Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-07-09 CPC MINPLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2012 7:00 P.M. Present: Mike Dahlquist, ,Aron Buchanan, Eric Hansen, Ann Siess, Chris Lauer and Councilmember Liaison Doug Menikheim Absent: Cameron Kelly, Mike Kocon and Mike Rodriguez Staff present: City Planner Intern Brian Finley, Community Development Director Bill Turnblad Chairman Dahlquist called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF JUNE 11, 2012 MINUTES Chairman Dahlquist reminded commissioners to state their names especially on motions and seconds for the new recording secretary. Commissioner Hansen requested a correction on page 2 to note that he was opposed to the fact that the applicant had to redesign, as he liked the original design as well. Also on page 5 where it stated that Commissioner Hansen said he would be against requiring a permit, it was not him because he was supportive of a permit. With corrections so made, motion by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Buchanan, to approve. All in favor. OPEN FORUM No comments were received. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2012 -22. A variance to the sign regulations for Early Childhood Education and Stillwater Junior High School located at 1111 Holcombe Street South and 523 Marsh Street West in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Stillwater Area Public Schools, applicant. Community Development Director Turnblad explained that the school district wants to install seven directional signs. Six meet the maximum size requirement of 32 square feet for informational signs allowed for institutional uses. Five are around the perimeter of the property. The only sign larger than 32 square feet is the one at the ECFE building. The variance requested is to allow eight feet of additional signage. He presented drawings showing the proposed sign which is internal to the site. Staff recommends approval of the variance because it is internal. Dennis Bloom, director of operations for the school district, presented drawings showing where each of the signs will be located. He explained that the requested signs are consistent with others throughout the district. Because Courage Center and 916 are leasing property from the school district, the district felt a larger sign was warranted. The sign as requested would be three feet wider than allowed. 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2012 Mr. Hansen asked what is the motivation is for the extra eight square feet? Mr. Bloom responded to have a presence in front of the building and keep the signs as consistent as possible. Mr. Hansen asked if the signs for the leasing partners could be on the building itself? Mr. Bloom said the district is emphasizing the partnership aspect, so separating the signs would make it look like they are separate entities. No public comments were received. The public hearing was closed at 7:22 p.m. Mr. Buchanan said he would support the request because it seems to be in scale with the development and it is internal. Ms. Siess expressed there is a reason for the ordinance and she feels the sign could be kept within the required 32 feet. She doesn't see a reasonable cause to grant the variance. Mr. Hansen said he likes the look of the sign packet, but agrees with Ms. Siess that there is a reason for the ordinance. He suggested considering the fact that the sign represents more than one entity. He asked if the signs for the partners could be put on the building. Mr. Hansen agreed with point made that aesthetically speaking, the consistent look makes sense, but more, information is going on a sign that is within the limitations than the one that is the subject of the variance. Mr. Dahlquist asked Mr. Bloom if the sign is out of scale with the building? Mr. Bloom responded that the sign being a little wider goes better with the building versus a higher sign. Mr. Buchanan stated it looks like three signs even though it is on the same placard. He said it is like splitting hairs but does the city want to make the district put another post hole in the ground and split the signage by a foot or an inch? Chairman Dahlquist said what is proposed looks better and would have less impact than two separate signs would look. Mr. Hansen said he would lean toward approving the variance because it is internal to the property. Motion by Commissioner Buchanan, seconded by Commissioner Hansen, to approve the request. Motion passed 4 -1 with Siess voting nay. She stated that it is not the city's problem to think of an alternative 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2012 Case No. 2012 -23. A variance request to the side yard setback for an addition located at 2632 Edgewood Court in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Jerad and Chloe Rasmussen, applicants. Brian Finley, city planner intern, explained that the applicants wish to replace the existing deck with a sunroom. Due to the orientation of the home parallel to the street, the home is at an angle to the side lot lines because it's on a cul de sac. The northeast corner of the home is approximately ten feet from the side property line. The new sunroom is proposed to extend ten feet off the back of the home and be flush with the east side of the home. Since the home is at an angle, the foundation of the new sunroom will encroach approximately four feet into the required side yard setback with the soffits encroaching an additional two feet. Therefore, a four foot variance to the side yard setback is requested to have the wall six feet from the lot line instead of ten. Mr. Finley said City Planner Pogge and he have spoken to the neighbor most impacted, who noted that she would gain privacy because the sunroom would not have a window facing her whereas the present deck is open. He added that staff didn't find a variance on file for the existing deck. Without a survey, it isn't possible to know definitively whether a variance would have been needed. Mr. Rasmussen shared that he and his wife bought the home about a month ago. The deck is very deteriorated and needs to be removed. He said they have talked to neighbors who are all OK with the proposal. There were no public comments. Commissioner Buchanan commented that there seem to be alternative ways to build the project in the same location without requiring a variance. Ms. Siess recognized that cul de sac lots are hard to work with. Mr. Dahlquist said the proposal looks reasonable. Mr. Hansen said you couldn't get less than ten feet and have a functional room. He said spaces that use the geometry of the lot often look like an eyesore. He doesn't mind approving the proposal. Motion by Commissioner Siess, seconded by Commissioner Lauer, to approve the variance. All in favor. Case No. 2012 -24. A variance request to the required setbacks, accessory structure regulations and impervious surface regulations for the construction of a garage located 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2012 719 Myrtle Street West in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Eric Greeder, applicant. Community Development Director Turnblad informed the commission that Mr. Greeder is renovating the property in two phases: first, adding a wrap around porch on the front and side of the home with 140 square foot storage area under the porch, which is possible because of the sloping grade of William Street, and second, adding a 692 square foot garage which may not occur until next year. He showed graphics of the lot and proposed additions. Seven variances are requested: 1. A 2.8 foot variance to the front yard setback for an open porch (17.2' requested /20' required) 2. A 13 foot variance to the exterior side yard setback for an open porch (7' requested /20' required) 3. A 23 foot variance to the exterior side yard setback for an attached accessory structure (7' requested /30' required) 4. A 14 foot variance to the exterior side yard setback for a detached garage (16' requested /30' required) 5. A variance to the maximum allowable garage and accessory building size (832 square feet requested [692 square foot garage + 140 square foot accessory building] /576 square feet allowed) 6. A variance to permit a second accessory building that is over 120 square feet (140 square feet requested /120 square feet maximum allowed) 7. A variance to the maximum allowable building coverage (36.01% requested /25% maximum allowed) Using the site plan, Mr. Turnblad walked the commission through the variances requested. Staff suggests that the space below the porch could be enclosed without a variance because the space is not a freestanding structure but is under the deck of the porch. Therefore, variances number three and six are not needed. Mr. Turnblad added there is no way to put a garage on the property without the variance. Staff is supportive of some type of a garage, but recommends denial of the variance for the larger- than - normal garage since the property is smaller than what would be required today for this zoning district. Instead, staff recommends allowing a 576 square foot garage which is a standard two -car garage. This would still be over the allowed impervious surface percentage, but staff believes it's reasonable to have a two - car garage. A mitigation plan for excess surface water runoff will have to be approved by the city engineer before a building permit is issued. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2012 Mr. Greeder told the commission that the garage requested, 692 square feet, would be only 117 square feet larger than allowed. Regarding variance number 5, the 140 square foot addition should not be counted in the impervious surface calculation because it is the storage area to be built under the deck. In lieu of having a garden shed, he would like to be allowed to add the 120 square feet onto the garage size instead. If limited to 576 square feet, he would not know how to reshape the garage to make it useful for his purposes. He pointed out it's a custom garage and to spend the money it needs to be a useable size. There were no public comments. Mr. Dahlquist recalled a previous applicant who was asked to redesign his garage because of the small size of the lot. With this project, the character of the garage seems to fit the site well, so it bothers him less. He added that he has no issue with the addition of the porch. Mr. Hansen said he understands the staff's position, but in a way it dictates the type of vehicles a person can drive. He feels the design is good and what is requested is a nice addition to the property. He supports the other variances as well. Mr. Buchanan stated he feels a 24 by 24 garage is doable. He supports the porch requests. Motion by Mr. Hansen, seconded by Mr. Lauer to approve five variance requests, 1, 2, 4, 5, 7 with conditions: 1. All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission; 2. The variance to encroach into the required front yard setback shall be limited to the open porch as shown on the site plan date stamped May 21, 2012 as on file in the Community Development Department; 3. A surface water runoff mitigation plan must be submitted to and found satisfactory by the city engineer prior to issuance of a building permit for the garage. All in favor, motion passed. Case No. 2012 -25. A zoning text amendment regarding Chapter 27, Section 27, for the keeping of chickens in the City of Stillwater. Tisha Palmer, applicant. Community Development Director Turnblad reminded commissioners that the present ordinance requires a three acre lot size for chickens, but there are no three acre lots in the city so they are effectively zoned out. The request is to eliminate the minimum lot size and allow five chickens on any size property, and to allow up to eight chickens if a property is large enough or if all neighbors whose homes are less than 50 feet from the chicken enclosure agree to the extra chickens. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2012 Mr. Turnblad said staff has researched other cities and looked at the American Planning Association, Humane Society and agencies that work with urban farming. 188 square feet is recommended per chicken. Considering the backyards of typical RB zoned homes in Stillwater, five birds would be the recommended allowable number. He reported that staff recommends that five chickens be the maximum allowed. All enclosures also should be in backyards, the coop itself should meet accessory building setback of three feet from each property line, and design guidelines should be adopted for the enclosures, coops and pens. Staff also believes slaughtering of chickens on site should be prohibited, and chickens should not be allowed in all zones, only in selected zones. Mr. Turnblad clarified that because the proposed ordinance was drafted by a resident, the commission's task is to respond to that wording at present. Staff has reviewed the proposed ordinance, recommends changes in wording and is prepared to redraft the proposed ordinance and bring it back in a month if the commission desires. In response to a question from Ms. Siess about how many Tots would meet the minimum if one acre were required, Mr. Turnblad said only a handful, and not any of those who made the request. He stated he has gotten mixed comments from the public. There have been slightly more in favor of allowing chickens in an urban setting, but others are concerned about nuisances such as smell, feed attracting rodents, and noise. If well managed, these concerns can be mitigated. Staff is comfortable using the Duluth ordinance as a model, but will look at additional items as well. Chair Dahlquist pointed out because one accessory structure is allowed, having a coop eliminates the possibility of also having a garden shed as worded currently. Mr. Turnblad explained that the 188 square feet recommended by the Humane Society is made up of the coop, the pen, and the supervised exercise yard. All needs to be fenced. Mr. Hansen asked if there are organizations that provide offsite slaughtering. Mr. Turnblad replied offsite processing is available. Tisha Palmer, 1115 First Street North, addressed concerns previously mentioned. From most of her research, the average noise a chicken makes is 70 decibels, only 10 decibels above average conversation and quieter than the average barking dog. Regarding cleanliness, she stated most people with urban chickens are for greener, more sustainable living. Chicken manure can be composted, virtually eliminating smell. She added that chicken feed will not attract rodents any more than dog food, fish in 6 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2012 outdoor ponds, birdbaths or hanging bird feeders common to many backyards. Ms. Palmer also presented a list of other major cities that allow chickens. Ms. Siess asked about other animals such as mink, wolves, coyotes, owls or bobcats that may want to eat the chickens and what might attract them. Ms. Palmer responded that the only problem she foresees is dogs roaming outside their own yards which she said isn't allowed in the city. Ms. Palmer said she agreed with the changes to the ordinance suggested by staff. She added that requiring a permit may convince residents who oppose chickens that chicken owners are responsible. She also said requiring some sort of certification of training is a good idea. Chairman Dahlquist opened the public hearing at 8:43 p.m. Brenda Goeltl, 723 Sixth Street South, Stillwater, elaborated on ways to protect the chickens from stray animals that may want to get them. She also said there are chicken keeping classes and extensive web sites to be used as resources. There are different chicken sizes from small to large, some chickens are quieter than others, some are more cold -hearty than others. She has researched ways to keep chickens safe and warm during the winter without heating the coop with electricity. She has found native songbirds are much louder than chickens if there isn't a rooster present. Walt DeYoung, who lives on Square Lake, spoke in favor of allowing chickens. He recounted how he was raised on a large poultry farm in New Jersey, raised bees and horses in Bemidji, taught at Breckenridge and headed up a family farm project before becoming bridge tender at Stillwater. He took a class through a commercial chicken processing plant and said he would never recommend it. He said chickens grazing in the yard eating natural things are healthier than those commercially raised. Julia Sandstrom, 212 West Cherry Street, spoke in support of allowing chickens. She told the commission that chickens can be kept warm in a semi insulated coop, they make less noise than dogs, and their feed doesn't attract rodents as it has to be kept dry in a closed container. She said she believes for $5, people would be willing to license their chickens. Anybody who is going to raise chickens will take care of their investment and make sure they are safe in their yard. Tim McKee, 601 South Fourth Street, said for his family, the chickens are pets and a way to know better where their food comes from. He equated the ease of care to that of a cat. His family hasn't experienced a fowl odor at all, they store food in closed containers, and the chickens make less noise than dogs. He said they are very PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2012 maintainable pets. He said it's troublesome that chickens are allowed in many other cities but not Stillwater. Kyle Palmer, 1115 First Street North, spoke in favor. He said building a coop was a good learning experience for his three daughters. He said coops don't have to be insulated but it's more comfortable for the chickens. The runs or exercise area required don't have to be long. He would prefer a free range style rather than using cages because chickens are able to get at bugs all over the yard. He feels the best protection for chickens is having dogs on the property, for instance most raccoons, coyotes or mink won't enter an area with dogs. He said watching chickens in the yard can be a very relaxing thing. He said he would like to see, not a permit per chicken, but a permit per flock. Chairman Dahlquist closed the public hearing at 9:05 p.m. Ms. Siess suggested moving forward with the ordinance. Mr. Dahlquist said he likes the concept of a permit being good for a couple of years. He would like staff to come back next month with an ordinance that incorporates feedback received during the meeting. Motion by Commissioner Siess to table, seconded by Commissioner Hansen. All in favor. Case No. 2012 -08. An amendment to an existing special use permit for the construction of a rooftop deck and bar (Rafters) located at 317 Main Street South in the CBD, Central Business District. Larry Cramer, applicant. Continued from June 11, 2012 meeting. Mr. Turnblad showed a graphic depicting the request. He said staff believes tonight's proposal resolves previous issues: • both entrances to the patio will be internal, the main access being a stairwell; • along one side of the patio, a decorative nine foot wall has been added to keep people from going onto adjacent property; • there is considerable separation from the building to the north; • the height to the fabric and stairwell has been lowered and now meets city criteria requiring no variance; • the guardrail along the edge of the patio has been moved to be set back three feet from the parapet. He conveyed that police and fire, fire marshal!, building official all recommend approval with conditions expressed in the staff report. He added that an elevator is not required 8 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2012 due to the size of the area, therefore there won't be handicapped access. The security cameras are being required for this patio at the request of the police chief. Mr. Dahlquist questioned the area being described as being for rooftop dining versus rooftop gathering. Mr. Turnblad said the area can be used for meals, or solely for drinks. The patio of the Green Room, in contrast, is for meals, which he said is the distinction between the two businesses. Mr. Hansen questioned basing recommendations on the building configuration versus based on the tenant. Mr. Turnblad said every property is unique, for example, the Green Room is not on a rooftop, it's in a niche of the building. The Rafters patio area is totally on the top level, and downtown acts as a natural amphitheater so what happens on a rooftop like this is perceived differently by residents. As ownership or clientele changes affecting the usage, owners can come in to ask for an amendment to the special use permit. Larry Cramer, applicant, explained there is a six foot high fence covered with netting on the north side. The parapet wall is an eight foot wall. There will not be more than 48 people on the patio. He pointed out the distinctions between the Rafters and other businesses. He said they will not allow people to have drinks only on the patio unless they spend a minimum amount of money; it will be managed basically as a dining facility. Mr. Cramer recognized that his business has to live with the conditions to get the required variances but he would like the option of modifying some of them in the future, such as closing hours, live music, and security cameras. Not having a physical bar on the patio was a big point of discussion with the city, but he said the definition of physical bar may not yet be clear. He said there are no plans to have plumbing on the patio but he would like to have an ice cooler there. He believes that this would be allowed as he reads the conditions. He intends to have a server station for water and beverages. He believes Mr. Pogge wrote the conditions to include some latitude on the issue of the ice cooler. He said he has already spent $5 -6,000 but can't move forward with the design without a decision on the proposal. Ms. Siess noted that many of the conditions seem restrictive but noted Mr. Cramer can always come back to request changes. Mr. Hansen said he would like to leave conditions as is for a year, so the conditions regarding music and closing hours could be reviewable within a year so perhaps something like light amplified music might be allowed. 9 Mr. Cramer added that he doesn't intend to use the patio for a big band concert; but felt the condition isn't fair because Shanghai Bistro plays all kinds of music into the night. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2012 Smalley's plays live music into the night. He said there is now live outside music at the Water Street Inn. He realizes his patio is higher, but said the condition of "no amplified music of any kind" seems unfair. Lowell Lindstrom, 3696 Abercrombie Lane, Stillwater, said he feels there might be double standards for the estimated 15 outdoor dining sites in Stillwater, for instance, the Legion Club's music vibrates downtown and up the hill, as does that of Shanghai Bistro. He said there's a big difference between amplified music and someone playing a guitar. He said Mr. Cramer is just trying to run a business, be successful, bring in jobs, and make a living. He feels it would be a nice opportunity to go to the patio for food and drinks, and feels there are a lot of people in Stillwater who are interested in seeing Rafters succeed. John Odne, 418 S. Williams Street, said he goes to Rafters every Friday in the summer and almost every weekend in the winter. He enjoys taking his children there. He said he is impressed with the way Mr. Cramer has modified his plans to suit the city. He feels Mr. Cramer has done everything the city has asked him to do and he hopes the commission recommends approval. Chairman Dahlquist closed the public hearing at 10:01 p.m. Ms. Siess said she was expecting something very similar to the Green Room's conditions of approval but this proposal has a lot more requirements. Council Member Menikheim said he understands the effort that Mr. Cramer has put into the proposal, but Rafters does not exist in a vacuum. Four elements concern him greatly: safety of being 43 feet in the air with 48 people and alcohol is not a good idea. His second concern is with historic downtown Stillwater. Rafters sits right in the middle of the natural amphitheater and the proposal doesn't fit with the historic downtown skyline. He also is concerned about noise. He hears from constituents about noise all the time. In addition, he views the proposal in the context of the city, not just one business. If the city starts putting things on rooftops without thinking about what it wants to do with the rooftops, he feels the city is making a bigger problem than it needs to - it should be better thought out. Mr. Cramer is doing everything he can, but the commission needs to think about the whole downtown especially in light of the old bridge closing and the new bridge coming which will change the character of downtown. Mr. Dahlquist said his view is the 42 inch high rail set back three feet from the edge of the roof seems to be a relatively standard approach compared with other areas. He understands Mr. Menikheim's points but asked if the issue isn't really the history of the 10 site. He said the conditions seem onerous, perhaps because of the past history of the site. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2012 Mr. Hansen said it seems like the unfortunate situation of Mr. Cramer that he is the first one who wanted to do this. The commission needs to consider that this is the first proposal of its kind in downtown Stillwater. Mr. Cramer also had to deal with his neighbors who were opposed to the proposal. He would like to approve the project with conditions as is which he feels are a good compromise. Mr. Lauer said the St. Croix River is as big a problem, with drunk people walking around, as a rooftop bar. The city has analyzed this to death with every city official. Mr. Turnblad said acoustic music is allowed under the conditions. Mr. Buchanan said he is fine with most of the conditions. The 9:30 cut -off and zero amplified music seem onerous. He also appreciates the issue of wait staff having to run up and down stairs to get water, soda, beer etc. Motion by Mr. Buchanan to approve the recommendation with conditions as stated, seconded by Mr. Hansen Mr. Dahlquist said though not happy with all conditions, the applicant accepts them all. He clarified that condition number seven refers to the east edge of the patio, and condition number 11, no physical bar or beverage station, is overly restrictive and it should say no physical bar or alcoholic beverage service station. These changes were accepted by the maker of the motion and the second. In response to questions from Mr. Dahlquist, Mr. Turnblad said an amendment to the special use permit may be made after a year if the applicant wishes to go through an application process. The commission could put together language to require a review, at no charge to the applicant, if it desires. It could be a review at the applicant's choice, or initiated by complaint; in either case there would not be a charge to the applicant, if it relates to minor amendments. Motion passed, all in favor. Case No. 2012 -12. A ordinance text amendment regarding Chapter 27, Section 27 -3 the "Keeping of Bees." City of Stillwater, applicant. Continued from June 11, 2012 meeting. Mr. Turnblad reported at the last meeting there was consensus among commission members to make three changes to the proposed ordinance: 11 • location of honey bees is limited to single family zoned properties and two family zoned district if the owner residing on the premises is the beekeeper • annual permit is required PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2012 • beekeeping training is required Mr. Turnblad said he has heard some concerns expressed by residents, but overwhelmingly reaction has been positive. Two people allergic to beestings expressed concern. Typically it is not honeybees that randomly sting, it is usually wasps and hornets rather than managed colony bees. He added that staff recommends a longer permit, perhaps every two years. Mr. Dahlquist asked about the proposed ordinance statement that the city shall consult with beekeeping instructors at the University of Minnesota or Century College about alternate training methods - is that a burden we should put on the city? He felt the applicant should determine the equivalency demonstration from one of those instructors. Mr. Turnblad agreed. Walt DeYoung stated that genetic manipulation is wiping out bees, and asked commissioners to view the film, "The Vanishing of the Bees." He wants to put Stillwater on the map by showing that bees are important to our health and wellbeing. Margaret Thomas, 2842 Wildcrest Lane, Stillwater, spoke about allergic reactions to beestings, having grown up with a father who was a physician. She took the Minnesota Beekeeping for Northern Climates course where she learned anyone with a true medical allergic reaction to bees likely carries an epipen. The severity of the reaction varies from person to person, but true concerns about a medical allergic reaction to a bee sting should be taken to a physician. She spoke highly of the beekeeping research and information available at the University of Minnesota. Chairman Dahlquist closed the public hearing at 10:38 p.m. Motion by Ms. Siess, seconded by Mr. Hansen to approve with changes regarding bi- annual permit, item number four replace "city" with "applicant" providing equivalency determination about alternate training methods. Motion passed, all in favor. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. OTHER BUSINESS First draft discussion of Marina Zoning Amendment. Mr. Turnblad reported the nonconforming status of marinas in town was discussed at the last Planning 12 Commission meeting. Since then, he talked with DNR Area Hydrologist Molly Shodeen about what the city might include in the list of accessory uses. She strongly recommended that the city not list accessory uses, but instead look at each proposed PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 9, 2012 accessory use on a case by case basis. This is because the St. Croix River being a Wild and Scenic River, the only way to increase the capacity of a marina is through an environmental impact statement because of the impact on the natural resource of the river. She recommends the city allow marinas by conditional use permit in the RB zoning district but not list accessory uses. Changes in technology, in other words, ways of doing things the marinas already do, would not trigger a change. Mr. Turnblad agreed to bring back a draft ordinance to the next meeting and set a public hearing for the next month. Commission membership. Mr. Dahlquist said there are only five members present because Commission Member Scott Spisak had to submit his resignation this week. The position is open. He suggested next month's agenda include election of a new vice chair. He also stated that his own home is now for sale, so he may not be on the commission much longer and may not be here next month, though he anticipates it will take more than a month to sell his home. Ms. Siess suggested the commission start advertising that there is an opening. Applicants need to be 18 years old and live in Stillwater. They can submit the application form found online. The chair, vice chair and one council member usually interview the various applicants, recommend an appointment to the council, and the position is filled. A formal advertisement will be made. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Siess to adjourn, seconded by Commissioner Buchanan. All in favor. Adjourned at 10:49 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Julie Kink Recording Secretary 13