Development Commission · Wednesday, February 7, 2024 · City Council Digest

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of Dec. 6, 2023

packet pp.5–13

Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

MINUTES DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 6:30 p.m. – Wednesday, December 6, 2023

4. PUBLIC HEARING

Site Development Permit Application for Mathur Townhomes, Quasi-Judicial (A)

90 min · Doug Yormick, Associate Planner Jennifer Kim, Medici Architects Application No: PRJ22-00016, SDP23-00001 Address: 35 2ne Ave SE Parcel No: 235430075 Description: The site development permit Way and 2nd Ave SE. Public Hearing Order: Meeting Materials · packet pp.15–1228

Topics: Land Use

Open packet at p.15 ↗

Staff report:

STAFF REPORT Site Development Permit File No PRJ22-00016 /SDP23-00001 February 7, 2024

5. REPORTS

City Council Update

Christian Geitz, Planning Manager

6. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS

Upcoming Schedule

packet pp.1229

▶ Watch from 37:00 Open packet at p.1229 ↗

Staff report:

JANUARY JULY 1/3/2024 cancelled 7/3/2024 TBD

811 segments .txt ↗

0:07 ↗ good evening and welcome I'd like to

0:09 ↗ call the February 7th meeting of the C

0:11 ↗ city of isana's development commission

0:13 ↗ to order at 6:30 p.m. as a reminder we

0:17 ↗ do still have a remote aspect to our

0:19 ↗ meetings this means both staff and

0:21 ↗ members of the public may be

0:22 ↗ participating in the muting in the

0:24 ↗ meeting remotely via webc for those

0:26 ↗ attending remotely if you have questions

0:28 ↗ or issues please please send the host a

0:30 ↗ chat message or email staff at Christian

0:34 ↗ gsa.gov that's Christian

0:37 ↗ gsa.gov there are two excused absences

0:41 ↗ for the meeting tonight commissioner

0:43 ↗ Gilbert and commissioner

0:48 ↗ iada alternate member Jeff Mayo is

0:50 ↗ filling in this evening as a regular

0:52 ↗ member welcome

0:54 ↗ Jeff our first item of business tonight

0:56 ↗ is take action on the meeting minutes

0:58 ↗ for December the 6th hope everyone has

1:01 ↗ had an opportunity to review them are

1:03 ↗ there any corrections to the December 6

1:05 ↗ minutes provided in the agenda

1:08 ↗ packet hearing none the minutes are

1:10 ↗ approved as submitted next I'd like to

1:13 ↗ open the floor for any members of the

1:15 ↗ public in person or virtually you would

1:17 ↗ like to make a general comment not about

1:19 ↗ the ma Town Homes project but on General

1:22 ↗ topics there will be an opportunity

1:24 ↗ later in the meeting for those who'd

1:25 ↗ like to comment about the project on

1:27 ↗ tonight's agenda Mr gats is anyone

1:30 ↗ signed up in advance to make General

1:32 ↗ Public comments we have nobody in the

1:34 ↗ room that has signed up and there are

1:35 ↗ three individuals online I believe are

1:37 ↗ all the

1:39 ↗ applicants okay so no General comments

1:42 ↗ from persons online correct okay thank

1:44 ↗ you okay we'll move ahead then to our

1:47 ↗ regular business tonight and our main

1:49 ↗ agenda item predecision open record

1:52 ↗ public hearing the order of operation

1:54 ↗ for this hearing will be as follows

1:56 ↗ first the purpose of the public hearing

1:58 ↗ followed by appear of fairness

2:00 ↗ disclosures then we'll open the public

2:03 ↗ hearing with a staff presentation and an

2:06 ↗ applicant

2:07 ↗ presentation then the floor will be open

2:09 ↗ for public comment there will be an

2:11 ↗ opportunity for rebuttal by applicant

2:12 ↗ and staff and then we'll close the

2:14 ↗ public hearing commission deliberation

2:17 ↗ will then be followed by commission

2:18 ↗ action including motions amendments and

2:21 ↗ vote and that will conclude the agenda

2:23 ↗ item on the Quasi judicial permit if for

2:26 ↗ any reason the hearing on this action

2:28 ↗ can't be completed this evening the

2:30 ↗ hearing may be continued at a specified

2:34 ↗ date purpose of the public hearing this

2:37 ↗ is the formal public hearing for the ma

2:39 ↗ Town Homes development The Proposal

2:41 ↗ being considered as a site development

2:43 ↗ permit application for a

2:46 ↗ 4661 ft² 4unit apartment building

2:49 ↗ located at 352nd Avenue Southeast the

2:53 ↗ purpose of this hearing is to solicit

2:55 ↗ relevant public comment and facilitate

2:57 ↗ review discussion and decision on the

2:59 ↗ application

3:00 ↗ by the development commission this is a

3:02 ↗ quasi judicial hearing and so Mr Gs

3:06 ↗ please proceed with our appearance of

3:07 ↗ fairness

3:15 ↗ disclosures okay so quasi judicial

3:19 ↗ decisions require proceedings to be fair

3:21 ↗ in fact and appearance similar to a

3:24 ↗ courtroom setting uh expart contacts are

3:26 ↗ prohibited Communications outside of the

3:28 ↗ hearing between a decision maker and an

3:30 ↗ opponent or proponent of the matter at

3:32 ↗ hand uh are prohibited if such

3:35 ↗ Communications have occurred record of

3:36 ↗ the substance of the communication must

3:38 ↗ be placed on the record to allow other

3:40 ↗ interest interested parties the right to

3:43 ↗ rebut the substance of such

3:45 ↗ communication the test which we'll get

3:47 ↗ into in a moment would be would a

3:49 ↗ disinterested person have being

3:51 ↗ appraised of the total totality of the

3:53 ↗ decision Maker's personal interest in a

3:55 ↗ matter being acted upon be reasonably

3:57 ↗ justified in thinking that the that part

4:00 ↗ partiality may

4:02 ↗ exist decision makers who have personal

4:05 ↗ interest prejudgment of issues or

4:07 ↗ partiality are disqualified from

4:11 ↗ proceeding the questions will run

4:13 ↗ through

4:16 ↗ here uh with regard to the outcome of

4:19 ↗ this proceeding for the Commissioners do

4:21 ↗ you have a personal interest Financial

4:23 ↗ or otherwise in the

4:25 ↗ outcome

4:26 ↗ no does your employer have an interest

4:29 ↗ finan IAL or otherwise in the outcome

4:32 ↗ no do you have any familial social or

4:35 ↗ business relationships or connections

4:37 ↗ with any of the parties or non-parties

4:39 ↗ who have an interest in the outcome no

4:43 ↗ do you have any special knowledge about

4:45 ↗ the substantive or or the merits of this

4:48 ↗ proceeding which would or could cause

4:50 ↗ you prejudge the outcome

4:53 ↗ no and additionally will there be any

4:57 ↗ respective employment for you or your

4:58 ↗ family because because of the the

5:00 ↗ decision no do you own or control

5:04 ↗ property within 300 ft of the subject

5:06 ↗ property

5:08 ↗ no and have you had any expart

5:11 ↗ Communications regarding this project

5:17 ↗ no final piece here do you believe you

5:20 ↗ can sit and hear this matter fairly and

5:22 ↗ impartially both as to the respective

5:25 ↗ positions of the proponents and

5:26 ↗ opponents of this matter yes

5:30 ↗ all right and questions for the audience

5:32 ↗ in person or virtually you are virtual

5:35 ↗ uh please raise your hand um does anyone

5:38 ↗ in attendance wish to challenge the

5:40 ↗ participation of any commissioner based

5:42 ↗ on appearance of fairness

5:45 ↗ Doctrine you have an an objection raise

5:48 ↗ your hand and

5:52 ↗ okay that is

5:54 ↗ it thank you okay thank you now I'll

5:58 ↗ open the public hearing

6:01 ↗ at 6:36

6:04 ↗ p.m. so first we'll proceed with staff

6:08 ↗ presentation uh Mr Yori I will need to

6:11 ↗ swear you in please state your name and

6:14 ↗ position with the city for the

6:18 ↗ record you swear by oath or affirmation

6:21 ↗ the testimony you're about to provide is

6:23 ↗ true I do thank you please

6:28 ↗ proceed

6:31 ↗ good

6:36 ↗ evening name is Douglas Yori associate

6:39 ↗ environmental planner with the city of

6:40 ↗ isqua here to present the ma Town Homes

6:43 ↗ project file number sdp

6:50 ↗ 23-00 the site is located directly

6:54 ↗ behind me at the intersection of East

6:56 ↗ Sunset and Second Avenue Southeast

7:00 ↗ the zoning is multif family high density

7:03 ↗ and is in the Oldtown

7:09 ↗ neighborhood The Proposal is a

7:11 ↗ three-story

7:13 ↗ 4unit town home approximately 4600

7:16 ↗ square ft in size each unit will be

7:19 ↗ approximately 1,000 square ft the site

7:22 ↗ is .14 acres and is currently vacant

7:25 ↗ single family residence was demolished a

7:28 ↗ couple of years ago on the site um in

7:31 ↗ addition to the proposed building um

7:35 ↗ there will be some upgrades to the

7:37 ↗ existing Frontage improvements um that

7:39 ↗ are provided as part of The

7:41 ↗ Proposal as noted in the staff report

7:44 ↗ there is a deviation to the street

7:45 ↗ standards request that was reviewed by

7:48 ↗ Community planning and development and

7:50 ↗ Public Works engineering since there are

7:52 ↗ no planned CIP projects in the vicinity

7:55 ↗ Public Works has requested um just an

7:58 ↗ upgrade to the existing Frontage instead

8:01 ↗ of doing the full Frontage improvements

8:03 ↗ that are included in the uh city of

8:05 ↗ isqua Street

8:11 ↗ standards so in the street standards uh

8:15 ↗ for both 2 Avenue Southeast and East

8:17 ↗ Sunset way half Street improvements are

8:20 ↗ required that would include 5- foot

8:22 ↗ sidewalks 5ft landscape strip 11t travel

8:25 ↗ lanes and a bike lane um however

8:30 ↗ as as I discussed before Public Works

8:33 ↗ has requested that um the frontage

8:36 ↗ improvements be upgraded but to match

8:38 ↗ the existing since there are no planned

8:40 ↗ improvements along either of those

8:42 ↗ stretches mainly the the addition of a

8:44 ↗ bike lane because there are no projects

8:47 ↗ um planned to include bike Lanes along

8:50 ↗ either of those streets um So currently

8:53 ↗ there is a curb gutter 5-ft sidewalk 4ft

8:57 ↗ landscape strip behind the side walk on

8:59 ↗ East Sunset and then on um Second Avenue

9:03 ↗ it's just to match which is curb gutter

9:05 ↗ 3 and 1/2t Landscape strip and a 5 foot

9:09 ↗ sidewalk um the site will be accessed

9:12 ↗ from an alley off of Second Avenue um

9:15 ↗ and that alley will have to be uh paved

9:22 ↗ 20 so as mentioned access to the site is

9:25 ↗ Through the Alley um code requires for

9:29 ↗ four parking stalls um or are proposed

9:32 ↗ in addition to those four um we have

9:35 ↗ electric vehicle standards and they are

9:38 ↗ providing one EV stall and then the rest

9:42 ↗ of the Stalls will be

9:45 ↗ ready the parking area will be screened

9:47 ↗ from Second Avenue with a screen fence

9:50 ↗ and um the landscape that is required

9:52 ↗ for the

9:58 ↗ development

10:00 ↗ So currently there are no trees on site

10:02 ↗ for tree

10:04 ↗ retention um a Type 3 visual buffer is

10:07 ↗ required around the perimeter of the

10:09 ↗ site um since the site lacks any

10:13 ↗ significant trees and has zero canopy

10:15 ↗ coverage this requirement to meet the

10:17 ↗ 20-year canopy coverage in in our

10:20 ↗ updated land use code will be reviewed

10:22 ↗ during the landscape permit and building

10:24 ↗ permit

10:28 ↗ review

10:35 ↗ in exhibit f are the material samples

10:38 ↗ there are two main colors of the

10:40 ↗ building white and brick veneer the

10:43 ↗ materials chosen the brick veneer and

10:45 ↗ and the board and Baton will provide

10:48 ↗ texture exhibit e provides the proposed

10:51 ↗ elevations the building meets the

10:53 ↗ district standards for height by

10:55 ↗ limiting two three stories the building

10:58 ↗ height itself is under 40 ft at 37 ft 3

11:01 ↗ and a/4

11:03 ↗ in also in that same exhibit um the

11:06 ↗ elevations and rendering show a

11:08 ↗ modulated facade and a varied roof line

11:11 ↗ to break up the mass of the

11:14 ↗ building the facade has Windows of

11:16 ↗ various sizes surrounded by trim the

11:19 ↗ public facing facades have at least 15%

11:22 ↗ glazing complying with the standards and

11:24 ↗ each of the four units will be um will

11:28 ↗ provide direct pedestrian access to

11:30 ↗ Second

11:35 ↗ Avenue with that are there any

11:45 ↗ questions to

11:49 ↗ me yeah so this is for clarifying

11:51 ↗ questions for staff only so then the

11:54 ↗ applicant will present you can have

11:56 ↗ clarifying

11:57 ↗ questions

12:02 ↗ I did have a question about

12:04 ↗ the um staff report specifically the

12:08 ↗ Oldtown standards it um and specifically

12:13 ↗ about the windows and the trim it states

12:15 ↗ that it should have a

12:17 ↗ substantial visible trim and in a

12:21 ↗ contrasting color as I look at the

12:23 ↗ drawings I don't see any trim on the

12:24 ↗ windows or doors I wouldn't expect there

12:27 ↗ to be any on the breake areas but M

12:29 ↗ there's none apparent is that just the

12:31 ↗ nature of the model I'm seeing or do you

12:33 ↗ know or potentially that's a question

12:35 ↗ for the applicant see that would be a

12:37 ↗ question for the applicant um to my

12:39 ↗ knowledge they're the the windows are

12:41 ↗ surrounded by by trim and they have a

12:43 ↗ trim color selected which is um it's in

12:47 ↗ the material sample exhibit I believe

12:49 ↗ exhibit F okay they show that they show

12:52 ↗ the what the trim color

12:55 ↗ is okay thank you I'll defer my question

12:58 ↗ to theend

13:00 ↗ other questions for staff Comm Morgan um

13:05 ↗ I noticed that there's a lot of um I'm

13:07 ↗ not sure the volume but a lot of

13:09 ↗ non-native plants included in list do we

13:12 ↗ have any requirements in terms of

13:14 ↗ percentage of native

13:16 ↗ non-native we don't have any percentage

13:18 ↗ for Native non-native when it's not um

13:22 ↗ contained within or adjacent to a

13:24 ↗ critical area such as a stream or a

13:26 ↗ wetland

13:27 ↗ um we would we would review the

13:30 ↗ landscape when the when the final

13:32 ↗ landscape plans come in for landscape

13:34 ↗ permit review we would just review that

13:36 ↗ against the landscape code in Title 18

13:38 ↗ great thank you you're

13:41 ↗ welcome

13:43 ↗ Shore the 28% canopy coverage at 20 year

13:47 ↗ how is that checked up

13:50 ↗ on or

13:52 ↗ enforced this is a new code that I don't

13:55 ↗ know if we we technically will have an

13:59 ↗ enforcement mechanism with it but what

14:01 ↗ we would do is during permit review the

14:04 ↗ species of trees that are selected they

14:06 ↗ would have to provide a 20-year canopy

14:09 ↗ coverage estimate and we have some

14:11 ↗ sheets that um some worksheets that show

14:14 ↗ what that 20-year canopy coverage would

14:16 ↗ be so we would compare it to that um and

14:19 ↗ then that would get if you meet that

14:22 ↗ requirement it would get you through

14:24 ↗ permitting we don't have any followup

14:26 ↗ with that so we're not going to be doing

14:28 ↗ a sight by sight measurement again in in

14:31 ↗ 20 years but as part and Christian you

14:34 ↗ can correct me if I'm wrong we're going

14:36 ↗ to be looking at the canopy coverage as

14:38 ↗ part of the comprehensive plans to see

14:40 ↗ if the neighborhoods are meeting their

14:43 ↗ objective their targets and and that's

14:46 ↗ how we're going to this should over time

14:49 ↗ increase the amount of coverage within

14:51 ↗ each

14:53 ↗ of thank

14:57 ↗ you other questions for

15:03 ↗ staff and also later on during

15:06 ↗ deliberation we'll have opportunity to

15:08 ↗ ask staff and applicant questions again

15:10 ↗ and make

15:12 ↗ comments okay now we'll proceed with the

15:14 ↗ applicant

15:16 ↗ presentation okay Jennifer I'm going to

15:18 ↗ make you a

15:19 ↗ panelist and you should be able to share

15:22 ↗ your screen and unmute

15:25 ↗ yourself and Jennifer I will need to

15:28 ↗ swear

15:31 ↗ in hello can you hear me yes yes okay

15:36 ↗ Jennifer could you please uh state your

15:38 ↗ name uh for the

15:40 ↗ record Jennifer Kim okay and do you

15:43 ↗ swear by oor affirmation the testimony

15:46 ↗ you about to provide is

15:47 ↗ true yes thank you and please

15:52 ↗ proceed let me share my screen

15:57 ↗ here

16:02 ↗ you all see that yes um most of what I'm

16:06 ↗ going to present um has been covered by

16:08 ↗ Doug so thank you Doug for presenting

16:10 ↗ our project um I'm just going to show

16:11 ↗ you kind of a few more visual visuals to

16:14 ↗ go through kind of the architectural

16:15 ↗ aspect of this project um sorry I'm

16:17 ↗ Jennifer Kim from medich Architects by

16:19 ↗ the

16:21 ↗ way so just to give you some site

16:24 ↗ context or some additional context um

16:26 ↗ the project site is on the southwest

16:27 ↗ corner of East Sunset way and Second

16:30 ↗ Avenue Northeast in the Oldtown sub area

16:33 ↗ adjacent uses include isaca City Hall

16:35 ↗ police and fire station across Sunset

16:37 ↗ way to the west and north and there's

16:39 ↗ some duplex and fourplex residences to

16:41 ↗ the west and south and single family

16:43 ↗ with commercial use across Second Avenue

16:45 ↗ to the East and there is an alley that

16:47 ↗ runs along the south of the property so

16:50 ↗ this satellite view here still shows um

16:52 ↗ existing buildings but as Doug had

16:54 ↗ mentioned those have been demolished and

16:55 ↗ you can see um from these street views

16:57 ↗ that the site is vacant no

17:02 ↗ trees this site plan shows the

17:04 ↗ orientation of the building fronting

17:06 ↗ both Sunset way and Second Avenue the

17:08 ↗ four units are all accessed from Second

17:10 ↗ Avenue to the east covered parking for

17:12 ↗ four vehicles is provided at the rear of

17:15 ↗ the building off of the alley and

17:16 ↗ Landscaping is proposed between the

17:18 ↗ building and the street Frontage

17:20 ↗ Frontage improvements will occur on both

17:22 ↗ Sunset way and second Second Avenue in

17:24 ↗ the way of replace curb gutter sidewalk

17:27 ↗ and planting strips

17:29 ↗ each unit entry is accessed with a

17:31 ↗ pedestrian walkway from the sidewalk

17:33 ↗ with weather protection at the entry

17:35 ↗ doors since the time this packet was

17:37 ↗ submitted in November we have um revised

17:39 ↗ our overhead prot protection at the

17:41 ↗ doors to meet the code minimum of 4 foot

17:43 ↗ deep by 4ot

17:47 ↗ wide so this top image is the um

17:50 ↗ proposed front elevation as it faces

17:51 ↗ Second Avenue that was submitted in the

17:53 ↗ November packet and as I mentioned that

17:55 ↗ we've adjusted our weather protection at

17:57 ↗ the entries the the two images on the

17:59 ↗ bottom show the deeper overhangs um that

18:02 ↗ meet the 4ot code minimum in each

18:05 ↗ Direction each unit is accessed from the

18:08 ↗ ground level with individual walkways

18:09 ↗ and

18:10 ↗ lighting We believe We Meet the intent

18:12 ↗ of the design standards with our use of

18:14 ↗ modulation materials roof forms Windows

18:18 ↗ engagement of the street front and

18:19 ↗ providing separation between public and

18:21 ↗ private

18:24 ↗ spaces here the left image shows the

18:26 ↗ elevation that faces Sunset w since the

18:29 ↗ north elevation as seen from senet way

18:31 ↗ is highly visible from the street we

18:33 ↗ provide visual interest with the roof

18:35 ↗ forms modulation materials and location

18:38 ↗ of doors and windows The Right image

18:41 ↗ shows the view from the

18:44 ↗ alley this is the rear of elevation

18:46 ↗ facing west it uses the same Design

18:48 ↗ Elements and materials as the other

18:50 ↗ elevations so just to added comment um

18:53 ↗ because that trim comment did or

18:55 ↗ question did come up we do intend to put

18:57 ↗ trim around all the windows Windows um

18:59 ↗ we did have a question about whether

19:01 ↗ trim being of the same body color of the

19:03 ↗ white um would be appropriate or

19:06 ↗ acceptable as that kind of meets that

19:08 ↗ same um farmhouse style that we're going

19:10 ↗ for um that may be a question that we

19:11 ↗ follow up with the planners with but we

19:13 ↗ do intend um to have trim around our

19:15 ↗ windows and

19:18 ↗ doors and these are just some

19:20 ↗ perspective views from different corners

19:22 ↗ of the building since buildings are

19:23 ↗ rarely seen straight on we like to

19:25 ↗ provide some images to better capture

19:27 ↗ the building is whole and how one would

19:29 ↗ perceive it from ground level we believe

19:31 ↗ this project can play a vital part in

19:33 ↗ not only providing housing in isqua but

19:36 ↗ energizing the Oldtown

19:39 ↗ area any

19:45 ↗ questions questions for applicant

19:47 ↗ commissioner

19:48 ↗ price hi uh can you hear me okay yes um

19:53 ↗ well thank you for your presentation

19:54 ↗ first of all I want to say I think this

19:55 ↗ is a great design I've been curious

19:58 ↗ what's going to happen on that lot and I

20:00 ↗ think you took a really unique lot a

20:02 ↗ very narrow lot and and and the outcome

20:05 ↗ is terrific so I want to start there I

20:07 ↗ think it's a really really strong

20:09 ↗ gesture for that corner um I did have

20:12 ↗ the trim question so that's forthcoming

20:15 ↗ I understand that I guess I'll just say

20:16 ↗ out loud I would be in support of a a

20:19 ↗ body trim color given that the windows

20:22 ↗ are highly contrasting um I think I

20:25 ↗ think it would be too black but that

20:27 ↗ that might not be in my purview um but

20:30 ↗ then then the the second question I had

20:32 ↗ was the height limit it in the staff

20:34 ↗ report it says it's 37 and change but on

20:38 ↗ the west

20:40 ↗ elevation I see one that's 41 fo9 is

20:44 ↗ that accurate am I misreading

20:48 ↗ that so the city of isqua and plan

20:51 ↗ planners can correct me if I'm wrong

20:52 ↗ measures to the middle of the ridge of

20:55 ↗ the roof for Max height Okay so so it's

20:58 ↗ an averaging across the site okay that's

21:01 ↗ fair uh all right that's all I had thank

21:03 ↗ you thank

21:08 ↗ you commissioner Morgan thank you um

21:12 ↗ Jennifer I was one that brought up the

21:14 ↗ question about the 4 foot coverage so

21:16 ↗ thank you for getting that addressed so

21:19 ↗ quickly um and and the other question I

21:22 ↗ was going to raise was the the thought

21:23 ↗ about having um uh supports for the two

21:27 ↗ inter units over that coverage and it

21:30 ↗ looks like you've added that just like

21:32 ↗ on the outer

21:33 ↗ units

21:35 ↗ um yeah with the tiebacks to hold up the

21:38 ↗ the covering is that what you're talking

21:40 ↗ about exactly yeah yeah um so I think

21:42 ↗ that's a great idea um and the only

21:45 ↗ other question I had or suggestion I

21:47 ↗ guess is uh back to the where you show

21:50 ↗ the angled

21:51 ↗ views

21:54 ↗ um on the upper left so to me it seems

21:57 ↗ like like that's the upper left is going

21:59 ↗ to be the most visible view that we a

22:02 ↗ lot of people will be looking at that

22:04 ↗ and the one thing that jumped out at me

22:06 ↗ is um in the middle of that I like the

22:09 ↗ the modulation but the the center

22:11 ↗ portion there we have about a twoot or

22:13 ↗ two story tall white column essentially

22:16 ↗ surrounded by a couple of brick walls

22:19 ↗ and I wondered if there's a way to break

22:21 ↗ that up a bit just with even with just a

22:23 ↗ band in the middle of it or something

22:25 ↗ like that that could work in

22:26 ↗ architecturally uh so it doesn't look

22:29 ↗ too much like a a blank

22:31 ↗ column sure um we can definitely take a

22:35 ↗ look at that I think we we have gone

22:37 ↗ back and forth with that area knowing

22:38 ↗ that that is the most visible Corner um

22:41 ↗ I think planwise we're not able to put

22:43 ↗ any Windows there and so we kind of

22:44 ↗ played with that that that white element

22:47 ↗ you know whether how tall that was or

22:49 ↗ you know did it come down to level so we

22:51 ↗ can definitely investigate that more um

22:53 ↗ to see how we can kind of make that less

22:55 ↗ of a blank wall great thank you yeah ni

22:57 ↗ I think the trees there is the if I

23:00 ↗ remember right is the Smoke Tree but

23:03 ↗ only gets after some time to 12 feet

23:06 ↗ so okay thank you thank

23:11 ↗ you other

23:16 ↗ questions okay good we now we'll move

23:19 ↗ into the public Comon portion of the

23:21 ↗ hearing then Mr gats has anyone signed

23:24 ↗ up to comment on this

23:26 ↗ topic uh nobody has signed up to comment

23:28 ↗ on this topic in the room and there are

23:30 ↗ only applicants uh and

23:33 ↗ owners on on the

23:35 ↗ online okay thank

23:38 ↗ you so both in room and online no one

23:42 ↗ else wants to

23:44 ↗ speak okay does the applicant have any

23:48 ↗ uh rebuttal to questions raised by the

23:53 ↗ commission we have no rebuttal okay

23:57 ↗ staff any rebuttal to the comments and

23:58 ↗ questions you've heard so

24:01 ↗ far so Commissioners are there any

24:03 ↗ objections to closing the public hearing

24:05 ↗ at this

24:08 ↗ point Mr

24:10 ↗ Morgan um no I guess the only question

24:13 ↗ is in terms of if they were going to add

24:14 ↗ something that would be I guess

24:17 ↗ something staff would look at in terms

24:19 ↗ of they added something architecturally

24:20 ↗ to that

24:22 ↗ corner is that in other words would we

24:24 ↗ want to add any kind of condition to

24:26 ↗ that or

24:28 ↗ just leave it to staff to consider it

24:32 ↗ right it could be it could be either

24:33 ↗ either adding it as a condition from

24:36 ↗ from discussion deliberation by by the

24:40 ↗ commission they've they've presented a a

24:44 ↗ design that that is compliant but as as

24:47 ↗ pointed out okay a desire there all

24:50 ↗ right well maybe I'll just add a

24:51 ↗ condition then okay thank

24:55 ↗ you so any objections to closing the

24:58 ↗ public

24:59 ↗ hearing so I now close the public

25:02 ↗ hearing at 6:56

25:05 ↗ p.m. the commission it's time to move

25:07 ↗ into deliberation portion of the meeting

25:10 ↗ any discussion and this can include

25:11 ↗ questions and comments to staff and

25:15 ↗ applicant as

25:26 ↗ well

25:28 ↗ agree with commissioner price I think

25:30 ↗ they've designed a great building for

25:31 ↗ the the partial great yeah so I just

25:34 ↗ have two questions I guess

25:37 ↗ um Christian could we get access to the

25:40 ↗ code popped up

25:43 ↗ please I'd like to look at uh

25:47 ↗ 18700

25:50 ↗ 1110 I guess this is primarily for

25:56 ↗ staff

26:26 ↗ r110

26:29 ↗ I've got the code up okay great um any

26:33 ↗ way you could share it with

26:47 ↗ us okay thanks so if we go to

26:52 ↗ 18711

26:54 ↗ B1 this about ground level details for

26:57 ↗ multif family so this says buildings

27:00 ↗ located in the multif family Zone on

27:02 ↗ East Sunset way only must incorporate at

27:04 ↗ least one of these

27:05 ↗ following the address of this building

27:09 ↗ technically is on second but we were

27:11 ↗ just discussing the elevation the

27:14 ↗ importance of the elevation that

27:16 ↗ faces uh Sunset so my question I guess

27:20 ↗ to staff is is this applicable to this

27:22 ↗ project or because it has a an address

27:26 ↗ on second that it is not

27:29 ↗ applicable I was I was taking this that

27:33 ↗ um since it's accessed from second that

27:37 ↗ this wouldn't but the applicant has

27:39 ↗ provided elements for a long Sunset um

27:42 ↗ for some engagement there's uh the the

27:45 ↗ fence with trellis and gate and and

27:48 ↗ Landscaping um and a path that goes

27:51 ↗ through that gate to access the the rear

27:54 ↗ yard of of the four units um put in in

27:57 ↗ terms of of this I was more looking at

28:02 ↗ um the access along second and sunset so

28:06 ↗ technically this probably is not

28:08 ↗ applicable but nonetheless it looks like

28:10 ↗ the applicant has gone the extra yard to

28:13 ↗ provide some of this some of these

28:16 ↗ amenities thanks and then on uh

28:20 ↗ 18.

28:26 ↗ 62060

28:34 ↗ this is on rooftop materials and this is

28:37 ↗ generally applicable correct to

28:41 ↗ multifam

28:53 ↗ development yes okay yeah good so I was

28:58 ↗ looking at

28:59 ↗ [Music]

29:01 ↗ L1 sorry if I'm scrolling too

29:04 ↗ quickly right there

29:07 ↗ yeah so the rooftops have to have

29:10 ↗ sustainable materials examples are some

29:13 ↗ of

29:13 ↗ these and it's not limited to these and

29:18 ↗ so we have metal rough

29:22 ↗ correct and it's black is the color is

29:25 ↗ that correct basically black

29:28 ↗ so which of these do you believe that

29:31 ↗ this would me is it 100%

29:40 ↗ recyclable um I'm going to defer to the

29:45 ↗ applicant but I believe when we were

29:47 ↗ discussing during the pre submittal

29:50 ↗ community meeting that the roof could be

29:53 ↗ made from recycled material or Rec

29:57 ↗ material yeah I guess this also says

29:59 ↗ that if the material used is 100%

30:03 ↗ recyclable that would also fulfill this

30:06 ↗ but I guess the black roof color being

30:10 ↗ the maximum absorptive and the least

30:15 ↗ reflective makes me wonder if it's

30:17 ↗ meeting the intent of this

30:20 ↗ code but it only has to meet

30:24 ↗ one so perhaps the applicant would like

30:26 ↗ to speak to the

30:30 ↗ metal roofs are generally accepted as a

30:33 ↗ recyclable material because after its

30:34 ↗ lifespan it can be reclaimed and reused

30:37 ↗ um in other forms of metal so um I would

30:42 ↗ um say that that would meet that that

30:46 ↗ criteria um whether it's 100% recyclable

30:49 ↗ Roofing um I think it's hard to find

30:52 ↗ anything that would be 100% recyclable

30:56 ↗ um

30:58 ↗ okay did you consider a color for the

31:00 ↗ roof that would be more

31:03 ↗ reflective than all we yeah the pro I

31:07 ↗ mean we and we've come across this issue

31:09 ↗ with actually some other projects we

31:10 ↗ have in isqua um the problem with the

31:13 ↗ the dark roofs is that or the the solar

31:17 ↗ reflectivity on the roofs when you're

31:18 ↗ trying to get it to be non-reflective

31:20 ↗ it's typically they've been tested when

31:22 ↗ they're like white or very very light

31:24 ↗ colors um which we don't think

31:26 ↗ necessarily would match the style or the

31:28 ↗ intent of this design um so

31:32 ↗ architecturally we would prefer it to be

31:34 ↗ a darker one we can find one that may

31:36 ↗ not be so dark so that that that um that

31:39 ↗ that reflectively index is actually

31:42 ↗ better than completely

31:45 ↗ dark that would be great I don't think

31:47 ↗ it requires a condition but I just

31:49 ↗ wanted to comment on that and I think

31:50 ↗ that would be super okay we'll

31:52 ↗ definitely look into

31:56 ↗ it any other discussion comment

32:07 ↗ question seems to conclude our

32:09 ↗ deliberation with deliberation concluded

32:11 ↗ it's time for the commission to take

32:13 ↗ action on the item before us is um

32:16 ↗ before we move on to this uh

32:18 ↗ commissioner Morgan with your discussion

32:20 ↗ regarding the banding did you want to

32:22 ↗ propose a condition for that or how did

32:25 ↗ you want to leave that before we move on

32:26 ↗ to action I I think I will add a

32:29 ↗ condition on at the end great

32:31 ↗ recommendation great it would be timely

32:33 ↗ to do so

32:34 ↗ now or we can do it after discussion

32:37 ↗ let's do it after after the main motion

32:39 ↗ discussion okay so it's time for to take

32:43 ↗ action before us there a motion on the

32:44 ↗ item before the

32:46 ↗ commission I move that the development

32:48 ↗ commission approve the site development

32:50 ↗ permit for ma Town Homes sdp 23-

32:55 ↗ 0000001 as descried described and

32:57 ↗ evaluated in the staff report dated

32:59 ↗ January 30th

33:01 ↗ 2024 with exhibits a through K subject

33:04 ↗ to the conditions therein and is amended

33:06 ↗ tonight do I hear a second

33:11 ↗ second discussion on the

33:14 ↗ motion and any amendments or

33:18 ↗ conditions um Mr chair the the motion I

33:21 ↗ don't know that mentioned the number of

33:23 ↗ conditions right oh yes I there's seven

33:29 ↗ okay yeah um just so I um Mr CH I move

33:34 ↗ we add condition 8 uh state that the um

33:40 ↗ architect will um Endeavor to um make

33:46 ↗ changes to the white column portion of

33:50 ↗ the Northeast portion of the building to

33:53 ↗ break up that facade in with approval by

33:56 ↗ City

33:58 ↗ staff second the motion thanks any

34:01 ↗ discussion on this condition

34:07 ↗ Amendment all in favor of the amendment

34:10 ↗ condition say I I all

34:13 ↗ oppos condition passes

34:16 ↗ unanimously any other amendments

34:18 ↗ conditions

34:24 ↗ discussions hearing none we have the

34:25 ↗ main motion before us

34:27 ↗ vote on the main motion this vote is on

34:29 ↗ the main motion all in favor of the main

34:32 ↗ motion say I I I all

34:35 ↗ opposed main motion passes

34:39 ↗ unanimously so this concludes the Mather

34:41 ↗ apartment development permit notice a

34:43 ↗ decision will be issued by staff within

34:45 ↗ 7

34:46 ↗ days like to ask staff to provide any

34:49 ↗ updates on city council

34:52 ↗ activities um actually let let before we

34:55 ↗ do this sorry we have a a second part to

34:58 ↗ this uh We've approved the main motion

35:00 ↗ but is there a follow-up motion on uh

35:04 ↗ stating City action I move that the

35:07 ↗ development commission direct the

35:08 ↗ community Planning and Development

35:10 ↗ Department to prepare finding of facts

35:12 ↗ and conclusions for review and approval

35:14 ↗ by the development commission chairman

35:16 ↗ affirming that development commission's

35:18 ↗ decisions to approve the ma Town Homes

35:21 ↗ SPD 23-

35:23 ↗ 0000001 subject to the conditions listed

35:26 ↗ in the staff report dated January 30th

35:29 ↗ 2024 with exhibits a through K and as

35:32 ↗ amended tonight are a second

35:36 ↗ second any discussion on the

35:40 ↗ motion all in favor of the motion say I

35:43 ↗ I I all oppose the motion no motion

35:48 ↗ passes

35:49 ↗ unanimously this concludes the Mather

35:52 ↗ apartment development permit notice a

35:54 ↗ decision will be issued by staff Within

35:56 ↗ 7 Days city council update staff can you

36:00 ↗ please provide any updates on city

36:02 ↗ council activities absolutely so we've

36:04 ↗ got a limited update since our last

36:06 ↗ meeting this evening uh with the start

36:08 ↗ of the New Year the council has

36:09 ↗ completed elections for council

36:10 ↗ president and Deputy president council

36:12 ↗ member Walsh was reelected as the

36:14 ↗ council president and council member D

36:16 ↗ Michelle has been elected as the deputy

36:18 ↗ council president uh on January 30th at

36:21 ↗ a special city council meeting the mayor

36:23 ↗ gave her state of the city

36:25 ↗ presentation um and then just this

36:27 ↗ Monday uh Council heard an initial uh

36:31 ↗ discussion and had held a public hearing

36:33 ↗ on a multif family tax exemption uh to

36:36 ↗ expand the current uh boundaries for the

36:39 ↗ mfte program uh to potentially

36:42 ↗ incorporate the shelter Holdings High

36:44 ↗ Street collection which was part of the

36:46 ↗ development agreement that was passed in

36:49 ↗ November that took place uh this past

36:52 ↗ Monday uh that project is moving forward

36:54 ↗ and will return to council uh sometime

36:57 ↗ March that's all thanks any other items

37:00 ↗ of business or announcement from

37:05 ↗ staff thanks there being no further

37:07 ↗ business before the commission this

37:09 ↗ meeting is adjourned at 7:08

37:13 ↗ p.m.

Approved minutes

Extracted from the next meeting's packet, where this meeting's minutes were approved as a consent-calendar attachment.

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (6)

Sanford

Vice-Chair Shore

Commissioners Brennan

Mayo

Morgan

Price

Staff (1)

Christian Geitz, Planning Manager Doug Yormick, Associate Planner 2. Approval of Minutes a) Minutes of December 6, 2023 With no corrections or comments the Minutes were approved. 3