Council holds public hearing on rezoning six lots at 0 South Main Street from R‑1A to R‑3

City council held a public hearing on a proposed rezoning of six lots at 0 South Main Street, a proposed change from R‑1A (lower‑density single‑family) to R‑3 (attached/multifamily residential).

Missus Keener opened the public‑hearing discussion and asked city staff to explain how the new zoning differs from the existing classification. Rob (development staff) said the current zoning classification for the parcels is R‑1A, a category the city applied to historically small lots to allow slightly smaller frontages and houses than modern R‑1 zoning. Under the city’s rewritten code, R‑3 is an "attached residential district" intended to provide for medium‑density multi‑family housing and a mixture of housing types.

Council members raised two main concerns: curb cuts and site plan review. Staff said curb cuts onto South Main require city approval and that, if the six lots are developed together for maximum density, the developer would likely receive a single curb cut and the city could negotiate access. If the parcels were developed as individual lots under R‑1A, each legal lot could in many cases qualify for its own curb cut. Staff also noted an alley behind several lots that could provide access if development consolidates parcels.

Members discussed the municipal planning commission’s recommendation and the planning commission’s close, contested vote; one council member described having changed a prior vote after reviewing possible scenarios. A speaker summarized the revised code’s rule for overturning a municipal planning commission recommendation, citing the code section as "revised code section 7 13 o 2," and explained that overruling the planning commission would require a two‑thirds vote of the full legislative authority (which the presenter clarified means five of seven votes when the body is at full membership).

Councilors also discussed the city’s permitting practice: staff said a developer must submit a proposed plan to the development services manager (Ms. Blankens) and that the city now has an inspector who will verify that construction matches approved permits. Staff acknowledged that under the existing zoning code there may be limited instances where no formal site plan is required for some types of infill development; that coding detail was identified as an area for future attention.

The council received a written public comment from Samantha Scoles opposing the rezoning; staff said the email would be entered into the record during the legislative session. The public hearing was adjourned and the council recessed to begin the legislative portion of the meeting.