Planning Commission

February 6, 2018 7:00 p.m. Planning Department Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners George Swaney, Darren Josephson, Margaret Wimborne, Gene Hicks, Arnold Cantu, Natalie Black, Lindsey Romankiw, Julie Foster. MEMBERS ABSENT: Brent Dixon, Joanne Denney ALSO PRESENT: Planning Director, Brad Cramer, Assistant Planning Director, Kerry Beutler, Brent McLane, Brian Stevens and interested citizens. CALL TO ORDER: Margaret Wimborne called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and reviewed the public hearing procedure. CHANGES TO AGENDA: Wimborne suggested, per Staff’s request, that the Agenda be modified to switch places of items 4 and 5. The Commissioners agreed to the modification. Minutes: Morrison moved to approve the minutes for January 9, 2018, Hicks seconded the motion and it passed. Public Hearing: 1. ANNX 17-009: ANNEXATION/INITIAL ZONING. M&B 8.619 Acres. Fairway Estates Division 22. McLane presented the staff report, a part of the record. Wimborne opened the public hearing. Applicant: Kevin Alcott, 101 Park Ave., Idaho Falls, Idaho. Alcott indicated that he is the owner. Alcott stood for questions. No one appeared in support or opposition. Wimborne closed the public hearing. Black moved to recommend to the Mayor and City Council approval of the Annexation and Initial Zoning of R-1 for M&B 8.619 Acres. S ½ Section 31, T 3N R 38 E (Fairway Estates Division 22), as presented, Josephson seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 2. ANNX 17-010: ANNEXATION/INITIAL ZONING Carlyle Erma Subdivision 4. Stephens presented the staff report, a part of the record. Wimborne opened the public hearing. Applicant: Fred Walland, 253 1st Street, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Walland stood for questions. No one appeared in support or opposition. Wimborne closed the public hearing. Morrison moved to recommend to the Mayor and City Council approval of the Annexation and Initial Zoning of HC-1 for M&B Approximately 5.106 acres, Section 16, T 2N, R 38 E as presented, Cantu seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 3. ANNX 17-011: ANNEXATION /INITIAL ZONING. Brookside Divisions 5&6. McLane presented the staff report, a part of the record. Black asked if there is anything built on the section that is annexed near the substation. McLane indicated that there is nothing on that section and it was part of the preliminary plat for Brookside 5&6. Wimborne opened the public hearing. Applicant: Daryl Kofoed, 100 S. Park, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Kofoed stood for questions. No one appeared in support or opposition. Foster moved to recommend to the Mayor and City Council approval of the Annexation and Initial Zoning of R-1 for M&B approximately 27.125 Acres, Section 33, T 2N, R 38 E (Brookside Division 5&6), as presented, Morrison seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 5. RZON 17-015. Midwest Rezone R-1 to R-2A. Cramer recused himself as Staff, from the discussion. Beutler presented the staff report, a part of the record. Black asked why the small piece was excluded from the annexation last month. Beutler stated that the subject property that is zoned R-1 was annexed into the City in 1971 and was Zoned R-1. Beutler added that the plat for that parcel is titled “The Fire District”, and nothing has ever been built on the property, and the ownership is now the same as the larger parcel that was previously zoned. Wimborne opened the public hearing. Applicant: Blake Jolley, Connect Engineering, 1150 Hollipark, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Jolley stated that this rezone is a continuation of what was done with the annexation and initial zoning on the larger piece to clean it up and make the entire area R-2A. No one appeared in support or opposition. Wimborne closed the public hearing. Lisa Lorette commented from the audience and asked if there will be a chance to comment about going to R-2A on the rest of the parcel. Wimborne stated that the rest of the parcel has already been rezoned. Wimborne re-opened the public hearing. Opposition: Lisa Lorette, 2293 Darrah, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Lorette stated that she is in opposition of the property going from R-1 to R-2A. Lorette stated that when she went to the Comprehensive Plan meetings this area was unincorporated and no indication that the rest of the area had been changed to R-2A. Lorette stated that the neighborhood is surrounded by houses and market values will go down. Lorette stated that the traffic is crazy already and high-density properties instead of residential properties will be a bad idea. Wimborne reminded the public to not cheer, or boo, or make comments not at the microphone. Wimborne closed the public hearing. Swaney stated that based upon the zoning in the immediate area and the adjoining lot that was recently rezoned to R-2A and the long-standing zoning of R-2A across the street, the proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and consistent with the ordinance as presented in Staff’s report. Swaney moved to recommend to the Mayor and City Council approval of the Rezone from R-1 to R-2A for Lot 1, Block 1, Bonneville County, as presented, Hicks seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 4. PUD 17-003: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. Midwest Townhomes. Stephens presented the staff report, a part of the record. Stephens clarified and corrected the staff report, that a traffic study will not be merited at this location given as there are lights at both major intersections, and no other lights can be placed along that road. Black showed concern about the parking for guests of the 70 units. Stephens stated that the private streets within the PUD allow parking on one side of the street, as well as the 4 guest spots on the southern border. Swaney clarified that the City Engineer has reviewed the plot plan and based upon the locations for the two entrance/exit as presented there is not a traffic study needed because it will not result in any additional traffic control by traffic lights. Stephens agreed with Swaney’s assertion. Wimborne asked how they will determine what the main entrance the PUD will use. Stephens stated that the developer can make the decision by sizing of the entrances, but Staff would like flow to go out both entrance/exit on Carmel and Skyline. Wimborne asked if they will work with City Engineers to determine sizing for entrance/exit. Stephens indicated that they are anticipating that both Carmel and Skyline will be used equally. Black asked if the City can mandate a right turn only onto Skyline. Stephens stated that can be considered and made as a recommendation in a motion. Wimborne clarified that there are not conditions from Staff placed on this application. Swaney reminded the Commission that there are variances being requested from the applicant. Morrison asked Stephens to go over the variance being requested on the spacing between the buildings. Stephens stated that normally for every foot of height of elevation it is required to have 8” between the building or a minimum 7’6” (15’ between buildings), this application is requesting a variance to have 12’ between the buildings. Stephens stated that they are meeting the minimum set back requirements on the perimeter of the parcel. Stephens also added that they must provide more open space in a PUD than a regular zone setting. Morrison asked about the drainage. Stephens showed the storm retention pond in the center of the PUD. Black asked what the main reason for the PUD. Stephens stated that the tandem parking and the variance between the buildings. Hicks asked if the private drive around the PUD is 2 lanes. Stephens stated that it is a private street and it will go in both directions with 2 lanes, and 1 lane for parking. Stephens stated that the tandem parking will be in the driveway with one in the garage and the 2nd vehicle will be in the driveway. Hicks asked if the 3rd vehicle will park on the street. Stephens stated that parking is allowed on the street, but most of the units are 1 and 2- bedroom units. Stephens stated that the street is privately maintained including snow removal. Hicks asked if the Commission rejected the changes on the PUD. Wimborne stated that the Commission doesn’t reject, it would just not be recommended but it would still go to City Council. Stephens stated that the Commission could condition the design, add some suggestions, or recommend denial. Wimborne opened the public hearing. Applicant: Blake Jolley, 1150 Hollipark, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Jolley stated that when they came before the Commission on the annexation/initial zoning they met with some of the neighbors in the hallway and mentioned that they would hold a neighborhood meeting prior to this meeting. Jolley stated that the meeting has not happened, due to the final comments back from internal review from staff on the PUD yesterday. Jolley stated that they wanted to address City comments prior to holding the meeting. Jolley stated that they plan to hold a meeting before the City Council meeting. Jolley stated that this development is similar to the project behind Big Lots (Big Sky). Jolley stated that there haven’t been any concerns with the driveway widths on the project behind Big Lots. Jolley stated that the units are 1 bed/1 bath, 2 bed/1 bath, and 2 bed/2 baths. Jolley indicated that the demographic interested has been near retired age or snow birds. Jolley stated that they have not shown a lot of kid traffic in the developments that this developer has done in Billings, Montana, Helena, Montana and Idaho Falls. Jolley stated that the property has always been a field with weeds and this project would help fill in property for the City and generate revenue for the City, as well as provide housing for people on the Westside of town. Jolley stated that Carmel and Skyline do not have sidewalks and as part of the development they will put in sidewalks and curb and gutter along both streets. Jolley stated that the north/south roads were widened by 8’ to provide additional parking spaces. Jolley stated that there are approximately 24 guest spaces. Jolley stated that the project behind Big Lots has tandem parking and there have been no problems, and the project behind Valencia has tandem parking, but has no tenants yet. Jolley stated that one of the City comments that they received yesterday was the suggestion to have an in-lane, a right turn lane, and left turn lane on Skyline and Carmel. Jolley stated that they will work with City Engineering to determine what the best plan is for those suggestions. Jolley stated that the streets are private with utility easements like the Big Sky Project behind Big Lots, and the Valencia Project. Jolley stated that they have 43% common space versus the required 25% to mitigate the side yard set back variance. Jolley stated that 70 units is slightly over 10 units per acre and R-2A allows 25 units per acre. Jolley stated that the retention pond has an elevation difference that needs to be dealt with by tiering. Morrison asked about buffering on the south and west sides of the development. Jolley stated that the typical R-2A set back is 25’ in the rear, which has been provided. Jolley stated that they will provide trees spaced intermittently through the back to continue to buffer the new development. Jolley stated that the units are all single story so there will not be a second story for the current residents to deal with. Jolley stated that fencing is not required as buffering for residential to residential, and they are not proposing any fencing. Swaney asked what the width of the private street is. Jolley stated that it is a 24’ drive isle with 8’ for parallel parking stall. Swaney asked if the landscaping shown on the PUD is the actual intention. Jolley stated that everywhere in Green will be seeded with grass and the trees spaced across Carmel and Skyline are required to be spaced at 30’. Black asked if there are any sidewalks on the inside of the development. Jolley stated that they are doing like the Valencia Project with sidewalks around the entire exterior to provide walking access to the streets. Black asked if they are considering a right turn only onto Skyline. Jolley stated that they will work with staff and if they require it they will. No one appeared in support. Opposition: Garney Hardy, 1686 Brentwood, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Hardy stated that she was annoyed by the comment a commissioner made at the last meeting, when she indicated she had inquired about the zoning of the property and was told it was residential, and one of the commissioners made a belittling remark that she should know better than to trust what a realtor said. Hardy indicated that the information came from the City Zoning Office. Hardy stated that people should be treated with respect and not sarcasm. Hardy asked what the squiggle in the south west corner of the PUD is depicting. Hardy asked if it is BBQ smoke that will go into her yard. Wimborne indicted that it looks like a pathway and some amenities. Stephens stated that as part of the PUD it is a requirement to provide some amenities to the members of the community, and they have provided a BBQ pit and a picnic area in the corners of the PUD. Hardy stated that the other BBQ areas are in an open space and that one on the southwest corner will pile up against her fence. Hardy suggested putting fencing to block the smoke. Lisa Lorette, 2293 Darrah, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Lorette asked if the setback against Skyline has been diminished from what is required. Wimborne clarified that the applicant has requested a variance of the space between the buildings, and the setbacks on Skyline and the western side of the development will meet the standards of 25’. Lorette asked if the setback on the north and south ends will not meet the minimums. Wimborne indicated that the only setbacks that would be different will be in the interior of the PUD between the buildings. Lorette suggested that if they kept the building space normal, then they’d have to reduce the number of houses, and that would not be a bad thing. Lorette stated that there are too many people going in and out of the area and they will have major accidents. Brad Cramer, 1742 Avalon, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Cramer stated that he was in favor of annexation. Cramer stated that if the green spaces in the center of the property are designed correctly that will make a nice feature for the neighborhood and is a positive. Cramer stated that the units are single story and that is a positive. Cramer stated that the density is substantially lower than what is allowed in the R-2A zone, and that is positive. Cramer stated that it is a positive that they have provided 24 guest spaces. Cramer stated that it is a positive that there are no driveways onto Skyline or Carmel. Cramer stated that he travels Carmel multiple times a day and sometimes it is tricky to get onto Skyline. Cramer stated that the parking that occurs on Carmel narrows the roadway and causes issues when turning onto Skyline. Cramer stated that he appreciates that there are sidewalks within the development and they will develop to City standards with sidewalks along Carmel and Skyline. Cramer stated that he doesn’t mind living next to a higher density development. Cramer stated that he does have some issues with the development. Cramer stated that the lack of a neighborhood meeting has been bad. Cramer stated that he has stayed out of the reviews and conversations with staff and has only studied the map that was sent in the mail, and he heard things tonight that surprised him. Cramer stated that he has learned through this process why citizens show up frustrated to these hearings, because this is the first time that they get to have any discussion about it. Cramer stated that a neighborhood meeting would make the meetings more palatable. Cramer stated that he would like to have a neighborhood meeting before the meeting with City Council. Cramer stated that there is no residential fencing required, but with the elevation difference on the south side he feels that there is a need for a buffer besides space. Cramer stated the parking stalls are odd, and with the elevation difference on that end, they will have headlights at window level with the adjacent houses, and some opaque fencing would be a benefit to buffer the development from the existing neighborhood. Cramer stated that a right hand turn onto Skyline would push everyone that wants to get onto Skyline to Carmel. Cramer asked the Commission to not consider making a right hand turn only on either Carmel or onto Skyline. Cramer stated that the unintended consequence of a right-hand turn lane is more traffic on Carmel. Cramer stated that he was confused about the discussion on the main entrance. Cramer stated that if there is an entrance that was going to be widened, he would suggest the one that goes directly into the development would be more appealing. Cramer suggested that they striped a left hand, right hand, and inlet to avoid confusion. Cramer stated that sometimes paint can improve traffic flow. Cramer stated that he wants this development to feel like a part of his neighborhood. Cramer suggested having the northern units of the PUD have their doors face Carmel to make them more inviting, with their driveways still facing the private drive. Cramer indicated that would make it feel like there is continuity between the new and existing development. Cramer indicated that many people park along the street that work in building along Carmel. Cramer suggested that the applicant, when discussing the roadway with engineering, consider and determine an appropriate no parking zone on Carmel, and sign it and/or stripe it as no parking. Cramer stated that a lot can be accomplished with paint. Cramer added that he is not opposed to the development, but some simple things could be done to incorporate it better into the existing neighborhood. Judy Delanus, 381 Cyprus, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Delanus pointed out her home that is adjacent to the proposed development. Delanus stated that for the last 28 years the back field has been part of her life. Delanus has concern about the parking on Carmel. Delanus stated that in the middle of the day she waited 12 minutes to get onto Skyline. Delanus stated that kids that live in the apartments across Skyline must cross Skyline to walk to school. Delanus stated that the intersection of Brentwood and Skyline is a dangerous corner as the sight is blocked by the hill. Delanus recommended that the area be made into a school zone so there are crossings for the kids on both areas. Delanus stated that kids for the high school come through their neighborhood to get to the restaurants at lunch time and they speed through the corners. Delanus stated that she has gone through Big Sky Project and there is no lighting in the development except for the lights on the unit’s garage and front door. Delanus stated that there is no new fencing at Big Sky, and only the property owners fence is existing. Delanus stated that the fencing behind her house will be used for the property. Delanus stated that if her fence disintegrates she is responsible for repairing the fence. Delanus stated that Jolley had indicated that there would be landscaping to help the people on Brentwood maintain their privacy. Delanus stated that Jolley indicated that there would be between 60-65 units and now they are stating it will be 70 units. Delanus asked if animals are allowed in the development, and stated that without fencing the animals will be everywhere. Ty Tomshak, 1742 Brenthaven, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Tomshak reiterated the request for fencing on the west and the south for the existing residents. Tomshak stated that they deserve an 8-10’ fence. Tomshak stated that Skyline has horrendous traffic with the pickup and trailers going to Camping World and the new storage place. Tomshak stated that they have kids going to a grade school, junior high, and high school, so they need a school crossing. Micky Beates, 365 Cyprus, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Beates stated that he lives on the west adjacent to the new development. Beates indicated that his utilities run down the fence line and questioned how the City will have access to the power supply. Morrison requested that if the applicant has another meeting before the City Council meeting, they should transcribe it and present it as part of the submittal to the City Council. Applicant: Blake Jolley, 1150 Hollipark, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Jolley stated that the squiggle mark that Hardy was looking at is a sidewalk to the amenity and that was a comment from staff to provide a walking way to the amenity. Jolley stated that they are 2.5x less than what is allowed in the zone for density. Jolley stated that there are things in the development they are still trying to figure out and they will work with engineering staff on their comments. Jolley stated that he has spoken with Mayor Casperson and told her one of the issues was trying to find a place to hold the meeting. Jolley indicated that one of the residents has some connections with one of the hotels and they will try to hold the meeting at the hotel. Jolley stated that Carmel should have parking restrictions and he will work that out with the City Engineer. Jolley stated that he agrees with the need for school crossings, and that discussion needs to be happening with the City Engineers, and that is not the developers job to do the studies to determine where the crossings will be required, although the developer will help with providing the crossings. Jolley stated that if this was developed as a regular residential neighborhood there would only be a 25’ setback and they could build a 2-story home without any exceptions. Jolley illustrated that a unit on the west is a 1bed/1bath with an 8x8 patio and the southern units are 2 bed/2bath and doesn’t have a patio on the back to help alleviate the tenants from spending time in the back yard looking into the back yard of the people on Brentwood, but rather encourage them to spend time in the front yard where they put in a larger patio. Jolley stated that they tried to meet the minimum requirements of the City and it doesn’t require fencing, although the Commission does have the ability to place that condition on the project. Jolley stated that the plat shows a 20’ overhead power access easement that is required by Idaho Falls Power. Black asked if there is enough room for the exit onto Skyline to have an intake/right/left lane. Jolley stated that currently between the side of the building and the side of the curb is 15’ on both sides, and if the Commission is ok they can take the set backs to the 7.5 which would be standard and that would generate 10’ which would allow for an entire additional lane. Jolley stated that they do have the ability to provide the room for the lanes. Swaney stated that it would be helpful for the community meeting to have a meeting with the City Engineer, Idaho Falls Police Department and possibly District #91 to come up with a traffic plan as to how to manage traffic in the area based on the proposed development and to provide some crosswalks on Skyline. Swaney stated that it is not all the applicant’s responsibility, but this is the opportunity for the applicant to play a part in a very positive improvement for the community. Jolley stated that he and Kent have had a discussion to try to decide what would be best utilized. Jolley stated that it shouldn’t be the developers burden, but rather a shared burden, or if it was justified before the development it needs to be done at City Engineering level. Wimborne closed the public hearing. Wimborne indicated that the Commissioners need to make a recommendation to the Mayor and City Council on the Planned Unit Development Proposal for Midwest Townhomes. Wimborne reminded the Commissioners that the staff report includes the varied development standards for the reduction of side setback; and the tandem parking for each unit. Wimborne reminded the Commissioners about the comments from the neighbors about other issues that could be considered within the recommendation. Morrison asked what the Commissioners think about requiring a fence along the southern border and approximately 25’ of the southwest corner near the grill area to mitigate smoke. Swaney stated that he would suggest that if that is proposed it be included in the motion for recommendation and that as a group vote, so the Commission speaks as a whole commission. Swaney stated that he is not opposed to a fence, but it is placing a burden upon the developer. Swaney stated that the developer mentioned that if this was an R-1 zone and they were discussing individual homes in an R-1 development the Commission could not mandate any person building a house to put a fence between them and their neighbor under the existing ordinance. Black stated that she is not a fan of requiring fencing where the ordinance doesn’t require it and agreed with Swaney. Black stated that the area where the parking is should have a fence to block the headlights. Josephson agreed with Swaney and Black. Hicks stated that he has another idea. Foster stated that she believes there is a fence needed on the west and the south side. Cantu agreed with Foster on the fencing. Romankiw stated that she agreed with Black on the fencing near the parking area and is not a fan of requiring fencing because and R-1 zone would not require fencing. Morrison clarified that he only suggested including a fence on the south west corner not the whole western side. Black stated that the largest growth population is ages 60-80 and builders are not building homes for empty nesters/snow birds, so this development will fit that niche. Black stated that the Big Sky development is her least favorite development in town, and the developer appears to have tried to improve on the previous divisions by adding the center open spaces, the sidewalk and the additional parking. Black stated that she is not a fan of tandem parking, and is not a fan of PUD, and is not a fan of the reduction of any of the setbacks. Black agreed with Cramer’s suggestion of facing the front of the units onto Carmel to make the development more welcoming. Black wants the center entrance widened and intake/right/left lanes created. Black highly recommended that the developers always meet with the neighbors. Hicks disagreed with the comment that this development will be primary housing for older residents, as it is on the west side of town and there are a lot of activities planned in the future for the Site, and this development will have young people with kids, and as such, he is against the variance on the setback for the spacing. Morrison moved to recommend to the Mayor and City Council approval of the Planned Unit Development for Midwest Townhomes with the reduction of side setbacks, tandem parking and an addition of a fence on the south side and the southwest recreation area. The motion died for lack of 2nd. Romankiw moved to recommend to the Mayor and City Council approval of the Planned Unit Development for Midwest Townhomes with the reduction of side setbacks, tandem parking and an addition of a fence on the south side and the southwest recreation area, as well as on the entrance to Skyline there be 3 lanes provided for intake/left turn/right turn. Josephson seconded the motion and it passed 6-2. Black and Hicks opposed the motion. Black indicated that she opposed the motion because she does not like the tandem parking. Hicks indicated that he agrees with Commissioner Black and added that there are too many people being put in a small place, and disagrees with the variance for the spacing, and the tandem parking. Business. 6. PLAT 17-033: FINAL PLAT. Fairway Estates Division 22. McLane presented the staff report, a part of the record. Swaney confirmed that the lot sizes are consistent with the original plat. McLane agreed with Swaney that the lots will match the existing neighborhood. Applicant: Kevin Alcott, Cambridge Development, 101 Park, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Alcott stood for questions. Alcott stated that the concept that the City has made the neighborhood collector right of ways wider is crazy. Alcott stated that a street that is built for a distance 60’ and now they are required it 70’ and it is not a good idea. Hicks moved to recommend to the Mayor and City Council approval of the Final Plat for Fairway Estates Division 22 as presented, Foster seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 7. PLAT 17-034: FINAL PLAT. Carlyle-Erma Subdivision Division 4. Stephens presented the staff report, a part of the record. Applicant: Fred Walland, 253 1st Street, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Walland stated that the storm drainage south of the property is up against the Meppen Canal, and to the north of the canal is an existing pipe that goes under Woodruff and drains storm water and ag run off to the existing Crow Creek Pond. Walland stated that he has discussed with the City Engineer about whether the pond has been designated as run off for the subject development, and the City is checking the records. Walland proposed that they will provide a pond that will take the water from the City right of way, the half of Woodruff that drains toward the subdivision and all of Bentley Way, and that any other run off would either be contained on each site, like the Kia Dealership, or go to Crow Creek Pond. Walland indicated that the plat doesn’t have storm drainage easements within the subject property that is being platted, and the storm pond easement would be to the south along the southern line. Walland stated that the cross-access agreement needs to be reviewed with the City surveyor to make sure they are conforming to the requirements. Morrison moved to recommend to the Mayor and City Council approval of the Final Plat for Carlyle-Erma Subdivision Division 4, as presented, Hicks seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 8. PLAT 17-036: FINAL PLAT. Midwest Division 1. Beutler presented the staff report, a part of the record. Applicant: Blake Jolley, Connect Engineering, 1150 Hollipark, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Jolley stood for questions. Swaney moved to recommend to the Mayor and City Council approval of the Final Plat for Midwest Division 1, as presented, Cantu seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 9. PLAT 17-037: FINAL PLAT. Brookside Division 5. McLane presented the staff report, a part of the record. Black asked McLane to show her the roadways in and out. McLane indicated there is a connection to the north, and a connection on the south. Black indicated that if you go out the south it takes you to 49th. McLane stated that the preliminary plat shows a connection that will go across the canal and towards the gravel pit, in the future Applicant: Daryl Kofoed, HLE, 100 S. Park, Idaho Falls, Idaho. Kofoed stood for questions. Swaney asked if they will have any ideas on controlling the open-ended road leading to the gravel pit. Kofoed stated that he understands the property will become the City’s property and at some point, the road will go through and become an amenity. Black asked if there is a pathway within this subdivision. Kofoed stated that there are sidewalks, and at some point, there will be a pathway along the canal. Foster moved to recommend to the Mayor and City Council approval of the Final Plat for Brookside Division 5, as presented, Hicks seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Miscellaneous. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Swaney listed the slate of Officers as follows: Chairman: George Morrison Vice-Chairman: Margaret Wimborne Secretary/Treasurer: Lindsey Romankiw Swaney will continue to act as the Commissioner that attends County meetings. Swaney proposed that in the future they have a progression from Vice-Chairman to Chairman, Secretary/Treasurer to Vice-Chairman, and only have to appoint a new Secretary/Treasurer each year. Wimborne asked Staff how they need to facilitate that change. Cramer indicated that they would need to change the By-Laws. Swaney proposed a Resolution to have Staff look at the updates necessary to the By-Laws in order for the Commission to have a progressive slate of officers where Vice-Chairman would become Chairman; Treasurer/Secretary would become Vice-Chairman; and a new Secretary/Treasurer would be elected, the Resolution passed unanimously. Black recommended approval of the Slate of Officers as follows: Chairman: George Morrison Vice-Chairman: Margaret Wimborne Secretary/Treasurer: Lindsey Romankiw Cantu seconded the recommendation, and it passed unanimously. Cramer asked if there are any questions about the Zoning Ordinance Changes. Black asked how the public outreach went. Cramer indicated that the meeting at the library was well attended, and the one at Long Fellow had poor attendance. Wimborne asked if it is an open house format. Cramer indicated that there is a presentation every hour and then in between the presentations is an open house format. Hicks asked if there is a way to stipulation the necessity of a neighborhood public meeting for redevelopments. Cramer indicated that it was proposed to require the meetings, and the Commission did not want to require it. Cramer indicated that if the Commission is willing to support the change, then Staff will write the amendment. Swaney indicated that if they require the meeting they will have to establish a way to demonstrate that they did it. Wimborne reminded the Commission that there is one meeting next month on the 6th of March. Wimborne asked if there is a work session. Cramer indicated that the current plan is to have the hearing on the zoning ordinance and the map. Wimborne Adjourned the meeting. Respectfully Submitted Beckie Thompson, Recorder