2001 06-07 SpecialMERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING JUNE 7, 2001
The City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Special Meeting was called to order at
6:30 p.m., on Thursday, June 7, 2001, by Chairman Keith Borup.
Members Present: Keith Borup, Jerry Centers, Bill Nary, Keven Shreeve
Members Absent: Sally Norton
Others Present: Shari Stiles, Brad Watson, Brad Hawkins-Clark, Will Berg,
David Swartley
Borup: I’ll call to order this Special Workshop for discussion of the proposed
Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Do we need to say who alls here? For the
Planning and Zoning Commission, Keith Borup, Jerry Centers – let’s have
everybody just yell out their name. We’re going to start with a staff report – or a
staff pre-(inaudible) and then a chance to (inaudible) personal questions and
answers. I don’t know if – one of the things that I would be interested in is
maybe some of the stuff that had, it’s been awhile now but some of the stuff that
changed from this draft. Is that probably some of the things they did or
especially things that are different from the previous one I guess.
Nary: Our previous Comprehensive Plan?
Borup: Yes our 93 Comp. Plan.
Stiles: The biggest change the Urban Service Planning Area (inaudible) been
reduced. I’m not sure we have our policy (inaudible) clear maybe if we need to,
to avoid the panic in this community. We wanted to have some priority areas for
growth and that’s the reason for the Urban Service Planning Area being reduced
the way it is. It doesn’t mean that we don’t intend to serve that area it’s just that
the time frame set by the County is not very realistic. When we got our Comp.
Plan approved by them in 97 they told us we had 10 years to serve that area and
we had to provide technical assurances that we could. It’s not that we couldn’t
it’s just we don’t need to serve the entire area of impact within 10 years. It’s not
a very realistic planning period. That is going to be a big area where people are
going to come out and testify against that. Especially if they have property
outside of that area. Also the new map shows pathways and those are based on
the draft Comprehensive Recreation System Plan which hasn’t been adopted.
They haven’t put it up for Public Hearings yet. That’s basically what they tried to
follow when this map was prepared. Another big change is the neighborhood
center concept. You’ll see on the map it’s kind of – in some places it’s a full
circle and in other places it’s a half circle. That’s based on smart growth policies
(inaudible) been going to so many workshops in the Treasure Valley Futures and
Treasure Valley partnerships everybody’s trying to go toward more smart growth
concepts and there’s another little graphic in here that has a better depiction of
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting
June 7, 2001
Pg. 2
where that neighborhood center is intended to be but I guess it’s right behind
(inaudible) to have a little bit of core commercial to provide some services for the
neighborhood, transit stops, some open areas, elementary school, some higher
density around this core commercial and then go to a lesser density as you go
out. The grid system is probably going to be another area that people are going
to resist because they love the endless cul-de-sacs and can sell them fast. If
you’ve ever been through some of these neighborhoods here you can’t ever find
your way out half the time because it’s just a maze of cul-de-sacs and no clear
direction.
Borup: Are we – is the staff trying to encourage the grid system now?
Stiles: Yes do you guys not like it?
Borup: No I like it. I mean (inaudible) the City was forcing a number of years
ago.
Stiles: They were forcing cul-de-sacs and dead end streets everywhere?
Borup: Yes I was involved in (inaudible) 20 years ago where the City Council flat
turned down the subdivision and it was a straight (inaudible). So they went back
and had to them build something (inaudible).
Shreeve: Don’t you think that’s the Chamber of trends? I think before it was we
don’t like all of the traffic coming back and forth through our subdivision. We
wanted a private street. We wanted to keep our little neighborhoods together.
Now it’s kind of (inaudible) shift the other way that the grid system an easy way
to find in and out.
Hawkins-Clark: You’re also seeing high grid subdivisions nationally when you
actually have both within the same subdivision. They can kind of serve – they
can serve two different purposes really in some ways I mean you –
Borup: I like what I’m seeing, some of the kind of big subdivisions (inaudible).
Shreeve: Personally, as a resident I know there is a lot of things (inaudible)
developers that cul-de-sacs save money but we purposely shop for cul-de-sac
location. We’re on the cul-de-sac in (inaudible) because our kids – I’m a big
proponent of cul-de-sacs although granted of course the reason of transportation
and neighborhood traffic. We intentionally shop for cul-de-sac homes.
Stiles: Well it’s not to just deny all cul-de-sacs it’s just to – yes. I can imagine
there is probably going to be quite a bit of opposition to this because they’re just
not used to doing it. They don’t (inaudible), they claim there’s no market for it
that there’s –
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting
June 7, 2001
Pg. 3
Borup: -- I don’t know if that’s necessarily true I think I don’t know maybe we it’s
been forced that way. Like I said it used to be everything but the grid. Some of
the –
Centers: -- that’s the way the engineers designed it. Once the Police
Department –
Borup: -- in Meridian specifically –
Stiles: -- grids, oh I’m sure they would love it. They can’t find anything now.
Nary: They haven’t commented at this point?
Stiles: No.
Borup: How was – some of the (inaudible) things been working? I don’t know if
Meridian’s got – 100 point is that what (inaudible) do? Actually that was the land
that was laid out on the grid system back in 70 – the 70’s.
Centers: It’s next to Sportsman.
Stiles: That turns (inaudible).
Borup: (Inaudible) no it’s off Locust Grove.
Hawkins-Clark: And also off Ustick.
Borup: Yes this was in like 76 or something, 77 or 8 you know (inaudible). I
know there was a sewer problem there (inaudible) but that one now does it. I’m
not thinking like –
Stiles: -- it’s not really (inaudible) though.
Borup: No it isn’t.
Hawkins-Clark: They had originally submitted for it though.
Stiles: Oh and they didn’t like it.
Borup: Right. No but they’ve got a little bit of a (inaudible) that’s what I was
referring to. Something like Columbia Village as Bridgetower’s not in theirs
although they don’t have a lot of (inaudible). Does that solve some of the same
concerns with collectors? (Inaudible.)
Stiles: It helps and that –
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting
June 7, 2001
Pg. 4
Borup: -- that traffic flows through the subdivision –
Stiles: -- there’s another graphic in there showing the collectors –
Borup: -- Chateau Meadows is that way partially. They don’t have any houses
facing on any of those streets.
Nary: I think you’re always going to have the both sides of the argument too.
With the grid system access it’s obviously a lot easier in and out but also you
encourage more vehicular traffic through it. That’s the reason for cul-de-sacs.
That’s the reason that that type of development is popular is exactly what
Keven’s saying is that people do like that sort of self-contained nature of the
neighborhood of the self-contained – I guess the feeling of safety that exists in
having cul-de-sacs with dead end streets in areas like that that provides some of
that buffer. Probably why what you’re saying Brad is true is that nationally
they’re trying to do both things because there are people that would rather live in
a more accessible area closer to the collector road and closer to the main
streets. Then there are the people who would rather live as far away from the
main street as possible. They want to go to the City (inaudible). I can see both
sides of what people are going to want. I don’t know that one size fits all so –
Borup: -- that’s probably why I mean can you handle some of both.
Centers: I think you’re going to have to have both because of the way our
geographic land is graphed. First of all you’re not going to tile every waterway
there is. You’re not going to cross it either. You’re going to have these parcels
that – you’re going to have maybe a cul-de-sac or something incorporated within
(inaudible).
Stiles: Yes this isn’t getting away with cul-de-sac we’re doing away with them.
It’s concentrating more on these neighborhood centers that are actually on the
map.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes you’re only talking about a half –
(Inaudible discussion amongst Commission members)
Stiles: Yes.
Centers: I have a question Shari.
Borup: Well then that’s not – I was wandering if you were trying to encourage
more access to the (inaudible) –
Hawkins-Clark: -- this really only represents –
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting
June 7, 2001
Pg. 5
Borup: Three fourths of it?
Hawkins-Clark: Three, yes – well not even that.
Borup: Sorry Jerry go ahead.
Centers: On Page 10 of your memo?
Stiles: Yes.
Centers: How do those acreage – yes I took (inaudible) I checked your map
though. How do those acreages compare to the 93 Comp. Plan?
Stiles: I don’t think they were even designated.
Centers: You didn’t have any numbers at that time?
Stiles: I don’t think that –
Centers: -- that’s too bad.
Stiles: I don’t think that Comp. Plan map showed anything. By looking at it is
like 85 percent of its single-family residents.
Centers: Right but I found this very interesting that was – good that you put that
into the (inaudible).
Stiles: That’s -- was that existing (inaudible)?
Hawkins-Clark: This was existing in 1993.
Stiles: But they didn’t have the future Land Use Map did they – calculation in
here?
Hawkins-Clark: No, I don’t think so.
Stiles: So 3,430 acres were residential?
Centers: 4, 430?
Stiles: 3,430. That was back in 1993.
Borup: That was existing.
Stiles: Yes, 4,700 acres. Do you have any idea how many –
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting
June 7, 2001
Pg. 6
Borup: -- well this was build out.
Stiles: -- no acres in the City limits?
Borup: This is build out though?
Stiles: Yes that’s what the future Land Use Map – that’s supposed to be based
on those future Land Uses.
Centers: Yes that’s your map.
Stiles: Yes.
Centers: Right.
Stiles: Yes
(Inaudible discussion amongst Commission members)
Stiles: -- and it is duplicated – I mean the acreage for residential and the percent
of the total residential then it’s broken down into different (inaudible). Same with
the public –
Borup: -- these acreages are within the area of impact?
Stiles: Yes that’s the entire area of impact. The map also – you were talking
about the circulation. This is kind of roughly based on what J-U-B did for Ada
County Highway District. They came up with a little circulation plan. What Brad
and Steve did was expand it so it wasn’t just this one area that did show. A big
problem we have is with Ada County Highway is their reluctance to designate
anything at collector street because if it’s designated to the collector street
they’re responsible for participating and paying for the additional right-of-way and
also constructing the additional road width. What we’ve been trying to stress to
them is –
Borup: -- you mean flexible in a subdivision?
Stiles: Yes, if it’s a designated collector. Even if the subdivision itself creates the
need for the collector (inaudible) in their policy says. What they did conveniently
for them is quit terming them collectors (inaudible) them residential collectors.
That’s how they got around paying for any improvements within that subdivision
that we told them you know if somebody’s doing a square-mile with 1,000 homes
and they’re creating the need – I mean it’s 2,000 trips yes they ought to pay for
their own (inaudible) collector.
Borup: What’s wrong with calling a neighborhood collector then?
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting
June 7, 2001
Pg. 7
Stiles: Well the residential collector they allow – some plan on housing and
times. We don’t have the street buffer requirement that (inaudible) regular urban
collector. We just want some way to get through somewhere you can get
through the entire mile and to designate that so it’s –
Borup: -- use a hypothetical – on a future thing. Bridgetower, how did that fit into
something that you would like to see?
Stiles: Probably too many cul-de-sacs.
Borup: I mean but as far as the collector item?
Stiles: The collector is nice but it doesn’t go to McMillan it doesn’t go through.
Borup: I mean the things that we talked about there.
Stiles: But to have a collector –
Borup: -- but the road width and the buffering and all of that.
Stiles: Yes we would like to see that.
Borup: Are they – what they propose to comply with. What would it be the
buffering on normal collectors?
Stiles: It seems to me the last one, well Woodbridge. They didn’t designate that
a collector that goes through (inaudible) of that eight years. It’s only a residential
(inaudible). So when that nets through to go to Magic View, the Law
Enforcement people are going to go through there, the J-Bill people are going to
go through there. If Greenhill Estates had an access to it they would want to go
through there. The person that did the report for Ada County Highway District
that didn’t work there anymore said his superior’s told him not to designate it a
collector even though he knew it was.
Borup: What difference does it make what it’s called?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Commission members)
Borup: I think that’s good. The developer should be paying for it.
Stiles: Well I think they should too but that –
Borup: -- or do they need another definition then?
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting
June 7, 2001
Pg. 8
Stiles: -- for some reason that has prevented them from calling them collectors.
If they’re collectors in our plan –
Borup: -- so some of our City Ordinances have pertained to frontage on
collectors can’t be applied to, is what you’re saying?
Stiles: We don’t have anything that prohibits frontage on collectors that’s the
Highway District. The biggest point was we wanted a collector. There needs to
be a collector at least at the half mile that goes from this point to this point. It
doesn’t have to be a straight shot it can just be as long –
Borup: -- can’t that be handled? It looks like a collector it smells like a collector
as long as it serves its purpose what difference does it make what it’s called? If
it meets all of the criteria?
Stiles: But they’re not requiring it. If we put this in our Comprehensive Plan we
can say we’ve got this in our Comprehensive Plan you’re required to have a
collector through there.
Hawkins-Clark: The alignment is –
Borup: -- but you know why? I think one of the problems why – I’m probably a
minority on this because – and it’s never going to go away when you develop
these little 10, 20 and 30-acre subdivisions you can’t do something like that.
Stiles: But you can design it so it can accommodate the next development to
continue it.
Borup: Well but you’ve got to plan ahead. It’s these big ones that can do that
though.
Stiles: That’s why you have (inaudible).
Borup: That’s part of planning.
Nary: What is the – what’s the conflict going to be or is there any, you designate
a collector street and they’re responsible (inaudible) Ada County Highway District
(inaudible)?
Stiles: Then we’ll say the Ada County Highway District is not the final authority
and we are required.
Borup: They are the final authority of the road.
Stiles: They can be the final authority on the road but when it comes to a design
of a subdivision that’s the City.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting
June 7, 2001
Pg. 9
Borup: Then see when you do these (inaudible) you run into the stuff like –
they’ve had it happen twice in the last six months with people tying in. They
don’t want to use the stuff (inaudible). They don’t want to use a stub street. The
stub street ends up being vacated or just closed off with a garbage collector.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Commission members)
Stiles: They ought to be denied. Green Hill Estates should have been denied
when they came in with their bridge.
Borup: (Inaudible) they’re going to regret it.
Stiles: Oh, yes. They’re going to be begging us to have that go through.
They’re not going to be able to get out on Eagle or Franklin.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Commission members)
Borup: Well, they still can. It’s not being (inaudible).
Stiles: Yes, they could (inaudible) in the future.
Borup: But, we’ve had some others that have been that way too. They put the
apartments in over here. Center’s deal.
Nary: Lee Centers.
Borup: People in the subdivision said no way. The neighbors didn’t want it. I
don’t blame them in that situation.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Commission members)
Borup: We’re always going to have that when we do these subdivisions.
Centers: But that was a nice development.
Nary: Wasn’t that the one with 50 percent open space?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Commission members)
Borup: I like that though. It’s not going to be perfect but at least we can –
Stiles: It’s an attempt.
Borup: If they know what they need to do before they buy the land or whatever,
they know what they need to comply with. Then they can design it (inaudible).
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting
June 7, 2001
Pg. 10
Stiles: It’s also been when we have these drains, creeks, sloughs and whatever
running through that’s always been a natural barrier. For some reason you can’t
build a bridge to cross. You know, The Landing Subdivision, if you’ve ever been
out in that mess of a subdivision the entire creek for that entire mile is not one
crossing. So, it’s bisected the whole section so that neighbors on this side can’t
bike or walk unless they go out to Linder Road. Then when they (inaudible) that
Linder Road – when they redid that Linder Road bridge they had to create some
temporary access going down that old Waltman Lane to get to Meridian Road
because that’s the only way in or out of their subdivision at that point. The
access has just been kind of a pet peeve of ours, I guess.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Commission members)
Stiles: Well, The Landing south of there.
Borup: You’re talking this ditch here?
Stiles: Yes.
Borup: Those are two separate subdivisions.
Stiles: Well, even if it were two separate subdivisions we should have required
at least one of them to have (inaudible) bridge and (inaudible).
(Inaudible discussion amongst Commission members)
Stiles: Fenway Park wasn’t that long ago.
Nary: No, it wasn’t. Fenway Park is where it should have happened. There
should have been a stub street from Fenway.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Commission members)
Watson: Any other questions that popped out?
Nary: I guess one of the things that I would like to see is, and it doesn’t have to
be real long, (inaudible). At least the significant bullet changes between the old
and the new. I don’t care much from the draft up until now. It doesn’t matter.
We’re not dealing with a draft. I mean people are going to raise those issues that
you folks are aware of that there’s been a significant change from the draft that
you think people are going to come to the meeting saying wait a minute in the
draft it was this. Now it’s this. We don’t feel like we have the right input for it.
Then maybe that would be nice to know. I guess one of the things I would like to
know when we’re listening to the testimony is which of the things in here really --
you think the City needs to have some real buy into? Which of the things that
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting
June 7, 2001
Pg. 11
are, I hate to use such a cliché, but what sort of sacred cows that you have in
here that you really don’t really think you have gotten enough input, you really
don’t want to see a whole lot of change to. Something you really want us to look
at when we’re listening to the testimony as to whether or not – we’re looking
down the road to recommend changes, which is one of the things that you folks
really want the Council to buy into. That you think long range, or at least 5 to 10
years, Meridian needs to really buy into the concept of it. The Urban Service
Planning Area and some of the things I’ve heard you say is what I am assuming
would be those types of things. That would be real helpful.
Stiles: Those are probably the last – if you get on Page 2, the last paragraph,
and full paragraph on that page. Then the following paragraph and the next
paragraph that talks about circulation. That talks about the new figures. Those
are really the major –
Nary: The final planned development –
Stiles: The major changes to the 93 plan.
Nary: Okay.
Stiles: If you want more detail on that or if you think that doesn’t answer what
you’re looking for, we’d be glad to get more information. I mean, we’re prepared
to get you whatever you want.
Nary: I guess when I look at this I mean what I was looking for and maybe this
does it to everybody else. What I was looking for was a real executive summary.
Here’s what we’re all about. This is the input that we got. This is what we came
up with. This is all the people that participated in it. This is where we see the
City of Meridian going for the next 5 to 10 years. This is what we’d like to see.
That’s what I assume you would be wanting to convince not only this commission
and the council to include in the Comprehensive Plan. When I looked at the
attachments of comments, that’s humble to agree. Attachment B though, talks
about I mean specific changes so I have to go pull the thing out and look at that.
You know, some of its miniscule ministerial stuff and some of it is some meaty
stuff. I guess what I’m concerned is when we’re listening to that testimony and if
all these people that testify for example, say every person that comes up there
thinks the urban service planning area is a bad idea for 45 different reasons. I
guess I would have liked, I wanted to know ahead of time, what was the thought
process that went into that development of that being a part of it because it’s a
significant part of this Comprehensive Plan. So that I have some way to at least
rationalize both their negative concerns as to why do we develop this. Because I
think one of the things that we sometimes sit up here when we’re reviewing
ordinances because we weren’t part of the development process, it’s real hard to
know well why did we write it that way? Because I have no idea. I don’t know
who’s input that was and why conceptually we chose this over that because I’m
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting
June 7, 2001
Pg. 12
going to guess. Most of the people that will come, at least the ones that are
developers and builders and those kind of folks. Those folks that have a little bit
more knowledge than the layperson, they’re going to come up with other
alternatives. They’re going to say well you shouldn’t have done this. You should
have done this. You know, why didn’t you look at this? Well I don’t know the
answer to that. So, it would be helpful to at least have some idea of how did we
get to these concepts? What were we looking at (inaudible) long-range objective
here? I think we’ve got a lot of information. I just kind of wanted some of that. I
just wanted a little bit more of how did we get here with some of those things? If
I missed that in just my reading through it, then just tell me where to look
because I just didn’t –
Stiles: I didn’t probably go into a lot of detail about the change. I mean it was a
very short paragraph about it. What the history of the Urban Service Planning
Area and changing that is we were getting the pressure to develop every single
square mile within the City of Meridian’s impact area. The suggestion initially
came from Ada County Employees because we were concerned that these
proposals were being presented to them in our area of impact. We didn’t want
them to be approved and their response was well, that’s in your area of impact,
it’s in your Urban Service Planning Area. It’s contingent to be developed.
Regardless of the timing or being contiguous or anything like that. So, that was
their suggestion to curb the development outside that area. Well, what it did was
exactly the opposite. Since it’s been so long since we’ve had the Draft Plan
which was presented people are panicking. They optioned off this property and
they want to develop it today. So, they’re submitting all these applications.
Borup: Not all of them are that situation. I got phone calls from people that say
hey, we optioned this property six months ago, now we’re outside the Urban
Service Area. (Inaudible)
Stiles: Who was that though? I mean, where, what area?
Borup: In the north. I mean they already had it before the thing came out. I
don’t know what stage they’re at or what. I didn’t want any detail. I didn’t ask
them (inaudible).
Stiles: I think that if you’ll look at (inaudible). They actually purchased it long
after we came out with this concept. They may have optioned a lot of it. They
optioned everything –
Borup: Well, yes. The options take place long before they purchase it and that’s
all it was is just an option two years ago.
Stiles: But then they went ahead and purchased it.
Borup: Yes.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting
June 7, 2001
Pg. 13
Stiles: And a lot of them have purchased it long after this.
Borup: Probably a lot of them have. I got the phones call (inaudible).
Stiles: We can understand that they’re concerned if they’ve got a lot of money
tied up in it. You’ve got a lot of money tied up in some land too but you’re not in
here pressuring us to (inaudible).
Nary: One of the questions I get asked a lot and because I wasn’t part of this
commission before and I’ve said (inaudible). One of the questions I seem to get
asked a lot is why did the City push it’s area of impact out so far if we were going
to turn around in a year or 2? Then want to pull this Urban Service Planning
Area back, not provide development opportunity to those outside? Why did we
even bother pushing it out that far? I think that’s the way the County looks at it.
They say you wanted that area of impact that’s the way it goes. I guess I don’t
know how we answer that question and it’s the Council that really has to answer
that question. You know the City’s area of impact is not something they can
surprise on the City. They choose to do that.
Borup: I know how I’d answer it, maybe not publicly though.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Commission members)
Nary: But, you know what? You can’t buy half the cake and then not get
anybody to have any of the rest of it. That’s exactly the reason and I think that’s
wrong. You can’t have both. That’s what they’ve tried to do, is they’ve tried to
have both. I think the members of the public have a pretty good beef in saying
wait a minute you wanted the area of impact out here south of town all the way
out there and north of town to where it is. Now you don’t want to allow the
development of it? I mean, I think you can’t have your cake and eat it too.
That’s what they’re wanting to do.
Borup: (Inaudible) and nothing’s going to happen on the three sides. It’s just
coming from the east with the big (inaudible). I mean I have probably lived in
Meridian since 65 and we had a proposal of Boise City Limits coming up to the
corner of our subdivision. This little chunk right here. The City limits of Boise,
they were trying to run this line straight on down and straight on over. I think we
needed to draw a line on this side. I don’t know, if we didn’t have Chinden,
would Eagle keep coming?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Commission members)
Stiles: Boise would go all the way to Star if they could. Have strip commercial all
the way up.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting
June 7, 2001
Pg. 14
(Inaudible discussion amongst Commission members)
Nary: Right. If they can serve it, they’d serve it. If the City of Meridian can’t
serve it, then tough then they shouldn’t put it in their area of impact. They
shouldn’t put it there if they can’t serve it. If the City of Boise can serve it, then
let them have it.
Stiles: Even if it creates an enclave, Meridian will be a little island surrounded –
Nary: Like Garden City.
Stiles: We don’t want to be like Garden City.
Nary: Then serve the area.
Stiles: We are serving the area.
Nary: Well, but I don’t think your comments fair. I think was a petty kind of
comment that developers get in the way of the City and feel like they’re not
getting supporting when we have a big area of impact that we don’t want to
annex. We don’t want to put property -- we don’t want to let them develop
anything. Then we want to say oh we’re going to change the boundaries.
Borup: We need to go. I meant to close this in five minutes and go. (Inaudible)
Shreeve: I make a motion to close this meeting.
Nary: Second.
Borup: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:00 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
KEITH BORUP, CHAIRMAN
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK