The Land Use & Zoning Committee convened an agenda meeting on August 19, 2026, at 4:30 PM in the Council Chamber. The meeting featured a brief agenda with 16 items, most of which were deferred or marked for continued consideration. No votes were taken; the meeting served to set the agenda for future action.
All right. Thank you, everyone, for joining us. We are going to go ahead and convene the agenda meeting for land use and zoning. It's 4 30 on August 19th. We've got a short agenda tonight, so we'll go through this real quick. We have item number one, 2026, 124 is deferred. Item number two, 2026, 125 is deferred. Item number three, 2026, 126 is open continue. Item number four, 2026, 127 is open continue. Item number five, 2026, 376 is deferred. Item number six, 2026, 436 is open continue. And item number seven, 2026, 523, open continue. Item number eight, 2026, 524, open continue. Item number nine, 2026, 525, open close move. And number 10, the companion, 2026, 526, ex parte, open closed move. Item number 11, 2026, 527, open closed move. Item number 12, 2026, 528. Ex parte, open close move. Item number 13 and 14. We will be taking up as action items number one and two. So everybody please mark your agendas for that. So item number 13, 2026, 529, open close move, and that will be action item number one. Item number 14, 2026, 530. Ex parte open close amended move, and that will be action item number two. Yeah. Okay. And then number 15, 2026, 531, ex parte, open close move. And item number 16, 2026, 532, ex parte, open close amended move. We've got conflicting recommendations. Mr. Harvey, can you explain what's going on or whoever? Can someone explain the conflicting recommendations for me again? Sure. So planning com uh planning commission recommended only one of the two uh the uh planning department conditions. So they adopted the traffic study but did not adopt uh the second condition, which was the uh vehicle use area landscaping. Um according to part twelve. The applicant gave an explanation as to why she didn't think it was justified. Um, and staff provided a response. Planning commission decided to um eliminate the condition. Um applicant I would assume is prepared to discuss it as well. Does staff have anything else to add? Yeah, what's the V UA? Uh V UA stands for vehicular use area. Um we put a condition on there that overall they're asking for waivers from a lot of the landscaping code, and we wanted them to provide at least some landscaping for the employee parking area. Uh the applicant did explain at planning commission that the facility is not gonna be open to the public, it's just gonna be four employees on site, and so with that justification. Um, they didn't see the need to provide any additional landscaping just given the type of facility that this is um industrial in nature, and the commission agreed that the landscaping wasn't necessarily needed given that it's not open to the public and nobody's gonna see it. And so they removed that condition and only recommended forwarding the one condition related to the traffic study. Okay, got it. Oh, uh Councilman Johnson, you recognize. Hey, thank you.