Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 3, 2005 P&Z Minuts Mendian Planning & Zoning March 3. 2005 Page 76 of 89 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rohm: Mr. Chairman? Zaremba: Commissioner Rohm. Rohm: I move that we forward on to City Council recommending approval of AZ 05- 002, to include all staff comments for the hearing date March 3rd, 2005, to include all staff comments dated February 24th, 2005. Borup: Second. Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Any opposed. That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Newton-Huckabay: I have a question. So, if I'm opposed to the development as it stands now, I can nay on 15; right? Zaremba: Yes. Newton-Huckabay: I got affirmative -- Zaremba: Yes. That would be the correct place. Rohm: Mr. Chairman, I move that we forward on to City Council recommending approval of PP 05-003, to include all staff comments for the hearing date March 3rd, 2005, and dated February 24th, 2005, and received March 1 st, 2005, and the amended plat received February 24th, 2005. Moe: Second. Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? Newton-Huckabay: Opposed. Zaremba: We have four affirmative and one opposed. The motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE NAY. Item 17: Public Hearing: CUP 05-005 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed use three story building consisting of retail, office and residential Meridian Planning & Zoning March 3. 2005 Page 77 of ag uses in the O-T zone for Dave Buich by Dave Buich - 641 North Main Street: Zaremba: We will now open the Public Hearing for Item 17 and this is CUP 05-005, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed use three story building consisting of retail, office, and residential uses in the OT zone for Dave Buich, I believe it is, by Dave Buich, 401 North Main Street. And excuse me if I didn't pronounce that correctly. Hopefully that's close. We will begin with the staff report. Canning: I believe it's Buich. I wish I could say downtown, nice building, go home, but, unfortunately, I probably need to say more, so I will. Rohm: That sounds pretty good. Canning: There are a couple of issues we probably should talk about. This is the Shell station just behind us here as you walk out that back door. It's -- and they are proposing a three-story building. Come on, building, where did you go? There we go. This is Main Street. This is Broadway. This is the existing city parking lot right now. They are proposing a three-story building. They'd have retail on the first floor, office on the second floor, and residences on the third floor. It will be a total of 8,300 square feet of ground floor retail, then, 8,460 square feet of second floor office, and, then, on the third floor will be four residences. You can see the building. There we go. This would yield a requirement for 71 parking spaces under our current ordinance. The proposed site plan shows 22 parking spaces, 11 of which are compact stalls, which is a fairly high percentage for our area of Suburbans. The adjacent city-owned parking lot contains 32 parking spaces. The applicant has applied for a variance for the parking requirements and that will be heard with this - or that decision will be made by City Council. I think on these past ones, though, in Old Town we have asked you if you want to comment on the variance for the parking, it's certainly something you can feel free to do, we can let the Council know how you feel about that and there is no standards for Old Town, so we are just a -- I'm sorry. Newton-Huckabay: We won't be able to see the creamery from Main Street anymore. Canning: Okay. Moving on. Newton-Huckabay: I sorry. I shouldn't have -- Borup: Good try. Newton-Huckabay: At some point I should probably stop commenting, somewhere around 11:15. Canning: The OT district does not have sign standards, so we have made the applicant detail out what their sign proposal was. That sign proposal is consistent -- basically, the only sign is in this feature here, I believe. And that was consistent with what the Meridian Pianning & Zoning March 3. 2005 Page 78 of 89 regulations are for the Light Office District, which is generally what we look for in the Old Town. So, it was consistent with that. The only-- Zaremba: I'm sorry. The individual retails that are going to on probably the ground floor don't want -- Canning: I presume there will be a little bit of wall signage that -- the wall sign, as they are right now, are only -- L-O allows for no more than 18 percent of the wall area, up to a maximum of 75 square feet. Zaremba: Oh. Okay. Your earlier discussion was a freestanding sign; right? Okay. So, wall signs are permissible. Canning: The use proposed is 50 square feet in the form of a circle, which is eight feet in diameter. So, he's only proposing 50 square feet and 75 square feet are allowed. They have not told us what they plan to do as far as identifying individual retail businesses in this location. So, they will probably want to do that before they get up to City Council. And the applicant may have something to add to that later. Zaremba: We will ask when the applicant gets here. Canning: Okay. Regarding the architecture, the only comment that staff had is that the design guidelines that we have been developing for the downtown area, which this would be a part of, highly encourage parapet roofs, instead of sloped roofs, and that, really, was the only issue and this has a sloped peaked roof, rather than having a parapet roof. When the Farmers and Merchants building originally came in next door it had a -- it had a very suburban look to it with a peaked roof and things like that and Steve really worked very hard with them to get it, for one thing, to be two stories and, then, to have a parapet roof. Now, this one -- they called about the design guidelines before they even, I think, set pen to paper on it and, again, it's the only criticism we had. We are thrilled to see the three stories and the fenestration is wonderful. The only thing we were disappointed in, I suppose, was the roof not being a parapet roof. The streetscape -- when Farmers and Merchants came in next door, they kind of established a pattern for street lights and the planters and I think we have asked that this application also continue those standards. And finally -- I already mentioned the variance for the parking, so those were the only issues that I felt that we needed to bring up as staff. Got some more elevations, I think. See how much better this one looks without that peaked roof up here? See? That's all. That's the rear elevation of the building, which I think is quite nice for a rear elevation. That's what you will see from the city parking lot. Rohm: And from the creamery. Canning: And from the creamery. Yes, indeed. Zaremba: Okay. Questions from the Commissioners? Do we know if the city parking lot is posted with any parking time limit? No overnight parking or four hour parking? Meridian Pianning & Zoning March 3. 2005 Page 79 of 89 Canning: We could have Bruce go right out there. Zaremba: Right across the street. Actually, I think I have parked there and I don't remember -- Borup: Overnight is when no one is using it. That's the best time to be using it, isn't it? Zaremba: You know, the theory on the city parking lot would be that there is turnover of vehicles and my concern is that maybe some of the residents might have larger cars that don't fit into the compact spaces, might park a car there and just leave it for days. I'm not sure that's the purpose of the city lot. So, I guess the defense to that would be to ask the city to put up a no overnight or -- Borup: Or no daytime parking. Zaremba: -- no more than 24 hours or something like that. Canning: The applicant may have designated spots for the residences. I'm not sure. You might want to ask him. Borup: There is only four. Canning: Right. Zaremba: That's true. All right. If there aren't other questions, we will go with the applicant. Marshall: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. I'm Scott Marshall, LKV Architects, appearing for Dave Buich, who wasn't able to be here tonight. Our firm's address is 1735 Federal Way, Boise, Idaho. 83705. We have no issues with the site-specific conditions or the standard conditions of approval and there is a couple things I'd like to address that I think that there is question on. The first being the signage, under special considerations. If you go to the sentence where it ends -- talking about the eight foot diameter sign on the north elevation, it says the applicant has also proposed tenant signs in the areas which are five by five on the east and west elevations. Zaremba: We are on page five. Marshall: Yes. So, directly above the doors on the front elevation would be signage for individual tenants orsignage areas. Canning: Is that correct? Okay. I'm sorry I missed that. I see it in -- plain as day now. Zaremba: I skimmed over that when I was reading it, too. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 3. 2005 Page 80 of 89 Marshall: The second issue was the architecture of structure. Same page. Item number two. We are not opposed to changing the roof to be a parapet. Our design intention was that seeings how it is residential, we wanted to bring a little bit of a residential feel to it and our opinion was because of the height of it and the narrowness of Main Street, that we would still be sensitive to the streetscape by having the businesses on the main floor and, then, providing a little bit of privacy to the residents as they tuck back. But we can put a parapet on top if you want it. It's not really an issue as far as our design goes. Zaremba: Okay. Marshall: And I think that's it, if you guys have any questions? Zaremba: Am I interpreting correctly that the residential units actually are set back a little bit and there is somewhat of a patio -- exterior patio around them? Marshall: That's correct. Zaremba: I think that's a great idea. Rohm: Yeah. I like that. They are not all sold, are they? Marshall: Not yet. I think they are still for purchase. Rohm: Interesting. Newton-Huckabay: You can still do that with the parapet roof? Marshall: Sure. Zaremba: This isn't necessarily a city issue, but I'm always concerned when a gas station is being removed, with old tanks and stuff. Are you prepared in case there is any cleanup necessary? Marshall: Our client is aware of the potential cost and abatement of that, contaminated soils. I guess he's weighed it out, crunching his numbers, to where it's going to pan out for him, so .- Zaremba: Good. Newton-Huckabay: Weren't those tanks just replaced almost a decade ago? Canning: I do know, Chairman Zaremba, that they did quite a bit of monitoring for the creamery. We tested that for -- to see if there was any contamination for that and this would be, I believe, kind of upstream from that and they didn't pick up anything, so the Meridian Planning & Zoning March 3. 2005 Page 81 of 89 chances are if something were really bad on that site we would -- they would have picked it up when they were doing the creamery and -- Zaremba: We would already know about it. Yeah. Okay. Marshall: I want to add we have met with ACHD already and they have approved what our site -- our access to the site is on both Main and Broadway and as well as the alley. They are requesting us to improve the alley and have it be one way. And as far as the parking goes for the residences, it's our intention to provide designated parking in the supplied lot to the residences on the top of the building. Zaremba: Are you saying they will have specific reserved spaces? Marshall: Correct. Zaremba: Okay. Marshall: To prevent that whole parking -- you know, leaving the camper out in that lot for four weeks or something, so -- Zaremba: Good. Any other questions? Canning: Old Town. Nice building. Go home. Zaremba: Frankly, I, one, appreciate your willingness to invest in our downtown, our Old Town, we are trying to revitalize it, and I have been very much in favor of seeing vertically integrated projects come. I think this is the first one that we have actually seen on paper. So, you already have my appreciation. Marshall: I'll convey that to our client. Borup: Yeah. I think it's exciting. I hope it's successful and that we see more of it. The only, I guess, question I have -- and I'm not sure which way I feel, and that's just on the exterior design and the parapet and such. I would -- Moe: Leave it alone. Borup: Leave it alone? Moe: Leave it alone. Borup: So, which -- I thought we was going to -- Moe: The way it is I like it. Borup: Oh, he's saying he likes it the way it is. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 3. 2005 Page 82 of 89 Moe: The way it is. Borup: Well, the others -- I mean the bank building and the George's Bicycle building, I think both have it, but they are both two stories, and it looks real good on the two story. This one has some of that feel. Zaremba: Well, I think from the ground level the top of the second story is going to look like a parapet almost and I'm not sure you are even going to see the top of the third story. Marshall: That's kind of what our thought was. I mean if you look at how -- if you look at the front doors in relationship to how big a person would be, I mean -- Borup: And these -- now these things here gives it a little bit of that feel. You know, it's kind of -- it does get some of that design to it. Marshall: The other thing that we were considering, too, is the view from the front elevation, as well as the side, we were considering bringing up and leaving a space on the top of the roof for individual mechanical units that would serve the residences only. And, then, the two towers on the ends would serve as cooling tower for the office and the -- and the retail space. So, that's kind of-- I suppose you could do that with a parapet wall, too, but that was kind of our thinking. Newton-Huckabay: Are you using the same kind of brick as they did in the Farmers and Merchants? Marshall: That's undetermined. We will be using a brick and a stucco facade and possibly some ceramic tile to kind of bring that old Main Street look, you know, be sensitive to it. But as far as coloring and stuff goes, I don't know. Rohm: Where were the roof top units going to be? Marshall: Well, we -- the roof -- if you see the side view, it doesn't pitch up in a triangle, it kind of flattens out, so it would kind of be up at an angle and, then, the top would be hollowed out to where you could put units up there to hide them. Rohm: Got you. Hollowed out. That's good. Zaremba: All right. If there are no further questions, we do have one other person signed up to speak. Thank you. Jim Zamzow. Zamzow: Good evening. Zaremba: Good evening. Meridian Pianning & Zoning March 3. 2005 Page 83 of 89 Zamzow: Mr. Chairman. Commissioners. I'm used to being last. I'm Zamzow. Zaremba: I have the same thing. Zaremba is always last also. Zamzow: I just have a couple of questions about this. Zaremba: Officially state your name and address, please. Zamzow: Jim Zamzow, 1727 Trout Road, Eagle, Idaho. A couple of questions. First of all, I have to make this comment, because I know you guys have gone through this before, but it's always amazed me how someone will build a subdivision next to a hog farm and, then, complain about the pigs stinking. Well, we have had a feed mill next to this location since 1953 and along with the feed mill goes heavy trucks, loud roller noises, dust with the grain being unloaded, and that type of thing and while I know that's not going to be a factor forever in the City of Meridian, it could be a factor for the residents at the top of this building and I just want to go down on record as saying that when people move into these very luxurious apartments that there may be some problems. So, I think -- just like the power lines in the other issue, I think that that should be addressed and be considered. I like the building. I, too, like to see the development down there. In fact, we, long term, have plans to do some good things there, too, if there is some way we could get together with those people that have the creamery. Is Jay Amyx still alive? Anyway, if they want to park their old vans and stuff, there is plenty of room back in the back there for that. My concern is the parking with the city lot. This still isn't an appropriate amount of parking, even with the city lot, as far as your code is concerned; is that correct? I thought I heard that. Secondly, is that city lot going to be available for parking for this building in the future, if the city has anything earmarked for that. That's a concern to me. We don't have enough parking along there as it is, so I can see some potential problems. Basically, that's all I really have to say. I just wanted to go down on record as -- I think they should go out and sit there on that location during our operation and kind of get a feel for it, if they haven't already, so that they know what's going on there. Plus, it's time you guys kick us out. Rohm: Good comments. Zaremba: Thank you. Zamzow: Thank you. Zaremba: Any questions for Mr. Zamzow? Newton-Huckabay: No. But I love the new store on Chinden. Zamzow: Thank you. Zaremba: I don't know whether there is a related issue, but in many subdivisions that are being put in next to something that continues to be farmed, we have a Meridian Planning & Zoning March 3. 2005 Page 84 of 89 Right-To-Farm Act statement that's put on the plat. Is there any right-to-mill statement that we can put on this one or -- Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, no, there is no state law that maintains that particular use. They certainly are allowed to continue that use, but it probably would not be appropriate for a plat or a condition, because the use is -- obviously, it can change at any point. But I agree with the testimony, is that certainly is a potential issue, but I don't know that there is really a way to address that. Maybe Mrs. Canning has a different thought, but I don't know that there really is a way to address that. The current use is that. They can certainly see it when they go there to buy an apartment. The other thing that I was going to mention, Mr. Chairman, probably -- because I think, as Mrs. Canning stated, it has been fairly common for this Commission to comment on the application for a variance in relation to that, that might be the appropriate place, if the Commission has some recommendation or suggestions to the Council in regards to the variance, because, obviously, the parking is an issue that's been raised by both the Commissioners and at the testimony, so that might be the appropriate place to make that comment, if you wish. Zaremba: Thank you. As the first vertically integrated project that we have had, I know there was parking -- a discussion of the parking and I have forgotten now how -- how short are they of what we would expect to be in a building with these uses. Newton-Huckabay: Fifty. Fifty. Zaremba: Short 50? Newton-Huckabay: Didn't you say 70 parking spaces? Canning: Seventy-one would normally be required and they have 22 off-street parking stalls. And, then, the city lot has 32. So, we are up to 54 out of 71. Nary: Mr. Chairman, on that note, too, I'm not aware of any discussion at this juncture that this property has had as to the use of the city parking lot or any cross-use agreement of any sort or -- there isn't -- I'm not aware that there is any signage currently on that lot about the usage or the time or turnover or any of those things. Certainly, the city may need to consider those things, but I'm not aware, unless the planning department is aware of any discussions that this applicant has had with the city about counting those spaces or having some cross-use agreement to be able to count those spaces as usable on a regular basis by the tenants of this property. Canning: That's correct. You go ahead. Rohm: I was just going to say that the applicant has made provisions for their residents and that's -- I think that that's going to be the spaces that will be occupied on a -- on a continuing basis and the rest of the spaces will be occupied on a come-and-go -- Meridian Planning & Zoning March 3, 2005 Page 85 of 89 Zaremba: Well -- and I'm not sure I have a problem even with the city lot being used by transient vehicles that are accessing this property. My concern would be that there not be permanent vehicles taking up space that -- I mean it's a public parking lot and it should be used for all businesses around there or all uses around there. Rohm: Yeah. At some point in time it may be something that the city should consider putting time limitations on those -- that city lot. I mean because right now the people that work in the buildings could take every one of them and there would be no parking for customers. Anyway, that's for another day. Canning: Chairman Zaremba, Commissioners -- Zaremba: Yes. Newton-Huckabay: Which it's almost another day, so -- Canning: There is -- the city conducted a parking study of the downtown area. I don't know if you're aware of that. The gist of the results were that for the most part there is not a parking problem in downtown. There is a little bit of a shortage just around this area. The City Hall generates a fair amount of need and, then, the church across the street when they are having their meetings creates a fair demand. One of the issues is that -- for planning is, though, is how much parking do you really want to require or plan for in the downtown area. The idea is to get people on their feet walking, have it be a pedestrian atmosphere. It is not to be a suburban location that -- where you can get from your car to the retail store in a few steps. I mean there is just a difference between the downtown area and a suburban mall location as far as parking requirements. Now, we haven't gotten that far in our -- in our assessment of the downtown area yet to come up with different standards for parking, but that's one -- that will be the -- I believe the only issue, really, for the variance before the City Council and staff has not included that analysis here, but I just wanted to give you that other information. Zaremba: Have we gotten comment from Meridian Development Corp on -- Canning: You know, Clair came by and I was in a different meeting to -- the director came by and I was in a different meeting today and I tried to call him, but was not able to hook up with him. He said he had one quick question and that's alii know, but-- Zaremba: Okay. Let's see. Is the Public Hearing still open? I don't believe we gave the applicant the last word, which is typical procedure. Marshall: Just one more quick thing. We -- there was extensive conversation between us and the client on the parking issue as well, because, obviously, if there is no parking, no one is going to come to the building and it's not going to rent and we came to the same conclusion that they did, is that it's a different -- the nature of the building is somewhat different than usual, it's not like it's the mall where you -- you would want to walk to a mall, because the parking lot is, you know, three hundred yards long. So, it Meridian Pianning & Zoning March 3. 2005 Page 86 of 89 was our feeling that it wouldn't be really an issue and that it would contribute more to the downtown fabric than to having not enough parking, so -- that's it. Rohm: Thank you. Zaremba: Are there going to be -- Mr. Marshall? Are there going to be CC&Rs for the four residents, for instance, a homeowners association or anything? Marshall: We haven't gotten that far yet. I would imagine so. Zaremba: I'm just wondering if mentioning that it -- at the present time there is a mill next door might be useful there. Marshall: There was a little bit of discussion of that, too, and I think that, you know, it is an urban setting and so anticipation of noises during the night, sirens, that kind of thing, I can't speak for everybody, but I know that if I were to buy it I would be aware of potential noises. It's not going to be like you're out in a subdivision out in Eagle or something where it's dead quiet. So, that -- it's a good point and I will take it back to the client. Zaremba: All right. Thank you. Any other questions from the Commissioners? All right. Thank you. Rohm: Mr. Chairman? Zaremba: Commissioner Rohm. Rohm: I move that we close the Public Hearing on CUP 05-005. Moe: Second. Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rohm: Okay. Mr. Chairman, I move that we forward onto City Council recommending approval of CUP 05-005, to include all staff comments dated February 24th, 2005, for the hearing date March 3rd, 2005, and received on March 1st, 2005, in their entirety. End of Motion. Moe: We were not going to make any -- Rohm: No. Newton-Huckabay: We didn't make a determination on the elevation. Meridian Planning & Zonin9 March 3. 2005 Page 87 of 89 Moe: -- in regards to the parking? Rohm: Right. No, I think we are just going to leave it just the way it is. End of motion. Newton-Huckabay: I am so confused now. Moe: Well, she brought up another good point. Are we going with the elevation as shown or to staff's comment on wanting to go with a more parapet, because that would, then, require them to make a change. Rohm: And I -- I, actually, accepted the applicant's position that the top story is going to set back in and from the streetscape it looks like a parapet, so I don't think that that's a huge issue. Moe: On that note, second. Zaremba: Okay. We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Zaremba: Do we care to give a consensus on the parking variance? Moe: Well, I -- just a comment that I'm a little bit concerned with, number one, I love this project, I think this is a fabulous addition to downtown. My concern is -- is you build one and others will come. Canning: We are hoping. Moe: But having said that, I'm a little bit concerned as far as the variance on the parking -- and I realize we have to do something for parking for this facility, but we are, then, going to -- we are opening ourselves up to where you gave it to them, now we want it and we want it and, then, at some point, then, we may have ourselves a parking problem by doing such. Having said that, I don't really know what I'm trying to tell you, but I have got a little bit of a concern there, but -- Newton-Huckabay: Well, downtown parking, I would imagine everything would be driven by demand. Isn't it going to be driven by availability to some extent? There is only so much space downtown. Nary: Mr. Chairman? Zaremba: Mr. Nary. Nary: Maybe to assist the Council, since it's ultimately their call, maybe to assist the Council, if the Commission has some thought in the fact that there are three different Meridian Planning & Zoning March 3, 2005 Page 88 of 89 types of uses in this building and it appears from the testimony the discussion was providing specific designated space for their tenants of the residences in the building. Maybe if the Commission had some thought to provide the Council some insight as to your feeling in regards to the office space and the necessity of parking in relation to those versus the necessity of parking in relation to retail, I think some of the testimony revolved around the turnover of parking and the nature of trying to create a pedestrian atmosphere, but maybe by dividing it by the types of uses that might give the Council some guidance as to how to set some standard for those variances to look at that, because I think you're right, once you build one of these and it's successful you may see more of that and that might be of some help to the Council. Newton-Huckabay: Is that by percentage? Nary: No. I'm just saying in relation to whatever your feelings are, but I mean they talked about providing specific designated spaces for their residences and if you feel that's adequate, then, the Council maybe should know that that is your preference. If you think that there should be some -- there should be some relationship of the office uses, because, again, those don't turn over during the course of a day normally, the same way that retail does, maybe that's part of your part comment to the Council as well, to give us some guidance between the types of uses, because we don't have anything in our code currently to address these varieties of uses in one facility like this. So, that might be a way for the Council to sort of get their arms around your thoughts as to those uses in relation to the parking, if that makes sense. Rohm: And I think that all of that is unique to downtown itself, but not specifically to this project and any comments that I would make about that parking would be in a -- more of a global nature and maybe suggest to the city that they consider the available downtown parking that currently exists should have some -- maybe some limitations on length of parking in a percentage of those, so that there is that turnover availability for retail, whether it be for this project or any other. But I don't think that there is anything specific to this project that I would want to -- that I would want to tie the Council to. Borup: Okay. I would think the owners would -- if they perceive -- if they have a problem, that they would maybe want to restrict certain parking places to retail only -- to limit it to the office and let the office park a little farther away, but -- Zaremba: Well, they can do that by designating some spaces as half hour spaces. Borup: Yeah. Zaremba: Or something like that. Borup: And I had the same concern Commissioner Moe does, I think, you know, we may have some problems in the future, but that's probably the time to address it as when the next projects come up, it's -- you know, it's good to get one something going and it would be nice to have that problem later on. Meridian Pianning & Zoning March 3. 2005 Page 89 of ag Zaremba: Well, I think my only concern is the public parking lot becoming de facto this property's parking lot and my answers to that would be to say probably to the City Council, yes, I'm in favor of the variance, my suggesting would be the applicant has said they are going to specifically identify the resident spaces and I suggest that the city do some signage that requires turnover in the city's parking lot. Rohm: I think that's well said. Zaremba: That would be my opinion. Moe: I would agree as well. Newton-Huckabay: I agree, too. Zaremba: Okay. Then, I believe that was a consensus and we are ready for one more motion. Rohm: Mr. Chairman, I move that we adjourn. Moe: Second. Zaremba: Moved and seconded. All in favor? Any opposed. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Zaremba: We are adjourned at what looks like midnight 07. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:07 A.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED DAVID ZAREMBA - CHAIRMAN _I_I- DATE APPROVED ATTESTED: WILLIAM G. BERG JR., CITY CLERK