All right.

Welcome everybody.

We're going to call this meeting of the City of Entown Planning Commission to order.

Appreciate your patience.

A couple announcements regarding the agenda.

So there were three land developments on the published agenda.

We have two projects that have postponed.

And that is number two, which is two Allen Street West Residences.

That was a resubdivision or resubmission.

That project has been postponed to a later date, as well as 2401 Mayus Avenue, the data center.

That has also been postponed to a future date.

So if anybody was in attendance for either of those two applications, we will take some public comment should you care to do so.

But there will be no presentation or deliberation on those projects today.

All right, moving into our first item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes of the May 12th meeting.

They've been prepared and circulated.

Does anybody have any comments or corrections of the amendments?

All right, hearing none, those will stand approved as written.

And we'll roll into we'll take uh public comment for the two items that have been postponed if anybody feels so inclined.

Uh then we can go ahead and let you guys go if you want.

All right, very well.

Pardon me.

We're gonna we're gonna stick to the city council rules, so we're gonna give you three minutes here.

You can start by stating your name and address, please.

All right.

Um my name is Justin Hernandez.

I live in uh 815 North 21st Street.

And the only thing I just wanted to ask was what since it is postponed, uh, when will be the next meeting?

Like what do you have any date planned on that yet?

Jennifer So the applicant has postponed.

We don't have a meeting date set.

This um commission meets on the second Tuesday of every month at 1215.

So it may be placed on the next meeting, or it's um uh they're still evaluating all the feedback that they've received so far and how to address it and they're reaching out to the community.

Um, and we may need to do more than one meeting for this.

So we're still figuring out a strategy for that and how to get best get the information out to everybody.

But when we have that information, and we will share it with you as soon as possible.

But please keep your eyes on the agenda for the following meeting, and um it will provide information and also on the city's website.

All right, thank you so much.

Thank you.

Anyone else in the audience?

Um I'd like to back up one minute.

I I forgot to do one important matter of business here, what's not on the agenda, but I think um you know we all recognize that there's uh one last person up here on the dais.

And um, I just want to officially for the record acknowledge with regret that we have lost um a trusted and valued member, not only to this commission, but to the city, and uh Jeff Glazier and his contributions will be greatly missed here and across the across the board.

So um let that be known that we have an official vacancy.

All right, let's uh move on to 401 Harrison Street.

That's our final um business item on the agenda today.

Um turn it over to staff for an introduction, please.

This project is um 41 Harrison Street's major land development and subdivision.

Uh, the project was heard by the planning commission on November 11th, 2025 and granted preliminary plan approval with conditions, including to address comments and recommendations of city staff and to address neighborhood concerns to the best extent possible.

In addition, the owner agreed to stagger the facades and architecturally enhance the project and to incorporate exterior lighting.

Um this is the uh land development and subdivision proposing construction of six townhouse units on uh currently vacant land.

Engineering comments um state that based on public comment received, this area is subject to sanitary sewage surcharges during plotting events.

Staff suggests the commission discuss this with the applicant to ensure the development is protected from any potential sewer backups.

Um stat no staff notes the plans do not show the staggering of facades or other architectural enhancements from the original design.

Revised color renderings were provided.

Color changes were added to two of the houses.

Um engineering comments recommend that pair street be widened to 12 feet along the subject property and that a paving pay paving be widened and a portion of the subject property be dedicated as a right-of-way.

The applicant responded saying stating that they would discuss this with planning commission to widen Pearish Street to a 10-foot cartway, and that they will provide a four-foot right-of-way access easement along the subject property.

Updated engineering comments, state and access easement is not an acceptable alternative.

Staff suggests the commission discussing with the applicant.

Uh no additional lighting has been added to the plans.

And conclusion, staff remains supportive of the project.

Staff suggests commission discuss the widening of Parish Street.

Um the sewage backups and inquire as to how the applicants intend to address neighborhood concerns, why the facades are not staggered, no significant art architectural enhancements were made, and no additional exterior lighting was added to the project, as the owner had agreed.

Finally, any recommendation of approval.

Uh final plan approval must be conditioned on the applicant appropriately addressing comments in the city comment letter.

Thank you.

All right, thanks, Melissa.

So um, just as a uh reminder and a refresher, we granted preliminary plan approval.

Is that what we did?

Is that that this is the one that we said, all right?

We're comfortable going preliminary but not preliminary final.

Okay, that's why it's back.

All right, very good.

All right, turn it over to the applicant.

Good afternoon, and thank you for having us here.

My name is Bernard Telatovich, I'm with Hanover Engineering.

We are the engineers for the project.

I have uh a small set of plans, a reduced set of plans.

If anybody up there needs them, I'll be happy to pass that out if that's if you would like to see that.

I mean, we have the uh exhibit here, and I have a small exhibit here that maybe I'd be best handing this out and make it simple so that everybody can see what we're talking about.

Sure.

Thank you.

As staff had said, we've been here before.

We received a preliminary approval with some conditions, some that have been addressed, most of them have been addressed, and those that didn't that uh your staff that went over, we will talk about them briefly, and we have no issues with them except resolving, I'll say engineering issues relative to say lighting or the sewer and uh Pearish Street, of course, is one big item.

I'm here with Tim Charlesworth, and I'm also here with Chad Clifton.

Tim is the attorney for the applicant, and Chad is the owner applicant for this project for Sundu Enterprises.

So if you have questions for them while I'm up here or questions later on, they'll be here to help answer that.

Went through the project before.

It is in a floodplain.

There is a designated floodway, AE floodway here that is not going to be touched by this project.

There is a um base flood elevation that we have met all the requirements for providing this residential uh project above the base flood elevation.

And of course, this flood fronts on Harrison Street, six units address would be 401 to 411 Harrison Street.

Side Street is um back to street to the rear is Pearish Street, and the side street is South 4th Street.

Um couple of the critical issues that staff recommend I want to address, and uh we can put it on the record because uh some of them, some of them I missed personally, and some just uh didn't get on the record for me to uh answer to the issue of the architectural staggering.

We had agreed to that.

Uh we'll with the building and planning of that.

We will probably move them two feet staggered uh with that.

We have no objection to that.

We agreed to that.

We agreed to that before, so it's it's not a uh issue that I feel is of concern.

As for lighting, uh the plans do show if you can look at the monitor up there, and maybe it's a question of what does the city want.

And I think that's kind of an engineering, maybe it's planning issue too.

We have lights on the front of every unit and lights at the rear of every unit.

Do we want a um iselux lines for all the uh lighting, or do we want a some type of motion sensor or whatever?

We're up to having that discussion with staff here because I don't really know what else was really needed, although we know lighting was discussed prior, so that's not a big issue.

The as for the sewer, that's the first time this came up, and I think it was a result of the citizenry saying, hey, we get sore backups in our basements, if I recall for the most part, and if you'll recall, the basements are below.

I didn't go out there and survey it, but I can guarantee it'll be based upon what I see.

Basements are below the base flood elevations, and that is the issue that unfortunately this project cannot resolve.

We will be happy based upon the comment to talk to LCA to see if they want this project to have certain types of backflow preventions, considering that it will be built at least a foot and a half above the or two feet above the base flood elevation in accordance with standard criteria.

If the backup is that high in this area, uh let LCA make the decision.

I can't really help you on that.

And like I said, the sewer issue we come across, which some of the citizenry talked about.

We you know, we feel bad for that.

It's just part of what's out there now.

It's nothing that's going to be changed with this project, and so and so we leave that to LCA to decide.

One of the fourth items that was talked was this Pear Street.

Um if you recall, this project's gone through five approval, five submissions, two or three prior to us resubmitting.

It had received final approval, and the Pear Street project basically or Pear Street right away or Pear Street property line, basically established setback requirements, and we basically are pushed back there.

Request came to say, hey, can you widen it to 12 feet?

There's a little bit of an issue there in some respect to the projects on the north side of Pear Street there.

Um I'll say encroachment, so we're not crying or complaining about the encroachments.

It's not that it's 10 feet out into the Pear Street that's a foot or two, and the pavement has been moved and uh gyrated around to allow for at least eight or ten feet of asphalt.

In lieu of giving a right-away as a fee simple.

I proposed let's just give extra four feet as an access easement.

That way, one the owner still retains ownership of it, two, it doesn't modify zoning issues relative to setbacks, and three, and talking with the owner, if in fact the town or city in the future, after this is approved, wants to have that as a right-of-way, it can go through a condemnation, and I think he agreed that it would be a dollar recommendation if he had if he had to do that.

That can be done.

So basically leaving it as an access easement.

So if you ever need, and it doesn't change what's out there now, it doesn't change the patterns of the other people driving.

If you ever need the move over two feet or four feet on his property, mainly because you can't move over onto the encroached property or the adjacent property because they're right up to the property line there, it'll be available there.

So I think that was a reasonable alternative.

And like I said, if that ever has to go to the city for whatever reason, if they ever widen that to 20 feet or whatever, it's available there for them.

Right, but it's sure.

Tim Charles was the attorney for the applicant.

As a part of that, Mr.

Microphone.

Okay, now it is sorry.

Tim Charles Worth attorney for the applicant.

In conjunction with the proposed easement in lieu of right-of-way, we could certainly name the city as a beneficiary of that easement.

So if there ever came a time that easement rights had to be enforced, the neighbors wouldn't necessarily have to point fingers at each other.

The city could come do what's necessary uh to clear out any obstructions that one neighbor might put in the way.

So without doing the full right-of-way, I think you'd have the same bang for your buck.

Thank you.

And only two other items I want to talk about relative to the staff uh summary report and relative to the planning commission report that you all have in front of you, and I don't have to have yes, I do have relative to the planning bureau's report.

And only two other items I want to talk about relative to the staff uh summary report and relative to the planning commission report that you all have in front of you, and I don't have to have yes, I do have relative to the planning bureau's report is uh the floodplain issues uh we had submitted for the floodplain permit, if I recall correctly, and Ms.

Hart could tell me if I'm right or wrong in this, that basically becomes only active or only really applied for in the building permit process.

We've gone through most everything with that.

There is a certification that we went back and forth on the language, and I can go back.

We can go back and forth from a staff to applicant level.

It's just the language on the certification to that, and uh like I said, I think we addressed everything except that to our satisfaction and maybe some other ancillary issues that from an engineering standpoint will deal with that and and work with it.

Like I said, this is not in the floodway, it is in a flood plain, it's built above the floodplain, and issues relative to waterproofing and stuff like that, we can deal with on the on the staff level here.

So that is basically my comments from the summaries report that the township uh engineers and surveyors and floodplain and everybody else reviewed.

Most of that is administrative.

The big issue is Pearish Street that we need to talk about.

One issue is also extending or putting more pavement on the bottom half of Harrison Street, which the applicant agreed to.

We are only cutting out into the middle of the roadway, tying in the utilities.

However, the staff had said, hey, if you're out in the middle, we need you to mill an overlay all the way to the edge, and we'll be happy to do that, even though we only show up to the half.

So that's the conclusion of my summary report.

I'll be happy to answer questions.

Mr.

Charles Worth is here to answer questions, and so is Mr.

Clifton.

So thank you very much for for listening to my five or ten minutes of recap what this staff had already told you.

All right, thank you, Mr.

Tilatovich.

Appreciate that.

Um just going through your list, okay.

We're just so the staggering uh is something that you feel you can accommodate.

I'm looking at the building restriction line, which you're sort of resting right along in terms of the back of these units, but you've got some leeway in the front with that alternate building restriction line.

Is that correct?

Is that how you're gonna get the stagger?

Well, well, the the answer is that that's sounds like that would have been the easy way to do it.

However, because of the sidewalks and walkways going down right to the edge of the side of the edge of the proposed sidewalks at the property line, that could create some issues relative to access and relative to getting up to the uh needed elevations above the floodplain.

Right, I understand that.

Um looking at the the landings that you have at the top of those stairs and walkway um into the front of the into the front of the units, it does look like there's a little bit of excess, if you will.

Um so that's where I assume you're gonna get unless you should be able to do that.

And Chris, if I can interrupt you, apologize for this.

And I tend to agree with you if you look at units one and two.

Units three and four, I think you're gonna be tightened to a point that uh makes it very difficult.

And five and six, I don't believe you can get your landing area outside your uh your walkway area.

Well, I guess that's why I'm bringing it up because you're saying that it's you know, you can you agree to do it, you will do it.

I'm just wanting to confirm how we're gonna do it.

Okay.

How we're gonna do the stagger.

Oh, no, the the stagger is probably going to be the uh three and four will move forward uh two feet or whatever.

The stagger will be moved three and four forward because five and six I can't move forward or backwards.

Right.

Uh one and two, I could probably even move if if uh depending upon how the architecture comes out, we can move it three or four feet or three and one and a half feet and back, or if we want to stagger like this, or if we want one, we'll work with staff on that and be glad to, like I said, work with them on that on what they think is appropriate based upon your recommendations and uh the ordinances.

Okay.

Yeah, go ahead.

Why don't you um I would add that if you can't do the three feet or two feet, you could you know get within a one-foot variable, but if you added more of a context and contextual finish, that would really add to a depth, meaning like a veneer brick or a veneer stone, perhaps on two of them.

And then you still have your reveal for a shadow line, too.

So I feel architecturally you could offset that that width and depth, rather.

Uh just out of curiosity, um question for staff.

You know, I know this isn't subject to the new ordinance, but what is what do we use, what do we look for in multifamily row housing like this in terms of separation.

I'm just kind of curious in terms of setback shadow line.

Is there a is there a prescribed depth?

Well, these would be these are not gonna be multifamily, they're gonna be on their own lots.

So they'll just be single family homes.

Okay.

Um we do have um we do have a section proposed in the new code on variations and projections that way you can add more um variation to the facade in addition to the standards.

Um I think they're probably for more multi-family type housing, they weren't evaluated for this particular proposal.

Um, but uh based on the you know when this was submitted.

But um, but but they are in with the design standards of the city's code.

Okay.

But not as prescriptive as to give a specific depth.

There are shadow line requirements.

That was one of the other comments.

There are very specific shadow line requirements for all almost all units within the new code.

Okay.

Just curious.

All right.

Um and then uh the building lighting, I don't think it's um I don't think it's uncommon to ask for some sort of uh lighting demonstration.

I will point out something that um so at the northwest corner or northeast corner, you are proposing a new Cobra head onto an existing telephone pole, and at the southeast corner, there's an existing, or at least according to Street View, there's an existing Cobra head on a utility pole.

So you know, that in combination with the exterior lighting shown on the elevations, I think uh pretty much satisfies me in terms of residential lighting, you know.

This was if this were multifamily or something else, I think it would maybe be subject to a little bit more robust plan that would show illumination, but I think um that kind of does it for me.

Umitary sewer issue.

I kind of think that you're developing this it's incumbent upon you guys to be comfortable with what your building is not going to have problems.

Um I do agree that that's something LCA certainly needs to chime in on, but I don't know that in the absence of any objection that I'm interested in standing in the way over that issue.

But um the the Pear Street, I guess that's the one I want to um you're currently um installing curving along Pear Street, correct?

Yeah, if I can go back in history here, and unfortunately I wasn't here for the history of 2017 or 2016 or 2018, but I believe that was probably an item discussed, and the issue was they were going to put a drop curb there along the entire way of the property line, so that if people went off they they can go off the drop curb with the raise an inch, maybe above it, or or whatever you want to classify it.

I don't think that it was discussed as detailed as dedicating an area or right-away, but I think the like I said, that's why we proposed the easement there to say, hey, let's at least look at that just in case it becomes an issue, the city can come in or whatever, we can uh they can have rights to that.

Well, I guess the the reason I was asking, and and I, you know, so yeah, I don't I'm not sure if I was involved.

I mean, I know it was on the commission back when this was originally talked about, but I don't know that I was present because I don't remember talking about this alley, but um I guess the reason that I was asking was you know, a lot of times we get hesitation or pushback, you know, on on these topics when it you know involves work that's not already being proposed, you know.

So like the fact that you're already gonna put a a curb along there and clean up that edge, um sure you give us the easement, and if we go to take it later, then you know, not only are we taking that area, but then we're we're also then looking at the expense and an effort to remove that curb and move it and then repave.

I'm just I'm trying to find the downside to doing it now.

Um I'll go back to my original comment about the setback lines where it looks like you have about that equal distance to the front of the units.

I know you've got you know some some concerns about access, but um I guess I just need to know or want to know like why can't we do that?

Why can't we just do it now?

I gave you actually the reason for at least the bat rear yard set back there.

Revisit it.

This would reset uh the location of that, and of course, we reset potentially either the size of the building or maybe at a minimum the size of that landing area if it doesn't encroach over the uh I'll say the secondary offset line that we have have to our use, but like I said, five and six would create a bigger issue than the other problem, the other locations because of that uh front landing area and access to the the building from the street.

Um so your building footprint is the problem then essentially building footprint could cause part of the problem could cause the problem at least in that area.

I'm just saying we're we're not causing the problem, it's your building footprint that you wouldn't build.

I didn't say it were not.

No, I know, I know.

Um let me ask you this.

So with your current proposal, you're gonna clean up the south side of Pear Street.

Um are you I don't see anything on the plan that proposes you're cleaning up or doing anything with the north side of Pearl Street?

No.

Okay.

All right.

So um if Chris, if you're headed this way, this was something we talked about.

Is do we want to have from that property line to the north side of that overlaid by the developer?

I think that's a reasonable request.

I haven't talked to actually I shouldn't say I haven't talked to him.

I haven't got an answer from the developer, but he's here for that option because it's 140 feet by 10 feet, let's say, an estimate.

So well, I think my next question would be so these individual driveways, I know they're doubled up, so they're 18 feet wide in total, but they're essentially nine feet wide for the individual resident, and and they're perpendicular to an alley that is currently proposed to be less than 10 feet in width.

And I'm just wondering if that's a is that a realistic turning movement to exit and enter a nine-foot-wide driveway on less than 10 feet of pavement perpendicular.

Thinking of driveway and parking lot design standards and just basic, you know, vehicle maneuverability.

Well, would I would I like to see 30 feet in a 30-foot radius?

Absolutely.

You know, from a traffic standpoint.

From a townhouse standpoint, you have the same situation for anybody else that's pulling off of that road into their their driveway or the garage or whatever.

And it's very similar to the like I said, to the uh I didn't say this, but similar to pulling into a parking lot.

Is it a is it nine feet, nine feet?

Yes, but uh if I see people pulling out of lot six there and backing out, I think that's movement easy and easy maneuver.

Lot five similarly, and they can easily use part of the I'll call it the easement area if you want to call it that to swing that additional uh turn.

Yeah.

Um I'm looking at the uh at the aerial on it, and it I can't tell if anybody other than the property on the far eastern corner actually has any vehicular access coming back onto this alley.

Maybe as you go further west, it does.

Um that might be the reason to say my argument for have them pave what's out there and improve that because the other, like I said, accesses are limited to maybe one right in that area.

You're not gonna change anything there to the west.

All right.

Uh those are my comments.

Anyone on the commission?

Eric, go ahead.

Um just start off with sort of what I said before with with um working with some textures, maybe revisit, uh, have your architect revisit that uh maybe every other one and really play with texture and flat, smooth and rough and heavy and light would really really add depth to the facade without even really moving them back and forth a lot.

Um we'll be happy to do that though.

Yeah, uh so on this plan over here, you have a new fence.

Can you tell us a little more about that?

There's a fence here that goes on the the west side and the north side, at least according to your your schedule over here.

Yeah, the north the north hang on.

It just wraps around the west.

I don't remember I don't remember wrapping around a Parish Street, even though I know we did put a fence there proposed.

I ask is it's continuous, so it covers the um the driveways.

Is there some sort of door there?

Or what's going on?

No, that that fence was not was not meant to be proposed there.

You found something that I think it's your construction fencing, isn't it?

It might be that it might be a carry over from the ENS and the construction, yes.

Because you do have your uh your your load-in spot, so maybe that's construction fence in, I guess.

Yeah, I believe.

Yeah, uh that's not meant to be a fence that is a privacy fence by any stretch or anything.

Okay, like I said, I do think it's something that was got carried over from the ENS.

Okay, maybe even one of the hidden uh things on the ENS that got changed.

So not an actual built-in.

No, okay.

Um as far as the sewer, did you guys complete a sewer module for the planning model?

You did the planning module.

Okay, I was just curious about that.

Um the only other thing was uh site lighting.

Um I think it would be helpful if if there was a light a little further out into the yard, perhaps, because I I know the intersection and it can get quite dark.

There's I think there's only one street light if my memory serves me correct.

Um so maybe explore putting one, you know, running an electrical line, 20 volt line out to the you know, out in the yard, maybe standing freestanding one out there would really help with lighting up the sidewalk, perhaps.

But that's all I have.

Thanks.

Thanks, Eric.

Is it um my concern mainly is with Pear Street, which you already touched on a lot about that too?

Um it's already a really thin street back there, so my concern would be with people like we just talked about too, with say they have a larger work truck or something like that, or deliveries, or they need um maintenance or items like that happening.

Is that the assumption then that those people would access through Harrison Street?

Well, hopefully they could use the Harrison Street at that point, yes.

So is that already a street that's heavily parked on?

Like would there be areas for those maintenance type of vehicles to that's a public street, so it's not gonna be a uh an area for them to maintain.

You can see that people park on Harrison Street.

Uh there's no no secret about that.

Uh you know, from a delivery standpoint, you're looking at residential townhouses.

We're not looking at uh you know something where deliveries are gonna come now.

Does the does the maintenance man come to repair the street?

Like a plumber or something like that.

Or like a snow plow or something along those lines as well.

Is there somebody who's gonna be maintaining that Pear Street to make sure?

No, Perry Pear Street is the public way that if it like I said, I think the uh to improve that at least from uh an aesthetic and uh workable standpoint in terms of paving, we we offered on behalf of the uh developer to do that.

Uh from that standpoint, in terms of that, they'll be doing the same thing as anybody else that would whether the next house is gonna deliver, where do they park, where does that person have?

They don't they don't have private uh let's say access now.

Like you said, some people go down Pear Street.

If I'm a plumber, do I park on Harrison Street?

I look for the best safe place to park.

Yeah, that's just my um I hear what you're saying.

That's just my concern, it would be with uh vehicular access on Pear Street, especially if there are some larger vehicles coming through, or if there's a number of vehicles that are parked there.

I know it's hard to say because it's dependent upon who's gonna live there and what's gonna happen, but I would say that's the the one thing that I'm concerned with.

Understand.

Thank you.

Kate?

Yeah, so I had comments just about the lighting, but I think we covered them pretty well as well.

Uh it does get dark back there.

Um, so does the pedestrian safety, I think, is important.

I think the freestanding light is a good idea there.

Like I said, I don't know how that really is at night time.

I don't know how dark it is.

I know you'll have front and back lights, but if that's an issue, it can be done.

Lighting staggering um folks, can you keep it down in the back, please?

Thank you.

Folks, you'll have a chance to talk.

Um just back to Pearish Street.

I'm looking at the at the Google Street view.

Um, and it appears you know, right or wrong, but it is what it is.

It looks like you know, there's walls and steps, trees and fences, you know, a lot of different things from the northern properties that may likely and and very well be in the right of way, and that's probably contributing to some of those pinch points.

Um I know you guys didn't cause that to be the case, but I think I can't help it to think we've got an opportunity to make this better.

And um just trying to think of how we get there.

You know, is is there a way that we can do a combination of what we're talking about?

Can we can we take the easement and require them to pave it?

What would be the what would be the yes?

It would be an access easement that is given but not dedicated, and then they pave it, and we and we get what we want and not fight over this.

Mr.

Brown, are you also suggesting that the city take a look at the north side to see if there are structures in the right-of-way that should be removed?

I'm not suggesting that actually.

Um, if if they were a subject of this development, I would say yes, we would need to look at those.

But no, I'm thinking um I'm what I'm saying is there's a condition that even if we were to pave to the north as far as we could, it's gonna be very little, if any, um benefit because I think the pinch points are sort of limited by these northern encroachments.

And I I tried to downplay those northern encroachments.

It is what it is.

It is what it is, yeah.

And and and but I think that's a big, you know, our your new residents will be backing into some of those tightest pinch points, you know, at least uh units three and four, um unit five, you know, they're gonna be backing right into those pinch points into those walls and steps.

So is there a way that we can you know compromise on this and still can we improve the situation without forcing that a dedication of right-away that affects the setback lines?

Uh generally speaking, we don't like having a uh a cartway that is half owned by the city and half in an easement.

Right.

Um I do understand what you're saying, what you're suggesting here.

That is something I thought of too.

Uh it it kind of feels like we're just trying to get around the rules.

Okay, so I'm glad you said it that way.

So what is the rule that we can is is there a rule that we can say, I mean, let's let's quit pussyfooting around, I guess.

If there is there a rule that says this is insufficient and and that they must do this, or are we just asking for it?

That's what I want to get to.

Uh as far as I know, there's no rule saying they have to do this.

Okay.

All right.

And and and that's fine, it is what it is, but that's why I'm saying, is there a way that we can, you know, um what if there was a continuous apron across the back, a four or five foot apron, you know, that is owned and maintained by the properties, but by virtue of being flushed with the depressed curb running along there, it provides an extra four or five feet of vehicle maneuverability.

If I could step in here, and I think I I understand what you're saying, and I have some ideas and potentially in my mind, I don't know if the developer will agree to that, but uh yeah, we're talking about a situation really that's important, and I know you already talked about the backing up, but when you have cars coming two ways, that circumstance is gonna be let's say extremely minimal at best, uh, you know, in that situation.

That's why going off, you know, I believe that probably when this was initially assigned, somebody brought that same issue up, whether it's a planning commission or staff, about is this required part of the ordinance?

Okay.

And I think that's where the idea came from.

Now, could we potentially put some some uh gravel back there as a widening area?

Because like I said, this isn't necessarily to improve the travel lane two directional.

This is to give somebody access to get around.

And you know, if that if that's a resolution and we get rid of the easement and that's part of the development, that's part of the approval process.

You know, I think that might be something that you know they can look at just putting gravel in there.

I think it's gonna turn to gravel because everybody's gonna drive on it, you know, it's gonna be a mess.

Yeah, I I agree.

I think I think if uh what you were saying earlier, if if uh a concrete apron would be more appropriate in this type of situation, and from a zoning standpoint, if I may, uh any kind of gravel type driving surface is generally discouraged.

The code under the requirement for off-street park and loading areas does require them to be any kind of parking areas, passageways and driveways to be surfaced with the dustless stirrable weather pavement type surface, which is generally taken as some kind of mechanical material.

Right.

I I I would tend to agree with a larger parking apron, you have more of a turning radius, and I think you would definitely cars would be less likely to hit the fences, perhaps.

You know, I guess you know, when when the the topic of whether something's required or not, you know, often comes up, right?

And and we're and we generally stick to you know what's more or less black and white when it comes to these types of things.

But I think the difference here is right, it's it's you know, it may not be quote unquote required you know to dedicate additional right-of-way and and and widen public roadways, but I also think we're proposing six new driveways that are going to utilize this alley, this public roadway as their primary and only vehicular access.

So I think that's where I think that's where it's appropriate for us to find some solution, whether it's a compromise or what we're asking for in terms of dedication.

I think something should be done because we're being asked to approve these new driveways going to this you know, under improved public roadway.

Um so with that, I would support staff and say that the access easement is is not enough.

And um where we go from here, I'm not sure.

Um whether we can agree to something here today, or if you want to go back and investigate whether there's something that you guys can do.

I mean, it we're get we'll get there.

You know, I don't think you guys are gonna let this thing, you know, this issue kill the project, and I don't think you know we have any interest in that either.

But I think what we want is is the best possible solution here.

I I think going and I understand what you're saying, Chris, and like I said, uh we've been very uh at least when I've been here, I think we're trying to work to resolution of all these issues and stuff like that.

And I think that recognizing that you're not looking at a local road by any stretch here, okay.

And you know, you're not even in that realm.

And I think the the fact that you have existing houses that encroach on there and everything else and make it let's say more difficult than that than it should be, even if it's only 10 feet wide.

I think the resolution for allowing, you know, I'm just gonna argue again and just you know make my point that allowing that four feet for anybody to use if they have to go off the side.

Like I said, it's this isn't a two-lane or two-directional pro uh roadway where you have cars you know every minute passing each other left and right.

I think the opportunity to pave that and make it nice for 10 feet or wide or whatever, however wide is almost, really makes it a lot more useful project.

The apron uh idea there that you put there, you know.

I don't know that putting a concrete apron or anything is in the in the interest or what the developer would have say yes, he's a gonna agree to, you know, but now you're looking at saying who's gonna take over that area, who's gonna maintain that.

That if that if you if the tower, if the city wants that for access for two-way traffic or somebody pulling off the road for whatever, you know, yeah, I think you get that in the easement.

I hate to say that, but that's the best I could come up with.

Now, remember the easement gives you all all rights of way uh, you know, property uh rights, and the attorney can if you need to talk to him or if he has any other ideas, Tim on that, but you know, it's just something there that has saying, hey, you know, this project has been approved, this project has gone through this.

We know that this was an issue, it was an issue back in 18.

I think they didn't resolve it necessarily, but came up with an option.

I think added to paving the pair street, if you look at that, if that's fully paved, uh, you know, so that cars know where they're at and don't have to worry about going off the end and everything else, it makes it a lot a lot of improvement.

That's just my say.

I understand uh what you would say, Chris.

I understand what the planning commission staff has said, you know, it's clear as can be, but you know, it's trying to resolve something here that uh I thought was a fair resolution.

Right.

Yeah, again this again, Tim Charles worth.

I I think I I have to say I agree with what Bernie is saying, and if if there comes a point that we have to look at the neighbors on the north and see if anything has to be removed, that's what we'll have to do, and we'd like to avoid that if possible.

We just want to deal with the situation as it exists on the ground.

And I think we can work with that.

Anybody else have any other thoughts on that?

I mean, I just like to reiterate, I mean, because uh actually at my house is the exact same scenario, except except my driveway, if you will, is only 15 feet deep.

So I'm very familiar with the turning radius of getting out on a on a on an alley of this size.

So I I still firmly believe that if it was a clear parking apron all the way across, and then and then a curb cut all the way down, that would get point it would give a little more turning radius for people to get out.

Because the grass or whatever that's in between these parking is nothing's gonna grow there, it's gonna get run over repeatedly.

It's gonna come a mud pool.

It's it's just the nature of it.

So yeah, Eric, I'll I'll share my my personal situation is same alley.

I've got a I've got a oversized garage with a 16 foot wide garage door, and I can only get one car in it because of the turning radius it takes to get in and out of it.

That's why I was questioning you about it.

I I think you put turning templates on this and it doesn't work.

So um, you know, they're they'll be using each other's driveways to get in and out, which may be fine because they're awfully deep, you know.

But if there's two cars stacked in there, it's they're gonna be driving in the grass um to make those movements, or they're gonna be doing multi-point movements.

Um so and we just don't, you know, I don't think we want to see you know, backyards that are rudded and eroded, and um you know, creating um you know, unsatisfactory conditions back there if we can solve it with the pencil on paper as opposed to dealing with it after the fact.

And the only reason I keep bringing it up is is the fact that you're doing all this construction anyway.

You're you're moving the utility pole.

That's usually the other thing.

Well, we can't do it because we can't move the utility pole.

You're already moving the utility pole.

You're installing a curb the entire length of this property.

Um what if what if we paved uh what if we paved a shoulder on the other side of the flush curb?

So it was clearly you know, it was like a private sidewalk, essentially, you just with bituminous, and um do it in that four foot easement, we'll call it an easement, and you've got that sort of added functionality, it's less expensive than concrete property owners would the individual property owners would maintain it.

And there would be a line, you know, the flush curve would be the delineation between what city responsibility and what the private owner's responsibility is.

Why don't you think about that?

I think there may be some public comment.

Um, and we'll come back to you guys.

Um thank you.

Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to uh address this agenda item?

Yeah, can you come on up?

Hi, um my name is Sylvia Yorgi.

We live at 431 Harrison Street.

Um, my husband and myself.

Um so I was reading the newest um brochure that you put out number six.

Uh it says that it is currently used, it is currently used, excuse me, is currently utilized as a parking lot by neighboring households.

There is a reason for that.

It's that field is used uh for parking because the parking it's it's a challenge.

Um and also I wanted to mention um I'm quite a little bit unclear about um the Pear Street.

We we access, we come up here street to get to our driveway behind our house on Harrison Street.

Um frequently, frequently when you're you start to come up there, or maybe from the top half, you see another car coming, and you don't see it until you're maybe part way up there or part way down.

The only thing you have to do, somebody's gotta back up and pull into a driveway, or sometimes we would go into the field and and go around.

So that it that is a factor.

Also, um, I kind of came here because I wanted to bring up the um thing about the flood, the flooding.

Um, some years ago, we had uh a big storm, and just a minute, I put some notes in my phone.

Hold on one second.

Umway, and I decided when that happened because it flooded so much that I was moved to check on um on flood insurance.

They checked our area and they deemed that there is a risk for us, even all the way up halfway up Pear Street, and they were gonna charge us $350 a month for flood insurance.

And so to me, you know, I don't I mean I don't make the decision, but it just didn't seem logical for apartments to be built there.

So and there was I wanted to say something else, just one second.

The Pear Street, um Pear Street doesn't get plowed generally, and when Pear Street isn't plowed, this is another reason why so people don't want to be locked into their uh their driveways for days, maybe they have to you know go to work.

So they park, that's even more people that have to park on Harrison Street because Pear Street does not get it it generally so it takes days to to shovel it out, Pear Street.

So um, and just if I could just ask one question, I'm not quite sure about this thing that's being discussed now, about I guess widening Pear Street where the where the uh proposed project is gonna be.

Um is that only gonna be down there, or is it gonna be widened further up where people have their driveways?

So that that's all I had to say.

Okay, thanks, Mrs.

Yuri.

Uh the um to answer your question about Pearish Street.

We're just talking about the the frontage of the subject property and and project anyone else like to come up.

Yeah, I have a question.

Um give them state your name and address, please.

Donna or mine 424 Harrison Street, Allenton.

Um curbing, possibly behind those homes on Pear Street.

It's what it's called a flush curve, it's just a it's it's a one and a half inch tall curb that creates a boundary between the asphalt paving and the private property.

I know initially you talked about possibly putting a wall there.

Did you decide against that?

I don't remember that conversation.

There's a wall on the other side of the property towards Harrison Street, there's a retaining wall.

Okay.

Uh also with the flooding.

Um I actually have two videos here from two different times.

And most of that parking area, and I say parking arena, um is flooded.

Uh Auburn Street gets flooded to the point where we're stuck in our home on Harrison Street, unless we turn around and go up the one-way street, because you cannot get through there.

And I'm talking water, like feet, feet of water.

Yeah.

Um, I don't know how you're gonna address that problem.

And parking is another issue.

Um, we're talking about possible trucks going down Harrison Street.

Good luck with that, because we have parking on both sides.

The street is narrow to begin with.

Trucks can't come down that way.

We barely see a snow plow.

Yeah, I believe it.

And worse, like she said, in the alleyway.

That never gets plowed.

Right.

So, what are those people gonna do?

Be stuck in their homes for days.

Sounds like that may be a possibility.

I quite frankly do not like this idea at all.

I've been living there 39 years, always have parking problems.

We used to be able to park in the parking lot that belongs to Trout Creek Park.

Recently they put signs up.

They don't want anybody parking there at night.

Yeah.

So those people are stuck trying to find a place to park.

Most of the people that live on that street have two cars.

Yeah.

Now you're talking about putting six extra homes.

What happens in the summertime when there's people down at the park?

Where are all these people gonna park?

I think there's so many other places you can build these homes.

Why does it have to be right there?

There were homes on the right-hand side in front of that building that were condemned years ago because of the flooding.

I should go up.

Also, there used to be when you come out 4th Street to Auburn.

There used to be a mirror there on the corner of the pole.

So you could see the traffic coming down Auburn Street.

It's parking only on one side of Auburn, and most of the cars are newer cars with tinted windows.

You cannot see up that street.

With the mirror there, at least you could see when a car was coming.

There have been numerous accidents on that corner.

And it's only gonna get worse with homes there.

And then those homes they built across that poor woman that lives there in the house.

You're showing she has a 20 six-foot RV.

How is she gonna get out of her parking lot?

How in God's name is she gonna get out?

Yeah, it's a whole picture.

Oh, I'd be curious to know how she gets out of it now without driving on somebody else's property.

Right, so she's using somebody else's property to that's correct.

And so are all those, so are all those cars that are parked there using someone else's property.

I get that.

And the guy that owns that property told those people they could park there because he he wasn't doing anything, right?

And now and now somebody wants to do with it.

I understand your frustration, you know.

I think um that's why we're trying to hold the developer to to meeting all the published and objective guidelines and requirements in the city, and and so far they they have um addressed most of them, and including the items that you're bringing up.

I I know this is frustrating and and change is difficult, but um, but it is a lawful, it is a lawful use uh on this property, and that's why we have to go through these this process of trying to evaluate it objectively against the rules and regulations of the city.

I know, I know how it works.

Um it's gonna go through whether anybody wants it or not.

Your your comments are worthwhile, so don't flooding quick because that's gonna really show like because they're saying the flood plane, they're saying the parts side.

Tim you want to make a comment, come on up clearly going free through.

Anyone else step down a quick showing that's how they mean they can see the actual flooding and stuff that's just ways.

Friend of Crushenics, 442 Auburn Street.

I'm not really sure why you're only addressing Pear Street where they're going to be because Harrison Street is a one-way down, uh their alternative to go up Pair Street meets with another small alley Levan.

So I suppose if one car is coming in and another one's going out, they're either gonna drive on people's properties or damage people's properties, and I don't see why you aren't concerned with the rest of the street.

Well, I think that's a that's a good point.

And um, you know, we're we're talking primarily about Paris Street because it's project fronts on Pear Street and it's under underimproved, meaning they have to do some improvements to it.

So we're looking at ways that we can try and maximize those improvements to benefit not only development but the rest of the folks that use that section of Pear Street.

All the other frontages are adequately improved to the city standards for this type of use.

So we can't really go in and change roads that are already improved to current city standards.

Okay.

And how does this project affect Chow Creek?

Um I don't know if I can answer that, but there are there are requirements that they need to meet in terms of stormwater, water quality, earth disturbance.

Um they have a floodplain ordinance in the city that they have to meet and comply with.

So there's a number of of ordinances that if it's not showing up on our report, then then the city staff and departments have either determined that they have been adequately addressed or in the process of being addressed.

So I don't know that I can answer that any other in any other way than than to say that there are many checks and balances that um that apply to this project that would affect the Traut Creek.

I just assume since he stated the people that are currently living there and experiencing the problems.

I understand that's their problem, but by him putting a wall up, now it's going to increase the amount of water and rise up to other people.

Which means it's gonna make the park flooded, erode.

I you know what I'm gonna be honest with you, I share that same concern, but I also rely on our departments, and including a full-time dedicated floodplain department.

I I trust that they have reviewed that, and there are ways to analyze the you know the impact on changing elevations in the floodplain.

Uh, I think I brought that up at the last meeting.

I was wondering if there was an offset.

Typically, there's an offset.

If you fill in the floodplain, you have to cut somewhere to you know end up balancing the net effects.

Um I'm relying on our staff and on our floodplain ordinance to make sure that that's adequately addressed.

And and I believe the indication is that they are in compliance.

What happens after they build and you find out they aren't?

It's a good question.

I don't I don't know the answer to that.

Good question.

I just joined us.

Good, how are we?

Okay, good.

My respectful of you.

Uh good afternoon.

My name is Miguel Marrero Jr.

I live in 415 Harrison Street or 415 and 417 Harrison Street, which um my garages are on the back of Pear Street, right?

Last week, uh, as you can say, uh, I do have a lot of problems coming into it in and out of my garage because of uh no spot to get in.

I have two garages that I cannot use, right?

Okay, two garages that I cannot use.

You can see how narrow it is.

You see the far end, and the other I cannot get in, and like you said, it's like I have to go in, back in, back just to get in.

Not only that, my garages have been damaged by other trucks coming up.

Okay, they've been damaged several times, okay.

Um if you may, if if I may show you uh a video real quick to you, sir.

Uh this year is how it gets bare street.

And how is the street?

Oh, that gets flooded.

I'm not talking about uh I'm talking about five foot of water and a little bit more.

Okay.

I live there since 2009.

Okay.

Uh I moved in from Beckham and that side that is just one way, you get flooded all the way to the side.

Okay, all the way to the side.

So if they build, if they build a five-foot wall, what happened with all that water?

Well, that water is gonna go into the house that is right around the corner that we were talking about, the RB.

That house is gonna be flooded, the house is gonna be condemned.

So you are building a house and throwing all the people's out of them.

Let's be honest.

You know what I mean?

There's no way that you can sit down and say, hey, I'm gonna make the water go this way.

You cannot, you cannot uh put a law on the water, the water is gonna go whatever that's gonna go.

You understand?

Why don't you pour it down and pour down?

And nobody can can ordain the water and say, you go this way.

No, it's not gonna happen.

So your people might do a great job, and I I'm not complaining about them, but they haven't addressed the flood plan that we have now.

So, how are we gonna address the flood plans that we're just gonna happen?

I'll be honest.

Okay, I see what is happening now, and it hasn't been addressed for years.

So if he hasn't addressed for years, what tells me that their competency have been worked so far that it's gonna be addressed for the future.

I'm honest.

I'm I'm here to to to give you my point of view, and we all hear our neighbors from that area.

And I'm I'm not talking about neighbors from two years three years.

I'm talking about 20, 30, 40 years plus.

People that live there and know that even the radios, like you were talking about getting into Pearl Street.

I have a truck, I have a Dutch run 1500.

Okay, to get in, okay, I have to hit the curve just to get into Pear Street.

I hit the curve.

So I don't even have the radio to turn.

So how are they gonna build houses that they're gonna have uh garage and a carport to come in and out when they don't have that width to bring the car in?

What happened if one of them buy a truck or two trucks for that fact?

And let's understand, you know, people have houses, have kids, kids grow up, and they get licensed and they get car.

I have I have two kids my own.

I have a 19-year-old, he's on a car, my wife on a car, and I uh and I owe two vehicles, okay?

So it's no way to park.

Let's be honest, no way to park.

When we come down, I had to park in the lot.

Um I asked uh the previous owner when I moved in, I talked to the previous owner, and he gave me permission to park there, but I conditioned the land.

I'm the one who's been cutting the grass of that land since 2009, all the way down to today.

Okay, I maintain that property clean.

I clean everything that is around it.

I make sure that it's no shenanigans going on.

I make sure that that land is clear and people can park there.

So I have uh neighbor like uh right there, my my friend he parked there.

The other neighbors park there because they don't have no parking on the front.

And their houses doesn't have no uh uh the Arburn Street houses doesn't have no back roach to go into.

At least the ones on the bottom.

You know what I mean?

The the the first, second, third, fourth, they don't have so they park on the back there.

That's where they park.

Unfortunately, all this is affecting the whole neighborhood area.

Yeah, you know what I mean?

And of course, they haven't addressed the flat plan because you cannot command the water.

They haven't addressed it, they haven't addressed the back of food, the bucket sewer, okay.

And unfortunately, now that you know that we see all the narrow that is the street, they haven't addressed that either.

It's hard to sit down and and and and me living there for all these years and coming in and out, in and out.

You know, I cannot use my garage.

I have two beautiful garages that I can put my cars in.

I don't need to leave them outside in the sun.

Can't because to go in is a pain.

So I have to park them in front of the house.

And that's the way people, you know, and of course, the Harrison, like they say is double park.

So people park on that series and people park in this area, because not too many people on Harrison has their parking lot on the back.

And some of them do, but they have already cars there.

Right.

So their extra cars are parking on the front.

Okay, we are not here to tell you how to do your job.

You guys know how to do it very well.

And I commend you for it.

You know what I mean?

You have to come over here and listen to us every day.

And you say, I know it's not easy, but I'm just like stating the fact.

Right.

You know, being there for so long and understanding how everything works.

They want to build a five-foot wall, maybe maybe a little bit over, then they want to fill up the the train, and that's another thing that I want to address.

That terrain is being given in.

Okay, because we we uh the the neighbors, he one of them uh used to own a tow truck, right?

Uh um, one of those uh trucks that brings um dirt, and we fill it into the point that you see that that truck that you see on the side, that is a little mountain there, right?

All that was like that now.

You see all that caved in, that's all the middle.

So the houses that you build there are gonna cave in.

I guarantee you that because over the years I see it cave it in, and not only that, if you walk into that into that land and you walk into several parts of it, you're gonna see that there are parts already going in like this.

Okay, and and I'm not talking about place that is weight on it.

It doesn't have no weight on it, but the dirt and the earth is giving in.

Yeah.

So you're gonna build houses in Slack, perfect.

What's gonna tell them that they're gonna have those houses for a long, long time?

So you're you are selling people dreams, and actually it's a nightmare.

I don't wanna I don't want to do that to anybody.

You know what I mean?

I don't want to go to a person and say, hey, this is your American dream, and all of a sudden they're gonna have to dump it on a big rain because everything got flooded or or or the or the earth cave in and and the houses are are done.

It is it is uh uh a great a great thing for the neighborhood.

We're not complaining that it's gonna up uh the neighborhood and it's gonna make make it better, and probably my our houses are gonna cost more because of it.

You see, it's a lot of up for us, but we don't want that shenanigans to happen to other people.

You see, other people are gonna come in there, and the people are gonna see and they're gonna say, This is what you're selling me.

I'm not I'm not here to you know to tell you how to do your job, it just just it just doesn't get here.

My house is on the top and my basement flooded three times.

I have to create a system, okay?

I understand when the water comes in and I have to take it right out.

Right.

Three five three to five feet of water inside the basement.

I lost everything that I had there.

Right.

Okay.

Sorry to hear that.

And and and unfortunately, I didn't I didn't bother the city to come in and do anything.

When it's when uh to say about um plowing.

I work with um I work with uh um a guy that owns a plow truck.

I plow the street.

Yeah, I plow Harrison Street.

I plow um um Payer Street whenever it needs to be done because we have to rely out on each other's to come out.

Sure.

We are here for each other.

Yeah, that's I think what you guys have down there is fantastic.

And and I and I hope that if this project goes through that you welcome these people the same, um, because it is great to have community.

It is great to have support with your neighbors to help dig out in snowstorms.

Sorry about your flooding issues.

I really am.

That's one of the most frustrating things to deal with.

Yes.

I I get it.

I get all of it.

I really do.

But all I'm saying is that the people that are there are gonna be a nightmare, it's not gonna be a sweet home for them.

If you if you want to have that in your conscious amen to that.

But me, for the lights of me, I can't.

I can't.

You know what I mean?

Do you want to sell people dream home?

You don't want to sell people a nightmare five years on the road, six years from the road.

I I agree.

I agree.

And and the way everything looks, the a lot of things hasn't been addressed, a lot of things hasn't been done.

And the per and the place can be the velope for the right amount of houses.

You might have two houses, it'll be great.

You see, you might have three houses with great, but six, you know, three buildings with uh, you know, that is a little bit um, I would say ambitious.

You know what I mean?

Because let's let's be honest too.

You can develop that in into two houses, beautiful, and you'll be off the off the of the level plane, and they have place to come in and out.

You can make the corruption to side on whatever you want.

But uh six six units is ambitious.

And it's it's not uh I'm sorry, but I seen it, and again, like the ladies say over there on the other side of the uh of um when you come down Harrison Street on that little corner there, right all that area was houses there, and they were condemned by the city.

They were destroyed by the city.

The city took over that land because the houses there were flooded.

Yeah, so you want to do the same thing with these new houses.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you for your time and have a blessed day.

You too.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else?

Um preferably with some new issues.

We don't we don't really need to hear the same things.

I think we've got it loud and clear.

My name's Neil Sicker.

I live at 412 Auburn Street.

I just want to say I lived there 64 years.

I've seen lots of floods, and my mother lost her car in a flood there.

I just want to say this happens constantly there.

Since 1964, I live there.

It's very bad that that whole area.

They ripped, like you said, they ripped that whole row of houses down.

There is a house all by itself.

They tore that down.

The the caretaker that used to take care of the park at one time.

They tore that house down.

I just want to say I lived there 64 years.

I know there's floods there every year.

No matter what you do there, it's gonna flood.

Thank you, sir.

Just saying.

I know I don't look 60.

Anyone else?

Turn it back over to the applicant.

Thank you.

I mean, we we've we've heard the neighbors' concerns and we sympathize.

We didn't create them.

Those are problems that have been around apparently for decades.

Uh, the flooding, the parking.

We're gonna provide parking for our residents.

Uh the rest of the neighborhood is not going to be changed significantly by any of what we're doing.

We intend to follow the rules.

We're a small local business, try to build a few houses in Allen Town that desperately needs housing.

Um so we will continue to work with the staff and iron out these last few details.

But for today, we'd like to get a conditional approval, final, and move this to staff and and get it where it needs to be.

So thank you for your time.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Um I guess um for the most part, everything is a will comply with the modification of the additional or alternate lighting in the front, but then there's the whole pear street thing.

I mean, I think what we can do as a commission is we can say we support the city, we support the city's response letter, and we can take action conditioned on that and let you guys duke it out.

Or um or we can try and help.

Well, I think we have tried to help.

Um I think that was the one item that that was specifically noted.

Well, we want to talk to the commission about it.

I think we've done that, um, and offered our two cents.

Um just quick quick uh quickly direct a question or two to the staff.

I'm just um you know, I know there's well I assume that there's some sort of stormwater management um in addition to the floodplain uh compliance that would um be separate from directly separate from from engineering, but I assume there was some stormwater information that was provided, and um well, first of all, was there some stormwater information provided by the applicant?

This location, uh they're proposing less than 10,000 square feet of impervious, so they don't fall under the requirement to provide that.

However, we can we can ask for uh you know something a little bit more substantial since this is an extenuating circumstance.

I appreciate your answer there.

That's that's what my response would have been if you asked me.

However, you're looking at something that is adjacent to a discharge stream, and in order to reduce flooding and everything else, you're looking at conditional no detention, regardless of whether we're at one square feet or a hundred thousand square feet, about that a hundred thousand would push into some different permitting.

So we just stayed below the ten thousand, and remember you're right there at the flood at uh call it the flood weight, where this will get to the floodway anything off this property before it ever uh before before any other I'll say subsequent runoff from the storm comes through there.

So you're looking at that kind of situation, and that's why there's really nothing that needs to be provided in terms of rate, water quality, and water and volume controls.

Okay.

Um I think it's unfortunate that we don't have you know some sort of mechanism to activate some sort of mitigation, especially in a in a known area uh for stormwater problems, but I do understand the rules.

Um and then just I feel like these are kind of the the bigger issues with with regard to the floodplain.

I mean, are we am I correct in that I saw a statement in the report that we are or that we have determined that this project is compliant with our floodplain ordinance?

Did I pretty sure I saw that, and I just want to for the record we just need to revisit a certification that the development can withstand the 100-year floodplain?

And once that certification is reevaluated through this next resubmission, the project would be compliant.

And that's pretty much the above ground improvements at that point, or is that the whole the certification is for all the end development activities that they can all withstand the 100-year flood velocities, pressures, and forces.

Okay.

But as far as the impact of the floodplain itself, um isn't we're okay on that end with the with the ordinance in the city?

So this area of the 100-year floodplain is not a floodway, so we do not ask for a hydraulic study, which is the offsetting that is only in the floodway.

So hydraulics were not required for this project.

Okay.

Thank you.

Excuse me.

What constitutes a floodway?

After everybody said how they're all flooded, how is it not deemed probably?

Go ahead, we'll let our floodplain managers speak to that.

The delineations that are mapped come from FEMA.

They are federally mapped.

We do not make the maps.

FEMA will do a hydraulic study that is a study to determine the elevation flood and the speed of the flood.

Where this building is buildings are being proposed is deemed at the 100-year floodplain.

The floodway is typically around your waterways, so that would be the Trop Creek.

And that is what holds the velocity most velocity of the flood.

So if we cannot, we did not make that decision.

That decision came from FEMA.

They publish the maps and they publish the flood studies and we enforce them.

How long ago was that published?

That was published in 2004, and new maps are being developed currently.

So if the new maps state that needs to be done, and this has already started, how does that affect that?

Once a project is approved, construction moves forward.

There are plenty of plenty of housing stock in Allentown that was built even before we had these regulations in place.

And every time the floodplain changes, a building is grandfathered.

There are mechanisms to bring buildings into compliance, which is another part of our ordinance.

So now you're going to have homes there, is it on the wall there?

Now where does the water bill?

Excuse me.

Can you just repeat the question, Hannah?

Just repeat the question before you answer it.

So you're asking if there is a plan to redirect the water.

Yeah.

I just want to compare it.

That's where it settles.

Like when it does, that's where it's at.

It's the field next where big blocks are at, and into the rock by Miguel's house.

So I'm just wondering, like with the wall and you know the plan.

We don't have we don't have that kind of hydraulic study.

I think that that that's what we were talking about before.

There the project is not required to s to provide an analysis of those hydraulics.

Um I just think of it's all right.

Right, but a pre- and post-construction analysis.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, all this all the floodplain information is publicly available.

Um there's a plan that Sir, I need your name and address and you need to use a microphone.

My apologies for the minutes my apologies.

So thank you.

My name is Darrell Musa, I live at 440 Auburn Street.

And I know we already touched on the same thing over and over again.

I just wanted to know was there a plan?

Well, two plans for where the water is going and somehow adding additional parking.

Because it does affect Auburn Street, because you got a building at the bottom of Auburn on the left, and then now you're gonna have more houses on the right of Auburn, and Auburn's only one way of parking.

So it backs up the parking all the way up to my house.

All right, your first question.

There is a there's parking that's proposed uh for the new units, and uh as far as a plan for the stormwater, it's going to run into the same patterns that it's currently running now.

There is no new or additional stormwater management proposed with this project.

So they get parking and we don't were there 60 years may get parked and if we don't assume that to be rhetorical question, sir.

I think they don't have to provide you parking.

They're they're developing their property, and I don't even have a spot on front of Auburn Street.

Okay.

There's people at five cars.

All right, sir.

That's uh it's not necessary.

Um let's try and land this plane, shall we?

Um there's still some there's still some outstanding comments with the uh with regard to engineering that does cover sanitary, that does cover um was there not at least something in the review um letter about stormwater or was I um yes, yeah.

You wanted some additional info in the narrative.

It kind of uh what everybody here has been talking about.

I would like the narrative to uh emphasize what what their plan is for the stormwater, even though they don't have to do a full report, uh they do need to provide a few paragraphs to describe what it exists and what they're proposing, right?

Okay, and that's not the technical that adds to the issue that we talked about relative to rain volume or whatever.

He just wants it explained in there, I believe, from right.

I'll expand on that.

That's the bigger.

I think it's important, and I'm glad that you have that in there.

And I think we should, you know, we're approving something that you know, these are licensed professionals that are putting forth uh a design that they feel meets the public, you know, health safety and welfare.

I think you should have them, you know, demonstrate that that is that that is indeed the case, you know.

Do they have to meet the regulations and codes, of course, um, and play by the rules, yes, but I think there's still a duty and an obligation to um maintain the health safety and welfare of the potential inhabitants of this development and and the neighbors.

So um, but I'm I'm looking at the rest of the comments.

I think there's a lot of protections that are still in there in terms of satisfaction that the uh applicant will be required to do.

And again, just going back to our discussion, um let's talk about uh what we would also include um in any sort of action would be confirmation of the staggering, but I think that's even in the ordinance or in the report.

And um we did talk about possibly some detached lighting in the front yards, mid-block, um to provide additional lighting.

Um with regard to Pear Street, are you guys comfortable?

I'm looking at engineering and public works.

Are you comfortable working with the applicant to come to some resolution?

And if and if you can't, I guess it comes back here.

Yeah, yeah, I think we are.

Okay.

Are you guys comfortable with that?

Okay.

Um there was also indication about um changes in building materials to complement the staggering.

Not sure if that was addressed in the report or not.

Um but okay.

So am I missing anything?

Jennifer, you think I'm missing anything?

Um just have uh units will be staggered to add some facade variation between one to three feet, use building materials and shadow lines where less variation is possible and work with the city's engineer to resolve um the width of Pear Street and add lighting to the front of the project.

Is the uh 90 degree turning radius on there where maybe we can add a little more room for radius for pulling in and out for the driveways, perhaps I feel that's gonna be problematic.

Would it be inappropriate to ask for a turning movement just to demonstrate that you can get a passenger vehicle in and out of the private driveways?

I I think we can ask for that since it's uh gonna be impacting the right-of-way.

Let's let's show it.

And if you need to put radiuses or flares or widen the driveways, you know, I don't how close are you to your 10,000 square feet, Mary?

Well, depends on your calculator, right?

Looking at the the existing photograph there, there's a potential we may have, let's say, undercounted the initial imperial.

Some deed.

I'll look at that again.

But we're we're close otherwise, very close.

Gotcha.

Even if it was a radius on the ends, maybe not completely all the way across if you're sort of on that crescendo or that threshold.

Yeah, some turning radius on it, perhaps.

You know, we don't want to have to go back and cite the properties for being rutted up and muddy because they're not able to make proper movements in and out.

So think about it that way as you're reviewing it, you know, so we can avoid that hassle.

All right, so we're gonna add the the radius and and and or turn turning movement demonstration.

All right.

I think I'll just make one final statement uh to to all the neighbors.

You know, thank you for coming out and and your your comments are well received.

Um this commission has a reputation of playing by the book, and you know, it doesn't always sound uh attractive to neighbors and residences, but you know, we do try and hold developers and ourselves uh objectively to the rules and regulations of the city, and we rely heavily on our you know, the depth of our staff departments um you know to help us enforce those.

So um we look for every opportunity where we can to flex those regulations and um and get as much compliance out of them as we possibly can, and that's what we're doing here, even though it may not look like it.

So um we look for every opportunity where we can to flex those regulations and um and get as much compliance out of them as we possibly can, and that's what we're doing here, even though it may not look like it your your comments are well received, and we appreciate you coming out.

So with that, um I would entertain a motion to grant uh final conditional final approval based on the summary list of uh items in addition to the staff report and review comment letter.

Oh second.

All right.

I'll I'll take that, then I made that motion.

No, no, it's like I was gonna entertain it, but I I entertain myself, that's fine.

That's okay.

No, it's okay.

Um so motion is made and seconded.

Uh is any further discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right, I have it.

All right, thank you, gentlemen.

Folks in the audience, thank you.

Um before we uh before we conclude today, guys, I just want to um mention one thing.

Uh uh, well, two things.

We have two administrative tasks we need to uh deal with.

Um one is an unfortunate circumstance.

We do need to appoint a new uh secretary.

Um Jeff Glazier did serve that uh role honorably for the the last term or two.

Um so umybody care to nominate someone for that role.

So um Craig's already vice president, so we can't uh we can't put it on him.

Um the role is is pretty uh pretty low.

I think we do a digital signature at this point, so but the the secretary does sign plans and um and other documents on behalf of the planning commission.

So it's not a heavy lift at all, but lots of notoriety.

All right, well, I'll nominate Eric to to assume the role of secretary.

Any other nominations?

All right.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All right, Eric, thank you.

Um if I can make one comment with your newfound uh authorities as the secretary, we have some plans for you to sign.

Excellent.

Um so the next thing uh and and um just in light of you know some some potential upcoming meetings where we're gonna potentially have even more public comment and seems like public comment is is becoming greater and greater these days.

Um we're going to uh circulate a document to you guys that discusses our the planning commission's official policy on public commenting.

Um and uh we'll look to um I guess can we can we take comments via email between now and and next meeting and then officially put it on the agenda with any modifications for approval?

I'm gonna look to the city's lawyers because they uh prepared it.

Or is it not open for comment?

I don't I mean it it's it's fine, it's it's pretty procedural, I think.

But I think prepare your sort of you just don't want to be seen as deliberating on any of the comments.

So if you provide your comments or incorporated no deliberation, and then obviously vote on that as a next meeting.

That would be the first order of business I would propose.

So that seems okay to me.

Yeah.

Just don't get into commenting on on the comment.

Right.

No, I I I get that.

Um and in fact, we could we can make a statement here that any feedback should go directly to Jennifer and not be a group, you know, we can't have a group email.

You know, that's you consult with us.

Right, yeah.

Sunshine law, we can't have a group email about anything, you know, except maybe happy hour on the holiday party or whenever something like that.

Um so yeah, so look for that then.

Why don't we do that?

We'll circulate that following today's meeting.

And um it looks like, you know, spoiler alert, looks like we're gonna have a um a general public comment period at the beginning of every agenda, like city council does.

Or even at the end.

Or at the end, right.

Um but if it's an agenda item, we'll defer it to that agenda item, I suppose.

Um do we still have the ability to do that, you know, and and so let me just get this straight because it wasn't I I saw a draft and stop it here.

I mean, I know it's called a public meeting, but yeah, the the whole world charter only addresses city council meetings, but then there is something um I think it's the is it the last section of the charter of the code that says public participation should generally be at the beginning of each meeting.

Um well I saw that and and I and I and I agree.

I guess so quick questions.

One, if if it's a if it's an agenda item, then I think we should we should discuss it at the time that that agenda item is being discussed.

Um, which brings me to like what are the I mean the thing that concerns me the most is you know we're not policymakers and you know any other planning discussion outside of an agenda item is really one that's going to you know greatly lengthen these meetings and and open open us up to you know hearing everybody's griefs and and grievances, but um I don't that's that's where I question it the most.

I feel like a welcome any public comment on an agenda item, but if if people are gonna come in and bring up old projects and old things, or I saw this, or you know, the kind of council meeting stuff that that they go through, those highly paid individuals.

Um I don't know, that's that's where um that's where um I'm like but I get it, you know.

We want to we want to make sure that we're yeah, and you can do you know the three minutes, submit to a resident or taxpayer, um, they can do the cards, there's sort of little tools you can use to still be in compliance with the Sunshine Act and the Charter, but just try and keep it on the rails a bit, yeah, and encourage them if they start talking about agenda item that they need to wait until that agenda item.

Right.

And if you guys really bad, you can always continue public comment to the next regularly scheduled meeting, or if there's a special meeting in between there.

Okay, which is you know, I know not ideal, but if it would really become unworkable.

Right.

Okay.

Someone, if someone works within city limits.

And they're paying or acts, yeah.

Yeah, I don't think we're gonna get things on that.

I mean that that's a bit of someone someone make the can someone make the claim I pay I mean consumer purposes in the city.

There are groups or individual food probably.

They're all gonna stop the wall.

Probably at some point we'll if you do the card, if you do the three minutes, you say state your state, state your residence or your tax pair.

I mean, we you don't really want to start, you know, running a pal with the sub China and the First Amendment possibility, but try to keep them on the rails, yeah.

Yeah.

I don't know if you know Bob can now or with the zoning.

He's he's pretty brutal with people coming up, like in a nice way.

Yeah, master and calling it.

Like, what are you doing here?

Why are you interested?

Now do you have LS as a space question?

Yeah, all right.

I like that.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah, okay, good.

Why are you here?

What's what's your interest in this case?

Yeah, right.

Yeah, that's good.

Okay.

All right.

Well, I think we all know where you know some of this is going, and uh we'll we'll see uh what happens.

Um, text sitting here about using.

Oh, yeah, that's good.

All right, guys.

Well, um, I guess I'll make the motion to adjourn.

Thank you all very much.

Oh, can I announce uh a couple events that are coming up actually?

Sorry, Jennifer.

Veronica.

I'll be quick, I really promised.

Hello, I'm Veronica.

I'm in the parks department.

I'm the sustainability coordinator.

Well, actually, technically I just started on the I'm the capital projects manager in the parks department, but I oversee sustainability, yeah, as of yesterday.

Um so I just wanted to let you all know about I'm working on two uh city plans right now.

So I'm working on both the climate action plan and the urban forestry master plan, and we have a couple of public um events coming up to participate.

So if you all are interested, um, or if you know somebody who is.

So one um uh tomorrow, actually, uh June 10th at 6 p.m.

We're having a virtual our first virtual forum for the climate action plan.

There's information on the city website um where you can get the link and we ask that people register ahead of time.

We're also gonna have um two in-person community forums during this first initial period.

Um there's gonna be one on let me get the make sure you don't get the dates wrong.

Uh there will be one uh June 16th at 6 p.m.

at Mueller Merc College in Seegers Union, and then um on June 27th at 2 p.m., which it's a Saturday, I believe, um, at Fearless Fire Company.

Uh if people want to attend the virtual the in-person forums and they register ahead of time, they're also eligible for a $25 stipend for their time.

So if that is particularly valuable to somebody, let them know that they need to uh register ahead of time to receive that $25.

Um we will also have some online, we'll have some mapping and some things that will be uploaded to the website soon.

So we're pretty early in the process of the planning for the climate action plan.

Then we also have our urban forestry master plan.

So looking at the urban forest, both um street trees, private trees, and parks trees, uh, looking at making sure that they are uh more equitably distributed and that um our forest is healthy overall.

We have a meeting coming up on July 14th, and that's at 6 p.m.

at Bucky Boyle Park inside the building.

Sometimes we'll get confused and think that the pavilion will be inside.

Um and then I also did want to mention that um we completed a street tree inventory recently.

We've got 13,000 street trees in the city, uh, and our consultant that's working on that plan is coming to the Shade Tree Commission meeting at their next meeting on the 30th, and they're gonna be doing a report on the condition of our street trees in the city, and it'll talk a little bit about our species selection plan too.

So if that's of interest to anybody here, that's also a public meeting.

I think uh your chair can probably give you some more information about that.

Um, but I just wanted to let you know we have a couple things going on, and again, should those be of any interest to you, you can feel free to reach out to me.

Great.

Um, one additional um event that we're going to be hosting along with Lehigh University is a pattern book we've been working on since the adoption of Zone Allentown to create better diagrams to illustrate the various building types, how they currently exist in within the city of Allentown, and how the building types can work to reinforce the established character of the area.

So we've uh we've enjoyed working on that with the architecture school.

And uh there will be a release party at Inkwell at um we're calling it a pre-launch party, I guess, um, on Tuesday, June 23rd at 5:30 to 8 p.m.

at Inkwell.

Did you all receive the invitation to that?

Okay, I'll make sure that you guys get that so it should be a nice fun, late-hearted event.

Nice.

Nice.

That sounds great.

Is it gonna be like uh like a like an art gallery kind of a thing where it'll be pinned up or what's the that's the goal?

Oh, yeah.

Awesome.

Exciting.

That sounds good.

Okay.

Well fun stuff.

All right.

Well, Craig totally jinxed it because he said this was gonna be a short meeting.

So then he didn't even show up.

Uh all right.

He was here actually.

He was.

He was virtual.

Oh, I'm sorry.

All right.

I feel bad.

All right.

Uh all right, back to the adjournment.

All right, thanks guys.

See you later.