Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/23/2015 Work SessionCity of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY MARCH 23, 2015 The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday March 23, 2015 at 5:30 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Moore, Ralston, Woodrow and Pishioneri. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff. Councilor Wylie was absent (excused). 1. Budget Committee Interviews. Bob Duey, Finance Director, presented the staff report on this item. Applicants are being sought to represent Wards 3 and 4 where former committee members' terms expired. The recruitment for this vacancy opened on January 29, 2015 and closed on February 27, 2015. Three candidates have applied for Ward 4. One candidate had initially applied for Ward 3, but withdrew their Budget Committee application when appointed by Council to another volunteer position. The appointee for Ward 4 will serve a three year term that will expire on December 31, 2017. Any eventual appointment for the Ward 3 position would also be eligible for a three year term. The Council is requested to interview three applicants. Budget Committee appointments are scheduled to be ratified at the Regular Session Meeting on April 6, 2015. Mr. Duey said Council had the discretion of appointing someone from Ward 4 to the Ward 3 position. Outreach has been done, but it is unlikely a candidate from Ward 3 will be found in time for the Budget Committee meetings. The Council chose the questions they would ask of each applicant: 1. Why are you interested in serving on the Budget Committee? (Mayor Lundberg) 2. Describe your professional and personal experience as it relates to your desire to become a committee member. (Councilor VanGordon) 3. Describe some personal goals that you wish to achieve by serving on the Springfield Budget Committee. (Councilor Woodrow) 4. While all of Springfield services seem to have strong support from different areas of the community, it is often necessary to prioritize services for budgetary reasons. How would you go about the task of establishing priorities among services? (Councilor Moore) 5. If you were a member of the Budget Committee, what would be some of the ways you would look to control costs and still be responsive to the service expectations of our citizens? (Councilor Ralston) 6. If you were on the Budget Committee and were looking at one of the City's services to decide how much should be funded through general taxes and how much through specific fees on City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 23, 2015 Page 2 customers, what questions would you want to have answered in order to make your decision? (Councilor Pishioneri) Council introduced themselves to the applicants and interviewed Gabrielle Guidero, CJ Mann and Nathan Mischel. Following the interviews, Council discussed the qualifications of each applicant. It was noted that all three applicants were highly qualified. Council consensus was to re -appoint Gabrielle Guidero to the Ward 4 Budget Committee position for a three-year term, and to appoint Nathan Mischel to the Ward 3 Budget Committee position for one year. They asked Mr. Duey to explain to Mr. Mischel that Council's preference is to appoint by ward, but would like to accept his offer to represent Ward 3 because of his proximity to Ward 3. The appointment would be for one year only. Councilor Moore wanted it expressed to CJ Mann that Council appreciated her applying and acknowledged her qualifications. They would encourage her to apply for other positions. Mr. Duey said he would explain to Mr. Mischel about the one-year appointment, and pass along the encouraging words to Ms. Mann. 2. Springfield 2030 Plan UGB Study: Results of College View Visioning Process (Metro Plan Amendment File No. LRP 2009-00014). Linda Pauly, Principal Planner, presented the staff report on this item. Ms. Pauly said the purpose of tonight's work session is to share the results of the visioning process the City conducted for the College View study area in the urban growth boundary (UGB) study. She included all of the materials so the Council could get a sense of what staff heard from community members. They started the process on January 14 with two workshops at City Hall. There were over 100 people in attendance on that date. She referred to the bottom of page 3, Attachment 1 of the agenda packet which included some of the content of what was discussed at the workshop. People were given four questions: • What is your biggest concern about change? • What is your biggest concern about this process? • What is your experience of the College View/South Franklin area today? • What one thing would improve your experience of College View/South Franklin? A stakeholder working group was appointed by the Committee for Citizen Involvement (CCI) following the workshops. That working group met three times: February 11, 2015, February 25, 2015, and March 4, 2015. Several of the stakeholder members were in the audience at tonight's meeting. Each meeting was about 1 '/2 to 2 hours in length and were held at City Hall. At the first workshop people were asked to introduce themselves, share their experience of the area today, and how the future of that area might fit in or not fit into their visions for their property, business or neighborhoods. They had a great discussion about where the gateway to Mt. Pisgah and Buford Park was and how that relates to the proposed expansion of the UGB. At the second meeting, they started to develop some good vision and goal statements which were included in the agenda packet as Attachment 2. They discussed commerce and industry types and land use that is consistent with those. At the final meeting, they talked at length regarding the existing Lane County zoning in the area. Most of the stakeholder members were not familiar with the existing City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 23, 2015 Page 3 zoning or permitted uses. A lot of information was shared by a planner from Lane County and city staff. Ms. Pauly referred to Attachment 1, Exhibit A which outlined the policy themes she had pulled out from the meetings that the majority of the participants would agree to, although not all. Staff is asking Council to look at those themes and determine if they are important themes the Council wants to carry into their Comprehensive plans and policies as they move forward with planning and zoning in that area. Many of these things are similar to what is currently in the Springfield Comprehensive Plan and zoning standards. One of the concerns that came up frequently was that there could be smoke stack industry. The citywide planning goals dictate the language used in planning and commercial, industrial and residential all have specific meanings. The City has to show that our plan is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 9, economic development. The goal identifies Industrial Uses and Other Employment Uses. The technical, legal Goal 9 definition of industrial land and Other Employment Uses is "all non -industrial employment activities including the widest range of retail, wholesale, service, non-profit, business headquarters, administrative and government employment activities that are accommodated in retail, office and flexible building types. Other employment uses also include employment activities of an entity or organization that serves the medical, educational social service, recreation and security needs of the community typically in large buildings or multi -building campuses". Councilor Moore asked if RiverBend was on industrial land. Ms. Pauly said it would be considered Other Employment Uses. Councilor Moore referred to page 6 of Attachment 1 of the agenda packet, "Zoning that will allow existing uses to be grandfathered in and grow in place, while requiring new zoning controls ... for new development, expansions and redevelopment". She has concerns about existing zoning in that area and asked why that statement was included. Ms. Pauly said there is a lot of legal complexity about non -conforming uses and uses permitted in existing zoning. This is similar to Glenwood where uses had been permitted for many years. Those existing uses are handled through non -conforming use policies in our Code. Mr. Grimaldi said businesses and activities in that location would remain, but would need to comply with the new rules if they redeveloped. The City cannot change the rules in that regard. Councilor Moore asked if the people at these meetings understood that rule. Ms. Pauly said they didn't have much representation from the business community, but it was a concern for the existing businesses in that location in terms of how it would affect them. Councilor VanGordon said he had seen a Eugene map off 30'' Avenue. He asked if that was still valid. Ms. Pauly said someone had submitted that during a visioning workshop and was included in the record. Councilor VanGordon said there was a lot of great material included. Sometimes the conversation shifted away from the discussion of the UGB and went to park and farmland. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 23, 2015 Page 4 Ms. Pauly said many of those in the working group were concerned about what they saw from their property in terms of sight, smells, and sounds. Councilor VanGordon said the City's strong history of water quality is very important. He would not want to see smoke stacks, but something very clean that would generate jobs for the community. He feels confident that the water and air quality can be protected by policy decisions. It seemed like there was a secondary concern about protecting the park (Buford) itself. He asked if that concern should be turned over to the County. Ms. Pauly said the Council could direct that issue go to the County as a next step. Councilor VanGordon said there is a lot of good material. When they are done with this conversation, he would like to forward this information to the County so they can see what their citizens are saying about that area. He liked the example of how the changes in Glenwood were approached. Councilor Ralston said our air quality is high and Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA) has been involved. The same standards that we have in the city would be applied to this area if brought into the city. Councilor Moore is pleased to read the comments. They were not counter to Council concerns that had been discussed. Of those opposed, their concerns were no less than those of the Council in terms of protections. The City would possibly be a benefit in that area to help preserve the things they value. Mayor Lundberg said even with all of the land currently inside the UGB, the City still needs 644 acres. The two areas under consideration (Gateway and College View) are much less than 644 acres. She noted some of the issues along McVay and the mobile home parks that were under County jurisdiction, and that the City's code enforcement rules are much stricter. People in that area called the City to get help because the County regulations are much less stringent. City codes are much stricter and we have a higher standard than the County. We have the ability to provide for a much better system than currently exists. She asked if this area was part of the original jurisdictional transfer of Glenwood. Mr. Grimaldi said it was not. Mayor Lundberg said following Glenwood through McVay, it leads to the College View area, making that connection. Willamalane has moved up their plans to put a bridge from Springfield to Mt. Pisgah at 32°d Street. In some of the materials provided, there was as comment that Springfield is not up to the task of taking care of the land. She didn't believe that was true. Springfield is a good steward and we try very hard. There are places that haven't changed for a long time. Now we have an opportunity to make this area something that everyone wants and can be proud of. She agreed with the themes and noted that the newer projects along the mill ways and Willamette River fit with these themes. She asked if the visions could be made into a proposal. Ms. Pauly said she felt they could. Other cities had struggled with the Industrial definitions from the State, but that seemed to be changing across the county. People want more flexible employment zones. Heavy industrial isn't happening much anymore, but is what people associate with the term Industrial. Mayor Lundberg asked if there was flexibility in how it was worded to call it out as an employment zone. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 23, 2015 Page 5 Ms. Pauly said Council held three work sessions last year and spoke regarding the economic element. There were policies that spoke specifically about that topic. The City had identified targeted industries for the UGB area Mayor Lundberg said what had come out of the vision process and what Council identified, could all go into the College View and Gateway areas, and fit within the State goals. Councilor Woodrow said she appreciated all of the work everyone put into the meetings and workshops. The themes that rose to the top are the ones that the Council started out with and wanted in the vision of this area. She is happy to see the match. It demonstrated the due diligence by everyone involved. Councilor Moore said Allison Laursen spoke to the Council and had a positive way of presenting the potential in that area. This area is a gem that could be polished into something amazing. Coming in off the freeway, she can see the potential for this area as being part of Springfield. Mayor Lundberg said they picked the five areas because they had potential. As far back as 10 years ago, they were told the College View area was a top area to consider because of how it fits in the State goals. Ms. Pauly said under the rules and goals, the City's first priority when looking to expand is urban reserves, which we don't have in the metro area. The second priority is exceptions areas (rural industrial, rural commercial, rural residential, and rural public facility). This area has the most of that closest to Springfield. We are required to look at those areas first to see if they meet our needs before expanding our entire value farmland, which is the exclusive farm use zone. Typically, larger parcels are exclusive farm use. The exceptions are `exceptions' because they weren't large enough at the time they did the original Comp Plan. Mayor Lundberg said because of that designation and looking at the economic piece, this area and Gateway rose to the top. They would need to come to an agreement of how to protect the area and make use of it. A citizen who was part of the visioning workshop spoke up, stating that the top theme was that they do not want the City of Springfield to expand in this area. He felt they were only hearing one side. Mayor Lundberg explained that this was a work session and public comment was not allowed. Ms. Pauly said she would be back to speak before the Council before their summer recess to finalize the buildable lands inventory and economic opportunities analysis that will establish land use. Staff will be preparing the proposal with all of the elements including zoning, plan designations, maps, findings, staff reports, etc. A joint work session with the City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners is scheduled for September 28, with a joint public hearing on October 19. Councilor Moore said anyone who would like to speak during a regular meeting, can do that at those public hearings. Mayor Lundberg said there was a full public process that hasn't been started yet. Another citizen spoke in opposition and referred to a letter from their attorney. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 23, 2015 Page 6 Mayor Lundberg asked Ms. Pauly to get information out to the people on the panel and in the neighborhood about the public process and how they can participate. Mr. Grimaldi said people can talk to the Council anytime, but when doing a land use process, the best place is during the public hearing on that item so it is part of the public record. Mayor Lundberg said tonight's discussion is just an update. Councilor Pishioneri said he appreciated the depth of this and the work done. There is no way this will make everyone happy. He hoped people could look at the big picture and greater good. This is not an easy process and will take fortitude and communication. He appreciated what Ms. Pauly was doing and all of the considerations made regarding the land. He looks forward to further discussion. Mayor Lundberg thanked Ms. Pauly for all of her work and for bringing all of the information to the Council. She looks forward to the rest of the process. They need to be open and communicate as much as possible. Ms. Pauly said there has been a lot of public involvement over the last few years, and many of the concerns that have come forward are being addressed. 3. ADA Compliance Update Briefing. Tom Mugleston, Risk Manager, and City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith presented the staff report on this item. The City recently finished up a lawsuit with a hearing impaired citizen and part of the settlement was to do a comprehensive review of policies and procedures through the Police Department. Through that process, it came to light that the City hadn't done a large comprehensive review of Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) policies and procedures citywide. The City has done a lot of work as a City, but did not have a comprehensive plan. Ms. Smith said they are bringing the draft transition plan, which is part of the ADA regulations which shows how the City approaches the ADA and addressing concerns from disabled citizens. The focus of the transition plan is on programs, services and activities. The next steps will be to incorporate facilities into the plan, starting with City Hall and City facilities and moving outwards. They found that each department had done a lot of work on ADA, but it was not in a cohesive city-wide policy. The plan is to have a public process regarding the regulations required, on the City's website. She asked them to let staff know of any community members that could review the information, or if they would like to see a different public process. There is a complaint process and Mr. Mugleston will be the point person for that process. The City already has an ordinance that addresses not allowing discrimination specifically for disabilities, and they didn't see a need to revise that at this time. She also asked Council for any input on the transition plan. The plan will be reviewed every six months for the first year, and then every 2-3 years with department self -assessments coordinated by Mr. Mugleston. Councilor Woodrow asked about requests for other formats and accommodations and asked if that was posted anywhere. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 23, 2015 Page 7 Ms. Smith said it was posted on the website. They have talked about posting it throughout the City in conference rooms. It is always on agendas for public meetings. The final piece would be to incorporate it on public notices that go out to the public. Councilor Woodrow said it could be incorporated under a signature line in and email or on general correspondence. People don't often realize they have that option. Ms. Smith said that should be done in the next few months. Councilor Pishioneri asked if staff had contacted Eugene and Lane County to compare their plans. Ms. Smith said they had talked to both of them. Councilor Pishioneri suggested contacting Alicia Hayes at Lane County who had started the County program. Councilor Ralston asked how much this would cost, such as an interpreter. Ms. Smith said it will depend on the situation and the accommodation. She explained a recent request for minutes transcribed. These are costs under the law that the City would absorb. Purchase of equipment or materials would be based on budget availability and technology. Councilor Ralston asked if they are also looking at making all buildings ADA compliant. Ms. Smith said all new buildings are ADA compliant, as is City Hall. As the building ages and changes, it becomes part of the ongoing maintenance. Councilor Woodrow said it spreads out beyond City Hall. When installing the pedestrian crossings, they are incorporated those accommodations. It is getting done through different projects. Ms. Smith said as a developer comes in, they would make curbs that area ADA compliant. There are also discussions about how to bring other areas up to compliance. Councilor Moore asked about staff training and who would be responsible to make sure that occurred. Mr. Mugleston said there will be two tiers. For general ADA concepts and knowledge, Human Resources will be responsible to train staff. Departmental specific trainings will be shifted towards the department. Councilor VanGordon said everything looked good. He feels these types of plans are ongoing. Mayor Lundberg said this is a good start. Her mother was in a wheelchair in times when there were no accommodations. It is the people that are affected that need to say how this works and need to be involved in the process. The accommodation can often be something small. There is a gentleman on the Lane ACT that serves as the representative for disabilities. She suggested they contact him because he is aware of ADA laws. They could contact Frannie Brindle to get his name. She appreciated that they are working on this. Councilor Pishioneri said the definition of disability has gotten extremely broad and covers both short- term and long-term disabilities. Educating the staff is very important. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 23, 2015 Page 8 4. Springfield Development Code (SDC) Amendments Adding Medical Marijuana Dispensaries to Certain Zoning Districts — File TYP414-0003. Mayor Lundberg said since the legislature is in the middle of the discussion around recreational marijuana, there will be more steps and possible rules. Rather than have an in-depth conversation about what the Council wants to do, staff will continue to work with the medical marijuana industry and patient groups, but hold off on specifics until they see how recreational marijuana laws will interface. Councilor Ralston said he liked the second map. They did meet with a lot of representatives and talked about the buffers. They came up with 50 foot buffers from residential and 250 foot buffers on parks. They are required by State law to have 1000 foot buffers from schools. If they set 1000 foot buffers from parks, it limits the locations. They can set some preferences. Jim Donovan, Planning Supervisor, said they started with the House Bill that approved dispensaries; the City opted out of the moratorium and came back with some Municipal Code reasonable regulations that are in place and working. The other piece was the zoning regulations. With the election on recreational marijuana, they felt it best to wait to address this until more was known about regulations for recreational marijuana. The Oregon Health Authority (OHA) is progressing on those regulations, has held some listening meetings, and is forming a committee at the State level. They want to have regulations in place by January 1, 2016, although it may be late 2016 before they actually approve a retail outlet. Mr. Donovan said he brought one additional map from the first discussion with 1000 foot buffers from residential, parks, schools and daycares that left very little options for locating dispensaries. Staff is proposing to allow medical marijuana dispensaries in two commercial zoning districts — the CC (Community Commercial) and MRC (Major Retail Commercial) districts. As outlined in the staff report, other neighborhood zoning districts and general office are transitional zoning districts that typically abut commercial zoning districts. Staff felt that CC and MRC were more appropriate. Staff is not proposing making medical marijuana dispensaries a permitted use in industrials districts. They thought it best to reserve industrial districts for the following four licenses related to recreational marijuana: grow; manufacture; wholesale; and retail. Three of the four are better suited to industrial districts. Campus industrial allows some industrial, but is generally more office buildings and businesses that support the people in the building. Mixed-use commercial zoning districts by definition include residential 90 % of the time so is not a good fit. That was shared with the dispensary group and was understood by those attending. Mr. Donovan said staff is proposing to put a marijuana dispensaries and other uses category in the Code under definitions and commercial zoning districts. Currently, they are not listed as a permitted use under any of the zoning districts. They are currently being treated as changes of use. Creating the zoning use category allows the City to put these businesses into place and allows some reasonable protections. He discussed the buffers and how they would provide protections. When meeting with industry reps, a buffer of 250 feet was agreed upon for the buffer to park facilities. Willamalane staff and management would prefer a 1000 foot buffer from destination parks and facilities that kids congregate, but are fine with a 250 foot buffer to walkways, paths or other facilities. Mr. Donovan said the rest of the staff report was the non -confirming use protection in situations where a school or daycare moves into a Commercial District near an existing dispensary. That would not City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 23, 2015 Page 9 create a non -conforming use in that instance. Similarly, once the regulations are adopted, the five dispensaries currently in operation would be grandfathered in and would become legally formed non- conforming uses, until they are non -operational for six months. Councilor Ralston said what Willamalane wanted made sense, and agreed that trails should be an exception. Putting a 1000 foot buffer at the facility on 32"d Street would prevent dispensaries from locating on a long stretch of Main Street in that area. He doesn't feel strongly about it either way. Councilor Ralston left the meeting at 7: l Opm. Councilor Pishioneri said he liked the first map (1000 foot buffers). He feels dispensaries and retail outlets should not be permitted in the same building. He would like to see what they currently had for building standards downtown. The Salem rules are clear and he agrees with those and would like the City to align with those rules. He feels 100 feet from residential makes more sense than 50 feet. He asked if the City could prohibit legalized grows in City limits. He asked if there are agricultural zones in the City. If so, it could cause some issues regarding homes on those sites. The city should put reasonable design standards in place downtown. He feels 1000 foot buffers from schools, day-care and parks are reasonable. Councilor Woodrow asked how they could set up a system to identify the difference between a destination park and a bike path park or other park. She was comfortable with 1000 foot buffer with all parks so they didn't have to try to differentiate. She liked the first map with 1000 foot buffers. She also thought the suggestion of 100 foot buffers to residential might be a good idea. Mr. Donovan said they would bring back 50 and 100 foot buffers for Council to consider. The staff report includes the 250 foot buffer in some cases along Main Street. The 50 foot buffer would preclude a dispensary on a parcel within 50 feet of the residential zoning district. The difference in the impact between 50 and 100 feet may be nominal, but staff will do some research and bring it back for Council consideration. Councilor VanGordon said he was leaning towards the 1000 foot buffer for park. The only impact he can see is near 32nd Street. He is not sure if there will be a big difference between 50 and 100 foot buffers to residential. He is fine with 50 foot buffers. Councilor Moore said she understood that at the point recreational marijuana is legal, people could have plants growing in their home (residential zone). It could move into the residential area regardless. She asked if there were any issues with the five dispensaries currently operating. Mr. Donovan said aside from the standard development communication back and forth and getting things on track and coordinating building, there were no major problems. Chief Doney said they had a handful of Police calls for service from a neighboring business at one of the dispensaries, but nothing with the others. Councilor Moore said she agreed with the 1000 foot buffer for parks. Councilor Pishioneri asked if the City would be licensing these establishments. Mr. Donovan said Council adopted Code for dispensaries and the City has been licensing them. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 23, 2015 Page 10 Councilor Pishioneri asked if any of that Code addressed multiple calls of service, similar to businesses with OLCC licenses. Mr. Donovan said they are only discussing medical marijuana at this time. The framework being created is to have a process in place once OHA finishes their recreational rules to set Code for recreational marijuana. Councilor Pishioneri said any of these businesses should be tied to calls for service. Mayor Lundberg said she wants to separate the two (medical and recreational). As she reads what is happening with both types, there are changes every day. It will all affect what the City does in the future. Medical marijuana dispensaries should be treated more like a pharmacy. Recreational marijuana will be a completely different and unknown issue. Tonight they are discussing how to make set codes that make medical marijuana dispensaries fit into the community and protect those trying to go there. Tonight's discussion needs to fit just the medical marijuana. She doesn't want to say anything about tracking police calls for medical marijuana, but will expect that OLCC will require those rules for recreational marijuana. She wants to be sensitive to those that have been working with the City and were trying to run their businesses. She is fine with the first map. Mr. Donovan said recreational marijuana will come with similar guidelines and suggestions, and reasonable protective clarification. After meeting again with health and industry representatives, staff can bring back zoning regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries for Council consideration. That will create the framework as they move into retail outlets. They will leave the current Municipal Code regulations and bring back the zoning regulations based on the first map. Mayor Lundberg said there is still a question about who can be in the front area of dispensaries. Mr. Donovan said staff can bring back some information to address that concern. That is part local and part State. State regulations address minors in areas where the product is available. Some dispensaries have separate areas, and some don't. He referenced a scenario where a single parent had a child with them. Current City Code states that a minor shall not be on the premises. That could be clarified. Mayor Lundberg said when staff meets with the representatives, she would like them to look at that and look for options. Councilor Pishioneri asked about the discontinuation of up to 6 months making a business abandoned. Mr. Donovan said that was the standard legal definition for creating a non -conforming use. Mr. Grimaldi asked if Council wants them to come back to get this in place prior to clarification on what is happening with recreational marijuana. Yes. He referred to Councilor Pishioneri's comments about design standards, and asked for clarification on areas. Councilor Pishioneri said he would like to see design standards in all commercial areas. Mr. Grimaldi said that would be a larger project. Mayor Lundberg said that would impact many businesses and she was not supportive. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 23, 2015 Page 11 Councilor Moore said the City is currently doing downtown business standards. Design standards do say a lot about our town. Mr. Donovan said there was a rush to get dispensaries open so some of them have very bright motifs to get attention. They are now getting more subdued. It may be best for design standards to be filtered through citywide analysis or the Main Street Corridor planning, rather than current planning staff. Councilor Pishioneri said people will hear this is a concern and a topic of discussion. He hoped that would bring a heightened interest to businesses. Mr. Donovan said staff would share that concern. Mayor Lundberg said she didn't want to go there based on a certain business. It is a big discussion and involves a lot of Code changes. Council agreed there is no need for staff to follow-up on design standards at this time. Mr. Donovan said staff will work on the proposal and bring back responses to questions. Zoning regulation options will be brought to the Planning Commission, the industry, and back to Council for final consideration and adoption. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m. Minutes Recorder — Amy Sowa f� Christine L. Lundberg Mayor Attest: Amy So l City Recorder