Dale Coulam stated that there were just minor changes. This discussion is to get approval to put this on for Public Hearing next meeting. This is a clean up of terms on Chapters 3 and 5. Figure 5-2 is generic once you take out any overlay references. That is how you make any zoning map amendment. That is the application procedure and it walks you through a flow chart. Figure 5-3 is for overlays an dis unnecessary. It would go through exactly the same zoning amendment process for an overlay. But in Chapter 7 it will just say the application process is to apply for a zone change. We don't need a separate flowchart. We already have Figure 5-2. Figure 5-4 goes back to same thing that Figure 5-2 does but for a concurrent land use/zoning amendment. It doesn't matter whether it is a zoning district change or an overlay asking for a subdivision enhancement overly, it is the same process. So he proposes the repeal of Figure 5-3 since it is repetitive and unnecessary. Chapter 6 lists the various zoning districts and overlays. It shows minimum lot sizes and type of zoning that it is. We added a summary for Recreational Vehicle Resort under commercial districts. He was going to change the order and renumber them, but it may be better to show the changes this way to see what is being done and why. Open space and habitat preservation district shows up on the zoning map as open space, and that seems like a district rather than an overlay. Drinking Water Source Protection Overlay we don't need anymore because we capped the well on 400 East so there is no water source that needs protection any longer. We are striking that. Sensitive Lands will come later in Chapter 8. Planned Development Overlay had never been used since 2005 so we will just expand the Subdivision Enhancement Overlay a bit. Mixed Use Development Overlay also shows in Chapter 8. Rural Overlay was proposed by Commissioner Lance Anderson but he hasn't fully articulated what he means. He wants it to coexist with the Transportation Master Plan for road cross-sections and how those are designed. If what he is proposing is to say across the board, once we are West past this property line, all the houses are the same size, or the same size lot, it could be a an unreasonable taking, and a lawsuit. He doesn't think they can impose that. He hasn't yet drafted anything for it. By keeping this listed the way that it is, right now Mixed Use appears as the first part of Chapter 8 and Sensitive Lands as the second part. All the references to our code for those two items he doesn't have to change so he left those intact for that reason. Section 16.06.102 was originally repealed, but he proposed that because in Chapter 7 the first part of each of the overlays and districts had an overlay of the purpose. It was duplicating that, but as he thought about it adding a small summary here as well would be okay. On Open Space he stated he is not sure whether we have ever declared open space just for native vegetation because it could get carried away. He proposed changing outcrops to outcroppings. He fixed a typo next to the last line of paragraph A. On Sensitive Lands he thought because we now have different slope requirements when we altered it for commercial and it starts at 8% for residential, so it may sound better to say beginning at 8% habitat areas, threatened or endangered species. Chapter 7 will identify and make modifications to the actual requirements for getting a density bonus under the Subdivision Enhancement Overlay, to make it more objective criteria that are administrative decisions. Where we are gong to allow Subdivision Enhancement Overlays, lot averaging, short term rentals in the city are legislative decisions and part of our normal zoning process. But on Subdivision Enhancement Overlays and lot averaging, the mathematical calculations or the checklist items to see how much bonus they get or if they meet the average, is an administrative decision. Commissioner Bryan Pack stated that the rural overlay should be taken out of this one if we don't want to move forward with it as a body. Dale Coulam stated he agreed. Commissioner Mike Scott stated on Page 6 Item B Subdivision Enhancement Overlay it states that "for the provision of community features not typically required by the subdivision requirements of the City." To keep with the spirit of what we have been talking about with density bonus criteria, he suggested expanding that to say "features that benefit the adjoining subdivisions and the broader community." The Planning Commission is all in favor of pushing forward. We will advertise for a Public Hearing for October 30th.