is adjacent to flood area. Around the airport, 5 there was agriculture, but staff did not feel single-family was appropriate for this area. This area is also located along the highway and staff felt this area would be more appropriate as industrial or commercial. Road changes are coming on Moody that would allow either an overpass or underpass to allow access from the West side of the highway to the East side of the city. Potentially, some commercial would be adequately placed at this gateway. A commercial node was located near Basic American area, as well as residential identified on Basic American’s land. The company is already using part of this land for their processing. Staff determined the designation would be better as industrial for their land, but have a commercial support designation adjacent. The last change is a commercial node in the northeast part of the city. A high traffic area would be further to the north, rather than in the center of Low to Moderate residential to support a commercial node. Chairman Rory Kunz asked the Commissioners if they had any clarification questions for staff. Melanie Davenport was thinking about Basic American and the large area that will be industrial. Is there future plans for a park near Basic American. Tawnya answered, Staff is working with Basic American to enhance the riverfront area of their property as part of their development agreement. Vince Haley is wondering why all of the changes are being done at one time. Tawnya responded, a piece of the proposal could be excluded in the motion if the Commission did not agree on an area to be changed. She reminded the Commissioners, this Comprehensive Plan Map is a planning document and should represent what we do want to see in the future in these areas. Keith Esplin asked for the descriptions to be read again for Rural Cluster. Tawnya read the designation descriptions. She shared part of the discussion on the staff level was the designations “Rural Cluster” and “Agriculture” are more transition areas from the County to the City and should be driven by the County. These designations would be for land annexing into the city, but the city is not going to plan to have areas that are Rural Cluster and Agriculture in the city. The text in the Comprehensive Plan text are not being changed tonight, these changes will be part of a further effort. Kristi Anderson asked about the changes of the roads that would support the moving of the commercial node in the northeast part of the city. From the East to the West, on the road that runs by Wal-Mart, there will be an underpass or overpass that will allow for more frequent traffic. John Bowen clarified. David Pulsipher also clarified where the Impact Area is in relation to the city. Tawnya explained, there are not a lot of east to west accesses in our city. Keith Esplin asked if this is also considered on 7th S. Instead, Tawnya answered, the interchanges have changes coming driven by the Idaho Transportation Department. John Bowen asked how far Basic American would be from the overpass or underpass. He is asking about moving the trucks from this business to the highway. These areas were located on the map. Other road planning is being discussed for this area. Vince Haley asked about the commercial node location. This node is located now at an intersection. David Pulsipher asked why not the commercial along the Yellowstone Highway. The commercial corridor was shown. This area has not driven any commercial development. Vince Haley confirmed this map projects 20 years out. Melanie Davenport explained the public references the Comprehensive Plan all the time. Vince Haley is worried about all the changes presented and the Commissioners expectation to study all these areas. Rory Kunz explained the expectation is that the Commissioners already understand the Comprehensive Plan and zones enough to make an educated choice. Keith Esplin says several parcels are affected, but the designations are common. Melanie Davenport asked about the process to determine these changes. Tawnya responded, a couple of Strategic Planning meetings were held for this discussion, which include the Mayor, Scott Johnson, Keith Davidson, Sally Smith, Bret Stoddard, and the Planner. The first meeting was based on the descriptions for the land 6 designations and the areas we see as transitional for the future of our city. Proposals were made by this body. She worked with GIS to make a map that represented those proposals. The same body reviewed the map to identify any missing lands or thoughts about the changes. Then, Staff moved forward. Chairman Rory Kunz asked the Commissioners if they had any conflicts of interest or had been approached by any parties relative to this particular subject. If you believe your prior contact with respect to this subject has created a bias, you should recuse yourself, otherwise at this time please indicate the nature of your conversation or contact. Chairman Rory Kunz opened the public input portion of the hearing at 7:16p.m. Favor: Forest Bonner – 865 W Liberty Ln - Basic American Foods – He is on layoff right now from Basic American. The expansion will bring in 40 more jobs for Rexburg. Neutral: None Opposed: None Written Input: None Rebuttal: None Chairman Rory Kunz asked if anyone else would like to speak? He closed the public input portion of the hearing at 7:18p.m. Melanie Davenport asked if Rory sees this is as a positive change in his line of work. Rory says it makes sense for developers to be able to develop their land and get its full use. If the city expands to that point, we need to be able to keep the density close to town, which would allow for larger open spaces outside of town. Keith Esplin asked, in the impact area, could someone develop on the far outside of these areas? Rory Kunz, says this would depend on the compliance with the County’s Comprehensive Plan and if the developer paid for the infrastructure to reach them. David Pulsipher asked about the Impact area and if the County overlaps into this area. The County controls the area and is taxed as such, but as far as development, the city rules apply. MOTION: Recommend approval by the City Council of the Comprehensive Plan Map changes as applied, because it meets the needs of the city., Action: Approve, Moved by John Bowen, Seconded by Kristi Anderson. Commission Discusses the Motion: None. VOTE: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 7, No = 1, Abstain = 0). Yes: David Pulsipher, John Bowen, Keith Esplin, Kristi Anderson, Melanie Davenport, Rory Kunz, Todd Marx. No: Vince Haley. 3. 6:45PM (19-00332) – 669 S 12th W – Rezone approximately 52 N 3rd W, 164 W 1st N, 231 W 1st N, and 250 W Main St from Light Industrial (LI), Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) and Community Business Center (CBC) to Mixed Use (MU). (action) 7 Brad Wolfe needs to recuse himself because he owns property in this proposal and will not be able to vote on this application with City Council. Cory Sorensen – 1041 Country Rd, Sugar City – He is representing four other owners, but he owns a significant piece of this property with his brothers. A few years ago, all the properties along Main Street were rezoned to Mixed Use to 5th W. The land for this application was previously zoned as Mixed Use and approved in 2012, but has reverted due to a Sunset Clause. Cory helped with the zone change, but he did not have significant ownership at the time. Light Industrial doesn’t really fit here anymore. The granaries, several of them, are no longer in use. He joined forces with the owner of the silos and a couple of other property owners. He wants to create the natural flow from low to moderate to the west and Mixed Use, keeping the commercial component along the streets with residential on the interior with multiple accesses, creating an environment that is a true, mixed-use project. He believes the area is about 5.5 acres. He is negotiating with the railroad on the railroad spur shown on the map, but not present on the land at this location. He showed an old piece of track that is not connected to anything else. He believes the railroad spur has not been used in 30-40 years. The goal is to ask for the Mixed Use zone. There is not project figured out for this land at this time. Kristi Anderson wondered about putting residential next to the railroad. Cory showed examples along the railroad where there is zoning of high-density adjacent to the railroad throughout the city. He lived by the railroad for ten years and said, you don’t even notice when it is going by. The railroad may see one train a day in the evening. He talked about a property of his near the railroad he rents, and no one has ever complained about the railroad. Cory and his brothers are long-term residents and have ties to the community. The property lies in the center of the Infill/Redevelopment Overlay. The Infill/Redevelopment goals of this area say, “The City of Rexburg City Council, Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Staff have been actively engaged in an effort to promote good planning principles. After a great deal of study, it has been determined that whenever possible the large demand for community housing generated by a growing university be focused to areas within the City core that are close to the BYUI campus, commercial centers, community amenities and job centers.” One reason for this is because you reduce costs developing close to the city’s core: infrastructure is already present and you don’t have to spend as much money to get things to that location. “It is in the best interest of all the citizens...” There may be neighbors next door that may not like apartments, but for all the citizens of Rexburg, it makes more sense to put apartments here, than put apartments west of town and put a Mixed Use project there. Parks are within a couple of blocks, Broulims is nearby, the property is three blocks from the University. The brick yard is a comparable project. For the brick yard, residential has to be driven through to get to the commercial. His project will be close to shopping. In his mind, the transitions from commercial to mixed use to medium-density residential makes sense for good planning. John Bowen loves the train. He had an office by the railroad tracks. His nephew is an engineer on the train. He likes to see the agriculture products move through the community. He feels this a great idea for this area. Cory said it has been a weed patch for way too long. Staff Report: Tawnya Grover – The Staff report shows some of the background of this property. This land has struggled to change on the Planning & Zoning Commission level and the City Council. Cory actually went back a second time for an adjusted proposal once he received the feedback from the hearings. Still, there was a struggle. The people had a difficult 8 time seeing change in their part of the city. The development has actually hopped over these residents in response to these decisions and their efforts to contain the growth. The Comprehensive Plan Map change and Rezone were run consecutively in the same meetings, and several times, the zoning had to put off, because the Comprehensive Plan Map changes would not go through. Several times, the Mayor was the deciding vote to say “yes” of “no” to get things to move. Eventually, the Planning & Zoning placed conditions to help both parties be appeased or confident their needs were addressed. On the Staff Report on pg. 2 under September 19, 2012, there were seven conditions placed on this request: 1) Surface parking only; no parking structure, 2) No access allowed on 3rd W, 3) Landscaped area along the frontage of the property of not less than 50’ (This is a lot of feet, more than Tawnya sees in the current requirements in the city; this is a huge buffer.), 4) 36-month sunset clause after which the zoning would revert back if the project did not move forward. (The 36 months did expire and the zoning reverted back, which is the reason Cory is in front of the Commission again.) When the project went to City Council, three more conditions were placed on this project: 5) Sufficient buffering with landscape for any line of site from a building to a neighboring backyard, 6) 1:1 ratio setback, 7) Allow no more than 16 units/acre. Again there was a tie voted and the Mayor voted yes to approve the motion. Staff feels that this time there is not the opposition that was present in the previous requests. Looking at the patterns in this area, the request would fit. Staff did not come forward with any infrastructure or traffic issues. With any project, a traffic study would need to be completed, to determine any potential issues with traffic. The conditions placed now look extreme. Tawnya felt the Commissioners needed to know these conditions to understand what was considered by the governing bodies of the time in case any of these conditions make sense for current use of the land. Chairman Rory Kunz asked the Commissioners if they had any clarification questions for staff. Melanie Davenport stated nothing significant has happened in this area. This area has remained stagnant, while development continued around the property. The unused property had truck trailers parked on the property. When Tawnya went out to the property, the property had been recently mowed, but had previously been a weed patch. Development in this area, she feels, would improve the look of the parcel and improve the neighborhood. Keith Esplin asked if the restrictions placed on the property hindered the development. Tawnya said no, the hindering factors were the ownerships situation of the property and the opposition at the time. The minutes were filled with these themes. Rory Kunz asked if development patterns have changed since 2012. Tawnya answered, yes. Just looking at this area, you can see that this area has been a good area for high-density residential and the commercial in this area has been sustainable along Main Street. These uses could do well in this location and thrive. Melanie Davenport stated there is plenty of room to adhere to the parking rules. Chairman Rory Kunz asked the Commissioners if they had any conflicts of interest or had been approached by any parties relative to this particular subject. If you believe your prior contact with respect to this subject has created a bias, you should recuse yourself, otherwise at this time please indicate the nature of your conversation or contact. Chairman Rory Kunz reviewed the public hearing procedures. Chairman Rory Kunz opened the public input portion of the hearing at 7:44p.m. 9 Favor: Scott Campbell – 164 W 1st N – He is the owner and general manager of Centennial Granary and one of the owners of one of the parcels being considered. He bought his business in 2007 and he was at the edge of town at the time. Being in the center of the town is not best for residents in the middle of town nor the grain business. Farmers deliver grain to the granary in either semi-trucks or bobtail trucks. They are able to navigate through the city streets. Everyone knew, when I was a boy, that you gave that truck a little bit of room. This doesn’t happen as much anymore. His customers are the farmers in the community, who usually live out in the county areas. His customers, for the most part, do not live in the city. They do not care to drive in the city traffic to do business, but there are not many grain elevators; they don’t have a lot of choices for where they do business. Scott knew something like this might be happening. Cory approached him a couple of months ago and asked if he would be interested in participating. He has been operating his business with the existing assets with the intention that a proposal would come forward. Scott is a customer of the railroad; he ships railcars of wheat throughout the United States to as far as Alabama from Rexburg. The railroad is operated as a short-line railroad. The line was sold by the Union Pacific Railroad 20-25 years ago to WATCO Companies, now called the Eastern Idaho Railroad. WATCO owns from the north of Idaho Falls to Ashton to Menan, through Ririe and up over the bench to end in Newdale. They don’t move a lot of cars; once a day, Monday through Friday. They have speed restrictions at 20-25 mph. There is going to be a railroad that runs through Rexburg. It would take four semis to move the same amount of wheat as 1 rail car to market. He has a document of a previous owner easement for the railroad spur that says if the railroad abandons the spur, the property reverts back to the owner. He has hired an attorney to work with the railroad to get this matter straightened out. Eric Sorensen – 145 S 2nd W – Cory read some of the Infill/Redevelopment Overlay. He would like to also read “The purpose of the Infill/Redevelopment effort is to balance community good with individual choice and property rights.” The policy statement has four points to it: “1) Densification through Infill and Redevelopment will save tax dollars by reducing the cost of streets, infrastructure, Police and Emergency Services, Sanitation and other vital services. The existing Comprehensive Plan Map is the primary document for planning future city growth and development. 2) It is in the best interest of all of the citizens of Rexburg to locate higher-density, housing projects near campus and the city core whenever possible. Besides the savings of tax dollars, there is also a positive health effect and other cost savings associated with being able to walk to campus, shopping, parks and other city amenities. 3) Identifying Infill/Redevelopment projects near the city core and making the necessary zone changes to encourage development not only will clean up vacant weeded properties, but will also partially ‘level the playing field’ for these projects versus the lower cost of finding cheaper agricultural ground on the periphery of the city.” Eric believes this means developers, who would normally develop on the outskirts of the city, are able to move in and develop the infill in the middle of the city and the city will help them. He was part of the rezone in 2012 and he heard the objections. The objections mainly came from the houses directly to the West. The people objected to traffic, they wanted to maintain their small-town neighborhood feel, felt there would be an increase of crime, and taxes would go up. Each one of these may or may not be a concern. As population increases, does this mean crime increases? Vacant land is an area for crime. He has parked trucks on this property and he has had the truck broken into and a laptop stolen out of it. A car parked there had the windows broken out if it. When there are less eyes, teenagers will cause mischief and damage. As far as taxes, the infrastructure costs less. Safety concerns, for children and traffic, can be mitigated with sidewalks, lighting is improved, crosswalks added, and these items that come with development improve the safety. The more individual residences backing out into the road may 10 be more dangerous instead of one development entering at one location and exiting forward at one point. Quality of life may improve with development as the stores that have not been kept up for years, get more traffic and customers. In Salt Lake, the church went in and built a high- rise building and put a bunch of people in the middle of town and revitalized a deteriorating downtown area. Development does not always ruin the quality of life, but enhances it. We are not talking about big high rises at this location. The last time there was a zone change, and the conditions were placed on the property, this did kill the project. The land owners could not get the development to work. The temptation is to add additional conditions to an application to make both parties happy. The zones already have well, thought-out rules in place that govern those areas. Additional rules to appease both parties can kill a project. He is in favor of the application. Neutral: Brad Wolfe – 155 S 2nd W – He is part of the application and feels like he should be for it. From his standpoint, the project is not going to affect his business one way or another. If his business was destroyed today, he would probably do more of a mixed-use project. There has been a lot of speaking of the past. He thinks we should look at the area at present and what the best use of that property is today. There is not opposition present, so people must be o.k. with the change now. The people have all been served notice and the change has been posted on the property. These are the items he feels the decision should be based on. Ryan Sorenson – 4700 Schurz Hwy, in Nevada – He doesn’t live in Idaho, but runs the family farm back in Nevada. A lot of comments have been based on the Comprehensive Plan comments made tonight. The application being presented is in alignment with the Comprehensive Plan years ago, when the Comprehensive Plan for this area was considered Neighborhood Commercial/Mixed Use. The Commissioners have had a chance today to see both ends of the spectrum. The Commissioners made plans to amend the Comprehensive Plan for future use today and now the application before them for a rezone supports the designation placed on the Comprehensive Plan Map. Opposed: None Written Input: None Rebuttal: None Chairman Rory Kunz asked if anyone else would like to speak? He closed the public input portion of the hearing at 8:02 p.m. Keith Esplin believes the presentation and arguments are well done. As he has driven by, he has wondered why change has not happened in this area. This application would benefit the businesses in this location. MOTION: Motion to recommend to City Council to approve the rezone of this application to Mixed Use without any conditions due to the benefits identified in the infill/redevelopment area., Action: Approve, Moved by Keith Esplin, Seconded by David Pulsipher. Commission Discusses the Motion: David Pulsipher feels that the approval of the zone change with the Urban Renewal land, he feels this change is a good adjacent use. This area does need the opportunity to be renewed. 11 VOTE: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 8). Yes: David Pulsipher, John Bowen, Keith Esplin, Kristi Anderson, Melanie Davenport, Rory Kunz, Todd Marx, Vince Haley. #1 #3 Items for Discussion:  Review of tiny homes options - Vince Haley feels this should be tabled, because those who attended the meeting in Boise are not present. Tawnya shared the State allows several different options to regulate tiny homes. One of these options is to regulate tiny homes as Manufactured Homes. The 2018 ICC Building Codes contain an appendix about requirements of tiny homes. This Building Code version will have to be adopted on the State level before it can be adopted on the City level. So, we are still several years from this happening. The Commissioners can read this section. Keith Esplin asked if the City Council goes along with the Planning and Zoning Commission decisions. For the most part, the City Council has voted in line with the Planning & Zoning Commission’s recommendations. The application on 12th W was suggested. This application will actually still be moving forward to City Council on their first meeting in August.  Accessory Apartment definition - TBD Heads Up: August 1st – Meeting canceled August 15th – Meeting canceled August 21st – PZ & CC Joint Work Meeting Adjournment: Commissioner Rory Kunz adjourned the meeting at 8:08PM.