Second of two required public hearings for the master plans for brickworks.

This will be our one and only agenda item tonight.

PC two-one six oh.

With the commissioners tonight are Gabriel Collard and other members from the city's planning department, Charian Eaton from the engineering department, and Scott Waxter from the city's legal department.

At this time, we will conduct a swearing-in of the staff, the applicant, and anyone who is here to make public comment.

If you would all stand and raise your right hand.

So what you are hearing are all the conversations.

Any the only things that take place in email are process when the meeting is being held, who is coming, etc.

So given that this is the second hearing, I imagine that the questions will be less uh technical, and hopefully we will arrive more quick more quickly at the public hearing part of the meeting.

So the process will go as this.

First is the introduction of the case, and I just hit that.

Second will be the presentation of the case and the recommendation by staff.

And we have asked staff to not have to go through everything that they went through the last hearing, but really focus on what the updates are.

Third is the commission questioning of staff, presentation by the applicant, the applicant, the commission questioning of the applicant.

Public comment.

Then we'll ask the applicant if they have any comments after the public comment, and then we will bring it up here for a discussion.

So that is the process.

Let's get started, and we will turn this over to staff.

Thank you.

I'll enter a staff report into record.

Um the applicant is requesting approval of a master plan for the development of a mixed use project on 64.61 acres.

That is between 15 percent and 30 percent non-residential, 60 to 80 percent residential, and at least 12 percent comprise the parks and open space.

The applicant is also requesting modifications to section 417 of the land management code, mixed use districts, uh, the MU1 and MU2, Section 601 for access management, and the standard city details for construction in accordance with Section 611 street improvement standards.

Uh the applicant with this application has requested that the planning commission uh consider uh approval for two conditional uses and our uh use matrix, the senior living and retirement facilities, and the nursing home and the domiciliary care adult living facilities are conditional uses that are permitted within the MU zone.

Uh, these conditional uses are viewed as encouraging a compatible mixture of units in the residential land use uh land area for this development.

Under the urban design elements, um, as noted before, they are um the buildings and the residential and a non-residential are to comply with the Class A urban design elements, and under the non-residential elements, they must meet seven of the elements.

They, as proposed, um, are going to adhere to the building structure and alignment, building modulation, ground floor design, active uses, mechanical equipment, and the amenities.

For the number seven, they are requesting that the planning commission consider uh plazas and outdoor seating as they have described.

Uh, the planning commission can grant this modification this modification upon review of their graphic and written testimony in keeping with the character of the overall design of the project.

The townhouse lot details.

The applicant has removed three of the residential townhouse lot details, one of the rear loaded um uh details and two of the front loaded details by eliminating the front loaded details in this plan.

We find that it's more consistent with the intent of the MU zone requirements.

They've eliminated three modifications with this associated with this, uh, section 803G for the 30 percent driveway cap, um, the reduced setbacks for the uh details that have been removed and plus the uh detail that still remains for the residential units uh uh labeled TH-1A complies with the 20 percent uh 20 percent uh 20-foot rear setback.

Section 417 C6 removes parking between principal building and the street, and since the front loaded units have been removed, that's no longer needed.

Um, one modification that is still being requested for the lot detail that they that remains is to front on open space and private streets, and this is to establish viewsheds and access to open spaces and recreational areas and to access and the and these units will be accessed to the from the rear from alleys.

Uh the multifamily lot detail.

Um the applicant has removed modifications for parking between principal building and the street, and read and uh uh they have removed the sh reduced setbacks, they have reduced the fronting on open spaces, the multifamily lot now complies with the MU setback requirements and building will be funded on public streets, and no modifications are being requested for this lot detail.

Non-residential lot detail requesting modification to accommodate a maximum front setback of 65 feet from the Noxie Boulevard and a side setback of 45 feet of interior lot line.

The modification for parking in front and side yards between the building and street, which is viewed by Minox from Minoxie Boulevard, and the parking for the non-residential component that will be between the multifamily and a street that's between a lot new comp plan road.

Let me state that once again.

And the parking for the non-residential component that will be between the multifamily and the street on the new comp with the new comp plan road.

Modification orientation to allow for 10% parking between the building and street.

No public entrances along the public streets.

Instead, these entrances will be facing the interior of the commercial area.

And distance between the buildings and the public street will exceed 20 feet, with the maximum requested as 65 feet from Minoxy Boulevard.

The noted compensating features are the as offered is the four-sided architecture, the four-foot-tall screen wall along Benoxie Boulevard, and the private drives to be designed designed as public streets.

Under parks, the applicant had did provide a conceptual active park rendering for the west side of the Southeast Street.

As noted, this is some of the park area that they have been requesting noted in their land code as their park.

Based on the size of community and no community pool, the potential park impact fees equal 1,093,680.

Access management, the two modifications for access separation distances are still being requested.

The 200 253 feet between Southeast Street and intersection and access of all East South Street, and the 298 feet between the Southeast Street's roundabout and the access south on the roundabout proposed as a right-in only.

Air street details.

Overall, in general, the public street details have been modified to increase the side sidewalk to six feet and the tree panel to seven feet.

In addition to decreasing lane widths.

Private streets will also have the increased sidewalk and tree panel widths.

The applicant no longer requested modifications for the sidewalk on one side of the street.

Under the MPDUs for 1,260 total units of the project.

The project would owes 158 MPDU units.

They have requested to pay fee in lieu of fee in lieu of building the units, and that total would be 2,543,800.

We have updated air recommendations and given and look and that has been corrected online.