Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-04-12 P&Z Commission MinutesCITY OF CALDWELL CALDWELL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMIS Community Room, Caldwell Police Department I l0 South 5th Avenue, Caldwelt, Idaho April 12, 2022, Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Regular Meeting - 7:00 p.m. Call to Order- Commissioner Betsy Hunsicker called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. Roll Call - Members Present: Betsy Hunsicker, Shawn Harman, Alex Zamora, Christina Byme, Ramzy Boutros Members Absent: Jim Nelson Staff Present: Robb MacDonald, City Engineer; Deb Root, Senior Planner; Cindy Brogdon, Administrative Assistant Staff Absent: Jerome Mapp, Director; Alex Jones, Associate Planner; Emma Hill, Associate Planner Others Present: Review of Proceedings - CONSENT CALENDAR: Commissioner Hunsicker requested a motion to approve the minutes for the February 8, 2022 Regular Meeting. MOTION: Commissioner Harman SECOND: Commissioner Bym e Passed: Unanimous volce vote. Old Business: I ) Case Number OA-2 I -04 (Removed from the agenda as per PZ Director) : A request by the Plaruring and Zoning Departrnent adding a new Article 14 to Chapter 10, of the Caldwell City Code, regarding the development of Multi-Family Housing. Commissioner Hunsicker requested a motion to remove Case Number OA-21-04 from the Agenda. Page I I Planning and Zoning Minutes I l) Commissioner Hunsicker requested a motion to approve the minutes for the February 8, 2022 Regular Meeting 2) Case Number OA-21-06 (Removed from the agenda as per PZ Director): A request by the Planning and Zoning Departrnent adding a new Article 15 to Chapter 10, of the Caldwell City Code, regarding the development of a Planned Unit Development (PUD). Commissioner Hunsicker requested a motion to remove Case Number OA-21-06 from the Agenda. New Business: 1) Case Number CPM22-000001 ZON22-00000r: Property R35892 (6.72 acres of 23.26 acres) located at 315 S. 43d Street is currently zoned "C3" (10.84 acres) and "Ml" ( 12.4 acres). Scannell Properties is requesting to increase the light industrial area with a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from Commercial and Services to Manufacturing and Production and a concurrent request for rezone from "C3" (Service Commercial) to "Ml" (Light lndustrial) with a Development Agreement for approximately 6.72 acres. The frontage property along Cleveland Blvd., approximately 4.l2 acres, will remain "C3" (Service Commercial). Testimonv: Deb Root (Senior Planner) at 621 Cleveland Blvd., Caldwell, ID 83605 stated that she did provided a number oflate exhibits for your review. PZ-1000 which is a revised landscape plan showing a 30 foot landscape buffer berm along South 43rd Avenue and new site plan which also reflects that 30 foot landscape buffer setback, building setback. She also provided PZ-1001 which is a revised engineering memorandum PA-l V2 that came in after the staff report was sent. The applicant also provided PZ-I002, which is a rendering of the proposed building which is Exhibit A-12 in the staff report. She also provided PZ- 1003, which is a packet of the slide sets presentation. The application tonight is a proposal to amend the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Map. The property is outlined in red, 315 South 43rd Street (shown on screen). The property is currently a vacant parcel. To the east of the property is Franklin Building Supply. Grizzly Motorsports is across the street along with the First National Pawn. Thers are seven or eight residential houses west ofthe property that could be utilized for commercial purposes, but currently they are primarily residential. To the northwest are industrial properties. There is a surplus equipment lot for the state (shown on screen). There are also some industrial shops that that take access through South 43rd. Northeast side of this development and across the railroad tracks is the Indian Creek Estates, a manufactured home park, then the interstate and the airport. This is in an industrial area with a mixed-use demographic with some residential and commercial. Cleveland Boulevard is on the south boundary of this property. The blue area (shown on screen) is Manufacturing and Production in the Comprehensive Plan Map. The red area is Commercial and Services. The applicant is requesting to decrease the amount of Page | 2 Planning and Zoning Minutes MOTION: Commissioner Harman SECOND: Commissioner Byme Passed: Unanimous voice vote. MOTION: Commissioner Harman SECOND: Commissioner Byme Passed: Unanimous voice vote. Commercial and Services and increase the Manufacturing and Production on the Comprehensive Plan Map by approximately 6.72 acres for the purpose of accommodating two large light industrial size buildings. The City's Master Plan requires that Arthur Street be extended through this site, so it will bisect the site not quite in half. Arthur will be a collector roadway between the industrial and commercial businesses to offload traffic on Cleveland Boulevard. As businesses expand and want to develop, the city is making progress on Arthur Street build-out through this area. Along with the Comprehensive Plan Map amendment, the applicant is concurrently requesting a rezone ofthe property from "C3" Commercial and Services zoning to "M-1" Light lndustrial. Many C-3 uses are also compatible and available to the M-l district as well. Commissioner Hunsicker asked if C-3 has the heaviest commercial uses. Ms. Root confirmed that it does. It also provides a lot of flexibility in what could be proposed on the on the property. The request to zone this to light industrial further enhances the ability and the flexibility of the site for those uses and development. The proposal is consistent with what the city envisions to be in this area. The city is in favor of this application. The challenges with this site are that there is a pocket ofresidential development that has been there for quite some time. Those residential properties are currently zoned commercial. They are proposed in the Comprehensive Plan to be commercial and industrial. Staffenvisions in the future that those properties will transition to a commercial or industrial use. They could remain residential which was the reason for the requesting the building to be set back or put an additional 30 foot landscape buffer versus the l0 foot that would be required there. To also have a berm with enhanced landscaping to shield the residential a little bit. The primary issue is that South 43rd Street is intended in the city's master plan to be the roadway with a sigrralized intersection at Lake Avenue, Cleveland, and South 43rd. That will encourage the trafhc, especially industrial trucks that need to tum left onto Cleveland to utilize that intersection when that signal becomes available. There are challenges with that. There are challenges with the residential pockets of development when they are in areas that are almost completely developed as industrial and commercial uses. This is a transitioning area of the city. This plan is their proposed landscape plan and site plan (shown on screen). The applicant recently sent over the new landscape plan with the increased landscape buffer and set the building back more from the property line. That will be from the right ofway, not from the existing street. They will have to improve the right ofway to the city street standards. Arthur Street does not currently exist there today. Because the applicants are proposing to develop on both sides of Arthur Street, they will be responsible for the full build ofthat collector roadway as they develop. They are proposing a smaller building on tho no(h half of the property above Arthur Street and a large industrial building to the south of Arthur Street with a commercial strip on the frontage ofCleveland Boulevard. The parking will be in the rear of that commercial development. They do have an option for a center access point into the commercial. It will be restricted to right in right out (shown on screen). Arthur skeet aligrunent will still need to be modified at South 43rd Street in Page | 3 Planning and Zoning Minutes accordance v/ith the city engineering requirements. The city does not wish to have to purchase the residential properties that are in alignment that is currently shown there (shown on screen). There will likely be a curvature to that road at South 43rd in the northwestem corner there (shown on screen). The Cleveland Boulevard and Arthur Street alignment will have to be modified in accordance with the Master Plan when that is signalized and aligns with Lake Avenue. These modifications are not currently on the site plan. This is a rendering of the proposed structure (shown on screen) that the applicant shared at the neighborhood meeting and shared with staff. That is the proposed rendering for the structure. It is an attractive structure. Landscaping, of course will have to be completed around that. Staff is recommending approval of the Comprehensive Plan Map amendment. Commissioner Boutros stated that the proposed allowable land uses looks like to be a wide variety of businesses that have the potential to create noise and odors. He asked if the berm as currently described would be adequate to manage noise and odor from this industrial property. Ms. Root responded that there is always the possibility and potential for noise and odors when you mix residential and commercial/industrial uses. The berm is providing more of a visual aesthetic view of the property. Fences and berms are not going to thorougl y protect the residential properties from being impacted by a new use. She considered the option ofrequesting that they install a fence on the berrn and that could still be done. The applicant may choose to do that on their own to protect the site for security or even to further buffer the individual people. That potentially closes in those residential properties and makes them feel encased or encroached upon. It was a consideration. It still could be a consideration for this commission. The commissioner is correct. The uses are wide open on this property. The intent for the uses that are not permitted at this site was to eliminate the more heavy industrial type uses that are allowed in the M-l zone. As well as those uses that were potentially, more delrimental to the residential properties or maybe that the city is not totally inclined to see on the frontage properties. Commissioner Boutros asked about the layout of the access road. Modifuing South 43'd Street as itjoins Lake in a way that makes it a logical signaled intersection. He asked if it is possible to keep the truck traffic that is expected to originate both from this development and potentially from Franklin building supply. He asked if it would be possible to have an access roadjust east ofthe berm so that that access road is the natural connection to the lake intersection. By doing that there would be cross truck traffic from these businesses to Arthur and then southwest on that new road. Then they could all exit at the sigrral. His concem is South 45th which is the road on the southeast side ofthis development looks like Franklin building supplies driveway. He asked ifthat road is going to be used to carry truck traflic with trusses, then those trucks should probably not be trying to get out onto the boulevard tuming left. Routing those trucks across Arthur Street and then south on a new access road would make it safer for everybody. It would enhance traflic flow and it would keep that residential street a residential street. Ms. Root responded that she would defer that question to the City Engineer. It is not in the interest of the city to build an additional road at this location. Currently, the South 43rd serves industrial properties to the north and west of this particular property, and has been serving those roads and will continue to do so. Page | 4 Planning and Zoning Minutes Robb MacDonald (City Engineer) at 621 Cleveland Blvd., Caldwell, ID 83605 stated staff has looked at this area extensively over the last several years. It is a very tricky situation, because there is this little pocket of residential (shown on screen) surrounded by everything else that is going on. Building an additional road that is parallel to the existing road is not something the city would normally want to do or promote due to the additional maintenance that it causes the city. Staffs preference would be that they use the existing road that is there. That road will be improved on the on the side of the development. As you get down to Cleveland (shown on screen), then have a slight meander to help it line up with the existing intersection there. Providing another road, which would require a wide area of right of way that would be in addition to the berm as it would encroach on the property quite a bit. It probably is not feasible to request, especially based on the traffic generation that has been presented in the traffic impact study. If there was a very high level of traffic coming down there, then that might need more consideration. However, at this point with the traffic the trip generation, it is not something that he would recommend. Commissioner Zamora asked Mr. MacDonald if there were any significant changes in the late exhibir on lhe updated engineering repon. Mr. MacDonald responded that the changes were mainly for clarification only. There was no substantial changes made. It was to clarify that Arthur Street was supposed to be improved on both sides. Before it had stated half-street improvements. There was nothing that would have a signifrcant impact on the development. Mr. MacDonald responded that it should read, "Shall tie into". Staff likes to have conductivity with our water mains. If they are in the same pressure zone, we always want that connection that helps substantially with fire pressure. He apologized for the error on the original. Commissioner Zamora appreciated the clarification. Commissioner Blrrne stated that the rendering ofthe building does not seem to have many sustainability practices in place. She asked if there are any proactive initiatives to make if more sustainable. Like LEED standards. Mr. MacDonald stated that when looking at the rendering, it is hard to tell if the buildings are LEED standard or if there are any other amenities like solar. Probably that question could be directed toward the applicant. The city does not have any specific requirements in our engineering code. The building department has specific requirements for building that have certain thresholds that have to be met. The developer has the prerogative to go beyond that. However, there is nothing in the engineering code or planning and zoning code that would mandate those t)?e of items dealing with sustainability. Commissioner Hunsicker asked to see where on the map it is going from commercial to industrial. Page | 5 Planning and Zoning Minutes Commissioner Zamora asked in the future if Mr. MacDonald could note the changes. He noted that on page 5 of 7 of the original document reads, "Arthur Street and 45t Ave. shall not shall tie into". He asked which it is. Shall or shall not. Ms. Root responded that of that 10+ acres that is currently zoned commercial, they are requesting that 6.72 acres is to become industrial leaving about 4 acres commercial. Mohnish Narlanka (Applicant) at 3468 Mt. Diablo Blvd., Lafayette, CA 94123 stated that they are proposing to bring some industrial product into an area that is already largely industrial. It is consistent with what exists around the proximity of the project. They believe that the frontage that is on Cleveland Boulevard would do best as some kind of service commercial. In investigating what might go there, they found that tlpical retail, like a shopping center probably does not make sense. However, a user like a carwash or a convenience store that could benefit the area. They understand that there are complications with the residential being there. During the neighborhood meeting with the residents, there was not a strong opposition to this project. One of the quotes from a resident was, "we knew it wasn't going to be a field forever". They want to do their part and make sure that it is not obtrusive. They will do their best with landscaping to make sure that what they are actually seeing that it is aesthetically pleasing. They are very excited about Caldwell, they want to be here. It is, you know, a community that could use some more of this kind best in class industrial products that they are proposing. Mr. Narlanka responded that it is a speculative development. There is no end user yet. As they get closer to actually building is when they would typically to out in the market to solicit interest. Commissioner Hunsicker asked what are exempt. She asked where he has done these projects in other areas. Mr. Narlanka responded that typically it would be warehousing. Last mile of delivery of goods. Store nearby raw materials for local businesses. Things ofthat nature. Commissioner Hunsicker stated that they have designed the building to be closer to the residents with expansion room to the east. She asks if they have thought to flip the plans and have the buildings further from the residents with the expansion to the west in consideration ofthose homes and to give them more space. Mr. Narlanka responded that thinks one ofthe complications with that is, it could cause two instances of construction for thern, rather than if they were to do the whole project, and then expand further away from them. They would be less affected by something like that versus maybe coming out a second time. The disruption picking up again. They will adhere to the landscaping buffer that needs to exist so that it is not intrusive to them. Commissioner Hunsicker asked if this option was presented at the neighborhood meeting, the building moving towards them or away. Mr. Narlanka responded that the residents did not bring that up as a concern. Page | 6 Planning and Zoning Minutes Comrnissioner Hunsicker asked what is the operation that they are proposing. Lowell Alseth (Applicant) at 300 W Mallard Dr., Boise, ID 83702 has chosen not to speak. Todd Berryhill (Applicant) at 3465 Mountain Butte, Los Angeles, CA 91602 has chosen not to speak. Commissioner Hunsicker requested a motion to close the public testimony MOTION: Commissioner Zamora. SECOND: Commissioner Harman. Passed: Unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Boutros stated that his concems about odor and noise were not a major concern to staff. Commissioner Hunsicker stated that with the berm and 30' of landscaping that the building will be enclosed. Commissioner Boutros stated the rendering shows a preliminary view of what the buildings will be. What they have not shown are various openings, doors, any other architectural details. He thought it might be a better idea to put more insulation along the top of the berm in the form of some kind of fence, so that the use of the property can be without any further restriction. Commissioner Hunsicker stated that they could condition it to look like what they've rendered. Commissioner Zamora stated that Commissioner Hunsickers suggestion about flipping the desiga puts the potential future expansion somewhat closer to those homes. He thinks that pushing it away mitigate some ofher concems. It gives additional space buffer. Commissioner Harman stated that there was already a meeting with those homeowners and they are not concemed with it. The commission is more concerned than the people live in there. Commissioner Zamora stated that he was not sure if they were given the option to flip the design at that time. Commissioner Harman asked if there was any insighl into that. Ms. Root responded stated that staff have not received any communications from the neighborhood. They have been notified at least twice through the neighborhood meeting and then with the notice of mailing that that they have been provided. Typically, if we have some major concern from property owners, staff would to hear from them. This building is desigrred with the dock doors and the truck traflic to be to the north side of each ofthose buildings. That is away from the residential properties. About the fence, you could condition a fence, ifyou so choose. You could choose to have them shift the building to the east. They have gone through a number ofrenderings and having that open space on the east side is more likely a place where truck traffic could turn and rotate around. There are more traflic movements before expansion takes over that space. It may be better not to push the building away from the residential development on the other side. Once this rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the construction ofthat building is completed we would not wish to restrict that expansion area unnecessarily It would have Page | 7 Planning and Zoning Minutes far less impact to the Franklin building supply side of the property than to the residential side. Commissioner Hunsicker stated that there is a 30' buffer on the west side. She asked what is the required buffer for a commercial strip mall. Ms. Root responded that it is l0'. Commissioner Hunsicker asked if someone could put a strip mall in with only a l0' bufl'er Ms, Root responded that they could Commissioner Hunsicker stated this is still light use commercial. It is already zoned for commercial, which could be even worse use in some ways. She regrets that those houses are there. However, it is a very industrial area. No matter what goes in there, it will disrupt those houses, and it is a 30-foot buffer. Commissioner Hunsicker stated that with the building nearer the residents, then truck trallic would flow to the east. Commissioner Boutros stated that he disagrees. He thinks with the traffic signal at the intersection, it will draw more truck traffic. Commissioner Harman responded that they are talking about within the property for turn- arounds, etc. Commissioner Boutros stated that is not sure how much truck traffic is going to be crossing on the east part ofthe property when the trucks are going to be trying to get from the back of the warehouse to Arthur Street. He does not think that the open space being on the side is going to help at all with traffic. Commissioner Hunsicker she was talking about intemal circulation on the back area. Commissioner Hunsicker entered into the record exhibit PZ^I000, PZ-l00l,PZ-1002, & PZ-1003. Commissioner Hunsicker requested a motion to accept the exhibits. MOTION: Commissioner Bvme. SECOND: Commissioner Zamora. Passed: Unanimous voice vote. Comprehensive Plan Analysis: The Caldwell Planning and Zoning Commission accepts the Comprehensive Plan components as listed in 5.1 and 5.2. MOTION: Commissioner Zamora. SECOND: Commissioner Harman. Passed: U vote. Page | 8 Planning and Zoning Minutes lm ous volce Findings of Factl The Caldwell Planning and Zoning Commission accepts the Findings of Facts components as listed and the evidence list. MOTION: Commissioner Zamora. SECOND: Commissioner Harman. Passed: Unanimous voice vote. RECOMMENIDATION FOR CPM22-00000f(Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment) MOTION: Commissioner Zamora that Case CPM22-000001 RECOMMENDATION TO BE APPROVED. SECOND: Commissioner Harman. Passed: Unanimous Roll Call Vote. With the following conditions: 8.2-8.3 RECOMMEIIDATION FOR ZON22-000001(Rezone) MOTION: Commissioner Zamora that Case ZON22-000001 RECOMMENDATION TO BE APPROVED. SECOND: Commissioner Harman. Passed: Unanimous Roll Ca[[ Vote. 2,) Case Number AMD-22-01: Amending DA-20-02: A request by Rennison Companies, Inc. to amend Development Agreement 20-02 (recorded as instrument 2020-068453) for properties R35140 and R35142 (23.6 acres) as follows: Article ll Section 2.3 Planning- l. Standards and Amenities Requirements: items d.4%--sriaimum-ope+*paee to 10% minimum qualifyins open space and m. @ modilto If required. olattine requirements shall be in conformance with Caldwell city code.The rezone and the development agreement were originally approved in 2020. The proposed mixed use project will include multifamily units and commercial business pads. The subject properties are located at 520 N. 16fi Avenue and 2505 Franklin Road, Caldwell, ID. Deb Root (Senior Plarurer) at 621 Cleveland Blvd., Caldwell, ID 83605 asks the commission to consider this Development Agreement Amendment. It is a minimal request for a couple of things to be modified to allow this development to continue on its path. The development agreement has been approved and recorded. In Article 2 Section 2.3 planning, number l, standards and amenity requirements, the staff had indicated at the time of hearing this case, a required 4% minimum open space. However, the ordinance actually requires l0%. The proposed development provides for more than the l0% as they provided for originally. Since they were going to amend the Development Agreement, staffwanted to clarify that l0% minimum qualiffing open space requirement because that is what the zoning code required at that time. The second piece and what is more critical for them to actually bring this case forward to amend this Development Agreement is item m under that same section. Item m said platting is required prior to construction of the multifamily component of the development. However, the ordinance allows this prope(y to actually be split by simple land divisioq and platting would not be required unless they created more than four parcels. Therefore, the fifth parcel would actually then require platting to occur. For this multifamily development, platting is not required. They do not intend to develop it and divide off separate off the buildings and sell them separately. Therefore, they requested to amend this Development Agreement to say if required platting requirements shall be in conformance with the Caldwell city code. These are two Page | 9 Planning and Zoning Minutes Conclusions of Law: The Caldwell Planning and Zoning Commission accepts the Conclusions of Law components as listed. MOTION: Commissioner Zamora. SECOND: Commissioner Byme. Passed: Unanimous voice vote. Testimonv: very simple amendments to this Development Agreement. However, one of thern is critical to how they intend to develop the properry, which is that platting requirement versus not platting. There is a lot ofexpense and procedure for that. That is what they are requesting. They are not requesting to modify anlthing else within that development agreement or within the development plan. Commissioner Hunsicker clarified the change is from 4o/o to 10%o andwasjust an oversight in the ordinance. It should have been l0% originally. Commissioner Hunsicker asked if the Platting was a correction also. Ms. Root responded the platting at the time this went through the hearing process. There was a potential intent for all multi-family to have to plat but we never made that change in the ordinance. There are times that it does not make sense for that to be if the developer intends to keep it all as one project. In this case, they do intend to create a parcel for the commercial piece that they have identifred there in the southeast comer. It was created on its own and they will likely divide off the third phase of the development as well to keep it separate and that is for more for financial purposes than anything and is perfectly within their rights to do. Commissioner Harman asked as long as the stay beneath 4 lots it would not need to be platted. However if the exceed 4 lots then it would require platting. Ms. Root responded yes as long as they do not create more than 4 properties on this parcel Commissioner Zamora asked about the statement is m "modify if required". He asked by whom it would be required. Ms. Root responded that if at some future time they wanted to create individual lots for these buildings. If they want to sell thern off individually by investors then they would need to plat this as a subdivision in order to separate those structures. Commissioner Hunsicker clarified lhat if the ordinance requires them to plat it Ms. Root responded that yes it would be required by code. It would also be required by state statute as you cannot create more than 4 parcels on an original parcel. Commissioner Zamora stated that the "if required" part seems like an unnecessary qualifier, because the rest ofthe planning requirements shall conform to city code. Ms. Root responded the "if required" gives it the qualifier that indicates that it's not required right now. It allows for the option. Ifitjust said planning requirements shall be in conformance with Caldwell City Code, it could leave it up to question well, do we have to plat or not, whereas the code couldn't qualify that. If down the road, they change their mind about how they want to develop this properly, or divide it, then platting requirements would be required in conformance with the Caldwell city code and state statute. Page | 10 Planning and Zoning Minutes Ms. Root responded yes it was an oversight on the Development Agreement and Staff Report. Commissioner Boutrcs stated that this is being called a mixed-use community, but it does not look like it is mixed use. It is all multi-family housing. He asked ifthe structure in the corner is a clubhouse. Ms. Root responded that that area was a commercial node. Those will all be a retail commercial development in that corner. Commissioner Boutros clarified the applicant is not plarming to separate or plat those commercial propefiy separately. That they will remain under their ownership and be leased out. Ms. Root responded that is correct. Zach Tumer (Applicant) at 4909 N. Elsinore Ave., Meridian, ID 83646 stated that he has nothing left to add to what Ms. Root has aheady stated. He stated that he is there to arswer any questions. Commissioner Hunsicker asked what is the open space percentage ofhis project. Mr. Turner responded that it is between l8o/o ard l9%o. Commissioner Hunsicker requested a motion to close the public testimony. MOTION: Commissioner Byme. SECOND: Commissioner Zamora. Passed: Unanimous voice vote. Comprehensive Plan Analysis: The Caldwell Planning and Zoning Commission accepts the Comprehensive Plan components as listed in 5.1 and 5.2. MOTION: Commissioner Blnne. SECOND: Commissioner Zamora. Passed: Unanimous voice vote. Findings of Fact: The Caldwell Planning and Zoning Commission accepts the Findings of Facts components as listed and the evidence list. MOTION: Commissioner Harman. SECOND: Commissioner Blrne. Passed: Unanimous voice vote. Conclusions of Law: The Caldwell Planning and Zoning Commission accepts the Conclusions of Law components as listed. MOTION: Commissioner Harman. SECOND Commissioner Byme . Passed: Unanimous voice vote RECOMMENDATION FOR AMD-22-01 (Amendment to Development Agreement DA-20-02) MOTION: Commissioner Harman that Case AMD-22-01 RECOMMENDATION TO BE APPROVED. SECOND: Commissioner Byme. Passed: Unanimous Roll Call Vote. Planning and Zoning comments/concerns Page | 11 Planning and Zoning Minutes Next Regular Planning antl Zoning Commission Scheduled Public Meeting Date: l,tne 14 2022- Commissioner Hunsicker adjourned the meeting' The meeting was adjoumed at approximately 8:15 p'm- Respectfully submitted by Cindy Brogdon MINUTES APPROVED AND SIGNED BY COMMISSIONER NELSON ON THE DATE NOTEDBELOW: u ilt 2-z- Betsy Hunsi Date ATTEST: Jerome FOR DETAILED MINUTES, PLEASE REQUEST A COPY OF TIIE RECORDING. Page | 12 Planning and Zoning Minutes