Council Meetings - 27 November 2018

After a couple months of "lighter" meetings, our agendas seem to be getting heavier again. Could it be holiday weight gain?

I usually try to highlight a few of the most impactful or interesting items. We don't have any blockbusters, but several could have a significant lasting impact. Should Provo have its own disaster recovery fund? The State thinks so and has incentivized us to do so. What about large-scale private energy production that interfaces with our grid? What can we/should we do about rising housing costs? Impact fees play into the housing affordability conversation. Some advocate for low/no impact fees, but does that doesn't make the related costs go away, it only shifts the costs to others. Finally, there is a newly added item that would raise the bar for homes eligible for home-purchasing assistance.

These should be some of the more interesting meetings to watch.

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Work Meeting Agenda

12:30 PM, Tuesday, November 27, 2018

Work Meetings are designed to be a less formal venue for discussion among Council Members. Generally, no public input is taken during the meeting.

Business



1. A discussion on the proposed Council Meeting schedule for 2019
   The Council is required to publish a schedule for the next calendar year. A draft has been put together for Council to consider. The schedule looks good to me...but as Vice-Chair I've already seen it and have given my input. Presentation only. This item will be scheduled for the December 11, 2018 Council Meeting. We aim for the 1st and 3rd Tuesdays of each month, but about a third of the time we shift to the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays because of scheduling conflicts.
2. A presentation on the option for municipalities to create a local government disaster fund
   A presenter from the Division of Emergency Management under the Utah Department of Public Safety will speak to the Council about the option in State Code for municipalities to create a local government disaster fund. The State wants local governments to take on a more active role in preparing for disaster, rather than just assuming that the state or federal government will swoop in a fix everything. They have created an incentive to encourage local governments to create their own disaster fund. From one perspective, this is a horrible time for Provo City to try to set aside even more money. After decades of letting tax and utility revenue dwindle, we have been playing catch up to responsibly maintain our services and infrastructure. From another perspective, though, if we can't set money aside for disaster recovery in the midst of this period of lauded prosperity, we never will. I've very torn on this. Presentation only. As the presenter said, there are major problems with this program, no one is using it, and they will be fixing it in the coming legislative session. They asked for our feedback and ideas on how it should work. We will give our suggestions and then will look into the topic again once the changes have been made.
3. A discussion on an ordinance amending Provo City Code to clarify that unauthorized energy generation shall not receive any rate or bill credits
   Provo City Code prohibits self-generation of electric energy unless the generation is licensed by the Provo City Energy Department. Additionally, licenses for electric self-generation by industrial and commercial customers have only recently been authorized by the code. Because self-generation without a license it prohibited, such generation would not qualify for any rate or bill credits. However, with rising interest in self-generation by residential, commercial, and industrial customers, the Energy Department believes it would be prudent to add language to the code explicitly stating that entities that engage in unauthorized self-generation shall not receive any rate or bill credits. This seems a bit unnecessary, but clarity is good. Presentation only. This item will be scheduled for the December 11, 2018 Council Meeting. There were several points of clean up, but really no substantive changes.
4. A presentation about the Utah Valley Chamber of Commerce
   Councilor David Harding asked Rona Rahlf, President of the Utah Valley Chamber of Commerce, to present to the Council about the Chamber's efforts on affordable housing. She will also provide an overview of their Valley Visioning initiative. Initially this started with me reaching out to our local Chamber about the Housing Resolution that the Salt Lake Chamber was asking us to pass. From this discussion, I learned that the Utah Valley Chamber has a number of initiatives of their own that they are pursuing to help address the threat of rising housing costs to our business environment. Presentation only. The UVCC supports the resolution proposed by the Salt Lake Chamber, but is in the initial stages of a major effort to help communities around the Valley to coordinate our efforts to address housing affordability. Here is a link to a survey to help inform the process.
5. A presentation on the Timp Kiwanis Bounous Park (TKP) LWCF Final Environmental Assessment Review (17-036)
   This update covers the last of the public comments received as part of the process. I believe this will be the final draft which, if approved, will be submitted to the federal government for their review. Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the November 27, 2018 Council Meeting. The Parks and Rec Department pushed back on suggestions that the Environmental Assessment was rushed or sloppy. They reviewed the purpose and scope of the document and how it fulfilled them.



Policy Items Referred from the Planning Commission



6. A discussion on a request for amendments to Section 15.03.020(3) to update 2018 standards to 2019 standards. Citywide impact. (PLOTA20180348)
   Each year, the Provo Public Works Departments updates utility construction standards, street design standards and other development standards. Staff is particularly interested in those standards which have a visible impact on the built environment and clearly fall within the purview of the Planning Commission. The standards under consideration for revision are generally related to underground utility construction. The current street design standards are not proposed for revision because an update to the Transportation Master Plan is currently in progress. These street design standards will come before the Planning Commission as part of the review of the Transportation Master Plan. Planning Commission recommended approval. This is a routine update. I didn't see anything consequential, but I'll ask this question during the presentation. Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the November 27, 2018 Council Meeting. As we transition to a new document handling system, the actual changes were not included in our document packet. We eventually (in the evening meeting) continued the item until next time so that we can review the proposal.
7. A discussion on a request for an Ordinance Text amendment to Section 14.34.350 Recreational Vehicle Storage and Towing Impound Yards to increase buffering requirements when adjacent to a Residential Zone. Citywide impact. (PLOTA20180216)
   Provo City Code has a section that identifies zones where impound yards can be and are subject to a conditional use permit (CUP). Some of the zones allow impound yards as a Permitted Use which is conflicting with 14.34.350. A number of existing impound yards in the City have been identified. Many existing impound yards are adjacent to or across the street from a residential zone. The applicant has expressed concerns with the existing buffering requirements of impound yards near residential zones. Staff finds that there are inconsistencies in the zoning code related to impound yards and where they are Permitted or Conditional Uses. Staff has proposed ordinance revisions to clean up the inconsistencies and move towards having them be permitted uses subject to meeting established criteria that the Planning Commission feels would mitigate impacts related to these land uses. Planning Commission recommended approval. I support removing inconsistencies from the Code. I support adequate buffering between recreational vehicle storage and towing impound yards and residential areas. I am a little wary of moving these uses from conditional to permitted. I'll need to feel comfortable that the "established criteria" will indeed properly "mitigate impacts related to these land uses". Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the November 27, 2018 Council Meeting. What is the right width of the buffer? What is the right fencing?
8. A discussion on a request for a zone change from R1.10 to Low Density Residential (LDR) for 2.94 acres of land, located at approximately 1080 E 1320 S to facilitate a 44-unit townhome development. Spring Creek Neighborhood. (PLRZ20180102)
   The applicants obtained the property in the last year with the intent to build a townhome project. The request comes with a concept of a 44 unit townhome project. The proposal has met all zoning requirements of the LDR zone and has satisfied the majority of city department issues. The remaining concern is that the roads to access the site are not completed at this time. This will have to be done before the final project plan is approved, and will be tied to that application. The adopted Southeast Neighborhoods Plan appendix of the General Plan shows the subject property as part of the LDR zone in the Future Land Use map. The LDR zone allows for townhomes with a maximum density of 15 units per acre. Planning Commission recommended approval. I'm interested in this item, and looking forward to learning more and possibly asking questions during the presentation. I believe this is in the area that we signaled an interest in developments targetting our young single professional population. I'm curious if the developer is tailoring the proposal to better fit the needs and desires of this group. Presentation only. This item was already scheduled for the November 27, 2018 Council Meeting. This is next to, but not a part of the area we highlighted for developers as a possible place for YSP-focused development. It fits with the neighborhood plan and the vision for this area.



Business



9. A report on the impact fee review process (18-099)
   There is a clear cost of growth in any community. A city's infrastructure provides a given quality of life in a community, and growth can put strain on that infrastructure. Water, electricity, sewer, street systems, and more must be modified to address the needs resulting from new growth. State law provides a mechanism, called impact fees, to collect funds to offset the City's cost of accommodating that growth. Provo City's ordinance provides that impact fees and capital facilities plans should be reviewed on five year intervals. The Impact Fee Review Committee (comprised of Council members, City staff, developers, and community members) has been meeting since early 2017 and working with a consulting firm to bring forward updated recommendations. The results of their work was presented at an Impact Fee Open House on November 8, 2018. Council will be holding public hearings at the November 27 and December 11 meetings and will then vote on the adoption of updated impact fees. Current impact fees are listed on the consolidated fee schedule. I think it is wise to account for the public costs that come with growth. I think it is reasonable to expect the people creating the costs to pay for the costs. I also think that there may be reasons why we wouldn't want to charge the full amount. This should be a good discussion. Presentation only. A presentation on this item was already scheduled for the November 27, 2018 Council Meeting. The public hearing on this item will be held at the December 11, 2018 Council Meeting. The proposal is for a 60% increase in overall impact fees. These fees haven't been adjusted since 2004 and at the time they were set below cost. I want to commend the committee that spent more than a year on this effort, and included stakeholders from across the spectrum. No one likes increasing fees, but the consensus is that these fees are fair and accurately reflect the costs created by development.



Closed Meeting



10. The Municipal Council or the Governing Board of the Redevelopment Agency will consider a motion to close the meeting for the purposes of holding a strategy session to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation, and/or to discuss the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of real property, and/or the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual in conformance with § 52-4-204 and 52-4-205 et. seq., Utah Code.
    Closed meetings (aka executive meetings) are held without the public present and must meet one of the conditions listed above. None requested.

---

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Regular Meeting Agenda

5:30 PM, Tuesday, November 27, 2018

Opening Ceremony

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.



Presentations, Proclamations, and Awards

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.
• A presentation of the Employee of the Month for November 2018
• A presentation on the establishment of the proposed impact fees (18-099)
  There is a clear cost of growth in any community. A city's infrastructure provides a given quality of life in a community, and growth can put strain on that infrastructure. Water, electricity, sewer, street systems, and more must be modified to address the needs resulting from new growth. State law provides a mechanism, called impact fees, to collect funds to offset the City's cost of accommodating that growth. Provo City's ordinance provides that impact fees and capital facilities plans should be reviewed on five year intervals. The Impact Fee Review Committee (comprised of Council members, City staff, developers, and community members) has been meeting since early 2017 and working with a consulting firm to bring forward updated recommendations. The results of their work was presented at an Impact Fee Open House on November 8, 2018. Council will be holding public hearings at the November 27 and December 11 meetings and will then vote on the adoption of updated impact fees. Current impact fees are listed on the consolidated fee schedule. From my preview of this item in the earlier meeting: "I think it is wise to account for the public costs that come with growth. I think it is reasonable to expect the people creating the costs to pay for the costs. I also think that there may be reasons why we wouldn't want to charge the full amount. This should be a good discussion."
  
  The actual vote won't take place until 11 December at the earliest. Presentation only. This item was already scheduled to be heard and voted on in the following meeting (11 Dec). The one thing I asked them to look into was tiering the price for residential water based on connection size. This would lower the impact fees on 3/4" connections and raise the fees on 1" connections. The current proposal is for them to be the same.

Public Comment

• This public comment period is intended to allow comment on matters that do not appear on the agenda. Each speaker will generally be limited to two minutes. Fifteen minutes has been set aside for this comment period.
• For items on the agenda requiring a public hearing, time to comment will be provided, after the item is presented, for all those who wish to speak.
• For items not requiring a public hearing, public comment will still be taken following presentation of the item, but will be limited to a ten minute total comment period.




Action Agenda



1. An ordinance amending Provo City Code to Public Works standards. Citywide impact. (PLOTA20180348)
   This is item 6 on the work meeting agenda. From my preview of this item in the earlier meeting: "This is a routine update. I didn't see anything consequential, but I'll ask this question during the presentation." A motion to place this item on the consent agenda for the December 11, 2018 Council Meeting was approved 7:0. The continuation will allow us to review the documents before voting.
2. An ordinance amending the Zone Map Classification of approximately 2.94 acres generally located at 1080 E 1320 S, from Residential (R1.10) to Low Density Residential (LDR). Spring Creek Neighborhood. (PLRZ20180102)
   The is item 8 on the work meeting agenda. From my preview of this item in the earlier meeting: "I'm interested in this item, and looking forward to learning more and possibly asking questions during the presentation. I believe this is in the area that we signaled an interest in developments targetting our young single professional population. I'm curious if the developer is tailoring the proposal to better fit the needs and desires of this group." Approved 7:0. The proposal fits the vision and plan.
3. An ordinance amending Provo City Code to increase buffering requirements and transitional standards when certain uses are adjacent to a Residential Zone. Citywide impact. (PLOTA20180216)
   This is item 7 on the work meeting agenda. From my preview of this item in the earlier meeting: "I support removing inconsistencies from the Code. I support adequate buffering between recreational vehicle storage and towing impound yards and residential areas. I am a little wary of moving these uses from conditional to permitted. I'll need to feel comfortable that the 'established criteria' will indeed properly 'mitigate impacts related to these land uses'." Continued to the December 11, 2018 Council Meeting. Community development is reworking the width of the buffer area.
4. A resolution approving an Environmental Assessment regarding a proposed Land and Water Conversion Fund property conversion (17-036)
   This is item 5 on the work meeting agenda. From my preview of this item in the earlier meeting: "I believe this will be the final draft which, if approved, will be submitted to the federal government for their review." Approved 7:0. I've written so much on this item already. It has been a painfully long process so far. I do support the neighborhood being made whole overall.
5. A resolution approving a substantial amendment to the program year 2018 annual action plan, fourth year update to the five-year consolidation plan, as amended (18-100)
   HOME Program regulations state that Participating Jurisdictions (PJ) utilizing HOME funds for activities assisting homebuyer and/or homeowner rehabilitation must use the Affordable Homeownership Limits (AHL) provided annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Alternatively the regulations allow the PJ to determine its own AHL by conducting a market analysis. City staff has conducted an analysis of the current local market in Utah County shows that the AHL provided by HUD, do not reflect the trends of the local market, limiting the choice of available homes for low-income families and individuals. The City, as Lead Entity of the HOME Consortium, is proposing to adopt its own AHL which reflect an increase of about 29% over the HUD limits. Increasing the AHL will enlarge the pool of available homes to low-income families and individuals and allow the PJ and partner non-profit agencies to better assist them. This is the first that I've heard about this item. I'm surprised that it is not on the Work Meeting. Well, I guess we'll see what it is about. The support documents are helpful. Approved 7:0. This won't change who qualifies, but what houses these programs can be used on. The use of this program has dropped over the past couple of years as fewer and fewer homes qualified for the programs.



Adjournment

Council Meetings - 13 November 2018

In my estimation, the most important items on tomorrow's agendas are development related. During the Work Meeting we'll be discussing possible changes to the zoning for "The Mix". In the evening meeting we will be considering the adoption of the Future Land Use Map for Southwest Provo.

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Work Meeting Agenda

1:00 PM, Tuesday, November 13, 2018

Work Meetings are designed to be a less formal venue for discussion among Council Members. Generally, no public input is taken during the meeting.

Business



1. Approval of minutes
   Approved by unanimous consent.
2. A report from Downtown Provo, Inc. (18-027)
   A semiannual update from Downtown Provo Inc. on their current initiatives and successes, as well as updates on any programs or projects. I haven't heard as much from DPI in the last little bit, so it'll be good to get up to speed on their current efforts. Presentation only. There is a lot of energy and excitement in Downtown Provo. DPI is in good hands.
3. A presentation on OnBase, the Council's new agenda management software (18-095)
   As part of the City's Provo360 project, the Council made a transition from SIRE to OnBase Agenda Management as the primary software to manage Council agendas. The system introduces many new features which will help Council staff and other city staff to work more effectively to conduct city and Council business. The presentation will cover how the public and Council will use the available resources to access Council agendas and materials. I've been looking forward to this day for a couple years now. I'm trying not to have unreasonable expectations, but I am hopeful that this transition will provide the public with all the information they need to follow the business of the Council in a way that is easy to access and navigate.
   
   Go to documents.provo.org to get started. Presentation only. So far the public interface seems fairly comparable to the old SIRE site. I believe the links to documents won't change with every minor update, so that is definitely an improvement. I would really love to get links to the presentation slides that are used in the meetings. I'm not sure that will happen, though.
4. A discussion on a proposal related to Neighborhood Housing Services of Provo and homes purchased with CDBG/HOME Dollars (18-076)
   Several years ago, Neighborhood Housing Services (now known as NeighborWorks) purchased and rehabbed several houses using funds borrowed from the Redevelopment Agency that originally came from the Federal Government. Based on the type and amount of funding used, the homes were required to remain affordable for specific durations of time. Recently, there has been interest in forgiving some of the loans. The RDA is concerned that should some of these houses no longer remain affordable, the Federal Government (HUD) could demand the funds back from Provo that were originally used to rehab them. The RDA is seeking guidance from the Council about whether to forgive the write-off amounts on all of the loans, the write-off amounts on some of the loans, and/or whether to establish a covenant between NeighborWorks and Provo City that would ensure the houses in question stay affordable. If I understand this correctly, this has been an unresolved issue for many years now. I am hopeful that we will have everyone and all the information together in the same room so that we can get to the bottom of it and can resolve it once and for all.
   
   Questions I have include: Was the original expectation that the loans would be paid back in full? Are there ways to ensure the units remain "affordable" during the required period? How is it in the public's best interest to forgive these loans? A motion to request RDA staff to make amendments to the contracts and documents to implement the changes discussed and to bring to a future Council Meeting was approved 7:0. The discussion was very helpful. While some of the rehabilitation projects may pay for themselves, that is not the main purpose of doing the project. As an example, shortly before I moved to Provo a dozen years ago, a house in my neighborhood was rehabbed by NHS. It had been the source of much crime and many calls to police. Meth had been cooked there. No private investor would buy and rehab the place because it was a money-losing proposition. But unless it was rehabbed, it would remain a source of problems and blight. It was very costly for Provo's emergency services to continually respond and had a significant negative impact on the quality of life of all the neighbors. The house was rehabbed and sold. The sales price may not have covered the cost to purchase and rehab the house, when the larger City and societal costs are considered, this was a valuable project.
   
   We discussed the importance of good communication, which has been improving, and for clear expectations when entering into these projects. I am optimistic that these problems are behind us and that we will be able to move forward with a valuable partner.
5. An update on the Interim Transportation Oriented Development (ITOD) zone as it relates to The Mix (18-097)
   This update is about potential changes to the ITOD zone in the area of The Mix development. (Supplemental Background from the Staff Report:) "The property owners of The Mix had planned to build retail and office space but have decided to build retail and housing instead due to a surplus of office space on the market. They will need to rezone the area from SC-3 to SC-2 and ITOD. The retail portion would remain about the same. The developer would more than likely bring a residential partner into the project to do that portion."
   
   There is high market demand for housing. We say we want more housing. We say we want housing that is more affordable for those living in Provo. We say we want density were density makes sense. We also value our role as being a business hub and office space is important for that. But if there is a current surplus of office space, I don't see much downside to allowing higher density residential into this space (assuming it is done well). A motion to request staff to prepare a rezone from SC3 to SC2 and ITOD and to begin the process of moving this forward for approval was approved 7:0. I think everyone on the Council was comfortable with a larger housing component in this project. For the reasons I explained in the preview, housing here is a positive. The lingering concern is if our ITOD zoning will ensure that we get a quality product that will enhance the area. We took a look at the three residential developments that have been built under our ITOD standards. Architecturally, I would say one is beautiful, one is adequate, and one leaves a lot to be desired.
6. A comprehensive update on items from Economic Development (18-094)
   The Council regularly asks the Economic Development Department to give updates. I'm interested to see what they are working on. Presentation only. I wish I could link to the presentation slides. I'll update this report if I get it. There is so much that has recently happened, is currently happening, and is in the works for Provo. We are in prosperous times.



Policy Items Referred from the Planning Commission



7. A discussion on an ordinance to amend the Zone Map Classification of approximately 5.89 acres of real property, generally located at 1437 East 2300 North from Public Facilities (PF) to Residential Agricultural (RA). Rock Canyon Neighborhood (PLRZ20180239)
   The property owner purchased the land in 2007 in order to create single family lots at a later date. The applicant has now applied for the necessary zone change and preliminary subdivision that would enable the property to be subdivided into three single-family lots. The property is currently a mostly vacant parcel that contains a storage building for the US Forest Service. Planning Commission recommended approval. This was previously heard by the Council, but sent back for review by the Planning Commission because of some changes regarding animal rights. Planning Commission recommended approval. My only concern was regarding the impact of agricultural animal rights on the nearby residential neighbors. If the applicant is willing to agree to animal rights equivalent to standard residential zones, then my concern is resolved. Presentation only. We just went over the changes in the proposal since it was last heard. The rezone was voted on and granted in the later meeting.



Closed Meeting

8. The Municipal Council or the Governing Board of the Redevelopment Agency will consider a motion to close the meeting for the purposes of holding a strategy session to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation, and/or to discuss the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of real property, and/or the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual in conformance with § 52-4-204 and 52-4-205 et. seq., Utah Code.
   Closed meetings (aka executive meetings) are held without the public present and must meet one of the conditions listed above.

Adjournment

---

PROVO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Regular Meeting Agenda

5:30 PM, Tuesday, November 13, 2018

Opening Ceremony

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.



Presentations, Proclamations, and Awards

Items in this category do not involve legislative action.
• A presentation of the Employee of the Month for October 2018

Public Comment

• This public comment period is intended to allow comment on matters that do not appear on the agenda. Each speaker will generally be limited to two minutes. Fifteen minutes has been set aside for this comment period.
• For items on the agenda requiring a public hearing, time to comment will be provided, after the item is presented, for all those who wish to speak.
• For items not requiring a public hearing, public comment will still be taken following presentation of the item, but will be limited to a ten minute total comment period.




Action Agenda

1. An ordinance to amend the General Plan Map regarding land west of the I-15 freeway and south of the Provo River. Lakewood, Sunset, Provo Bay, and Fort Utah Neighborhoods. (PLGPA20180225)
   On a vote of 5:2, the Planning Commission recommended that the Municipal Council adopt the General Plan Land Use Map for the Southwest Area Neighborhood Plan, based on the efforts made by the Committee, neighbors, and staff to address the future development of the area. The Planning Commission recommended that the RES designation on the Map be defined as four units per acre as a net acreage calculation, rather than a gross acreage calculation. This recommendation is consistent with the recommendation of the West Side Advisory Committee. This had a first hearing at the October 23 Council meeting and was continued. There are many fine details that will need to be worked out in the future, and various concerns in the community about different aspects, but overall I think this proposal represents a good balance of many competing interests. Approved 7:0. This represents a major step forward in the planning for future development in west Provo. There is sadness and anxiety among many who love what this area once was, but even they recommended this map for approval, feeling that it was a good balance between the many competing interests in the area.
2. A resolution approving an Environmental Assessment and a proposed Land and Water Conversion Fund property conversion. (17-036)
   The public comment period was reopened for the draft environmental assessment for the Timp-Kiwanis Bounous property conversion. This is an update on the public comments received and a request to move it forward in the process. This will be a good transaction for the people of Provo. A motion to include the public comments given in this meeting in the Environmental Assessment and close the period for giving public comments, and that the resulting draft be brought back to the November 27, 2018 Council Meeting was approved 7:0. If we approve the Environmental Assessment next time, then the proposal will be submitted to the Federal Government for approval. If we get the green light, then we can try to negotiate the sale and then determine if it should be sold.
3. An ordinance amending the Zone Map Classification of approximately 5.89 acres located at 1437 E 2300 N from Public Facilities (PF) to Residential Agricultural (RA). Rock Canyon neighborhood. (PLRZ20180239)
   This is item 7 on the work meeting agenda. As I said above, "My only concern was regarding the impact of agricultural animal rights on the nearby residential neighbors. If the applicant is willing to agree to animal rights equivalent to standard residential zones, then my concern is resolved." Approved 7:0. The applicant was willing and also waived any enhanced commerical rights that come with the RA zone.
4. **THIS ITEM HAS BEEN CONTINUED** An ordinance amending Provo City Code Section 15.03.020(3) to update 2018 standards to 2019 standards. Citywide impact. (PLOTA20180348)
   This item was continued by the Planning Commission.
5. **THIS ITEM HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN** An ordinance amending Section 14.06.020 to redefine "Family" to include four unrelated individuals. Citywide application. (PLOTA20180169)
   This item was withdrawn from the Planning Commission agenda.



Adjournment