Welcome to today's City Planning Commission meeting Tuesday, February 10th, 2026.

I'm gonna go ahead and read the formal public hearing rules.

The City Planning Commission has established certain rules governing the procedures that will be followed at all public hearings.

Before speaking, each person shall give their name, address whom he or she is representing.

Proponents for the proposal will speak for a period of 10 minutes.

Each speaker will be allowed to speak for a maximum of two minutes.

Opponents or other interested parties will speak second for a period of 15 minutes.

Each speaker will be allowed a maximum of two minutes.

Proponents will be allowed a period of six minutes for rebuttal.

Each speaker shall be allowed a maximum of two minutes.

Opponents will not be allowed to rebut.

No material, written matter, photographs, maps will be accepted by the commission or its staff at any time during this hearing.

This procedure shall be followed except at such time when the preceding officer shall, with the approval of the commission members, present extend such time.

Okay.

Our first, oh, adoption of the meeting minutes.

Roll call.

Are we all signed in?

We still need to do roll call?

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

Commissioner O'Shea.

Here.

Commissioner Kepper.

Commissioner Flick.

President.

Commissioner Steve.

Here.

Commissioner Stewart.

Present.

And Commissioner Whitry Stewart.

Commissioner Richard is present.

Oh, that's sweet.

Adoption of the minutes from January 13th and 27th.

Uh Commissioner Flick will make a motion for adoption of the meeting minutes from January 13th and the 27th.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

Second.

Commissioner Seek seconds.

All right.

Any discussion.

If not, let's vote.

All right, the motion passed.

We'll move on to our fourth order of business, which is zoning docket 003-26.

Good afternoon.

Um zoning docket 003-26 is a request for a waiver to permit the expansion of an existing neighborhood commercial establishment in an HURD2 two-family residential district.

The site consists of one consolidated law totaling approximately 7,540 square feet and is currently developed with a 2700 square foot structure containing a bakery in the front and an office in the rear.

These uses were approved through a 2018 conditional use zoning docket 12618.

And the applicant has since constructed a camelback addition that adds a second floor, uh a second floor office space of approximately 970 square feet, increasing the total floor area beyond the 3,000 square foot limit allowed for neighborhood commercial establishments.

The request is necessary due to the fact that the expansion exceeds the permitted floor area and introduces a second story, which is not allowed under Article 20, Section 20.3 point and neighborhood commercial establishment.

While the underlying uses remain the same, the added square footage could potentially have adverse impacts in the operation of this neighborhood.

In that the operation of this neighborhood commercial establishment could increase and create added levels of activity.

Staff finds that while the proposal is consistent with the master plan and the purpose of the zoning district, it does not meet several of the approval standards for variances.

So as some of you are familiar, this case was deferred from last month's um CPC hearing for staff to meet with the applicant and see what other options there were for them to pursue.

And um as of excuse me.

What day was that on uh February 2nd uh 2026?

Staff met with the applicant to discuss options that could be pursued in lieu of a conditional use request.

Uh during this meeting, staff presented two potential paths forward.

The applicant could withdraw the current case and instead pursue a zoning change application, which the staff theoretically would support as the site is a commercial corner store and the HUB1A district provides the zoning requirements for the existing structure and associated uses.

Alternatively, the applicant could proceed with the application as submitted with the understanding that staff is required to recommend denial because the request does not meet the non-variance criteria.

While staff is recommending denial and the proposal does not technically meet the standards for neighborhood commercial establishment, it should be noted that a conditional use approval technically would be more restrictive than the alternative zoning change.

Thank you.

Mr.

Bailey or Mr.

Zeller Please state your name and address and you have two minutes.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jared Zeller, 3205 Orleans Avenue.

I'm the applicant.

If you look at our letters of support from the immediate neighbors, you'll see that everybody is in support of this project.

We've been operating here since 2019 with small minority owned businesses as our tenants.

And as Mitchell pointed out, what we're requesting is a lot more prohibitive and restrictive.

And if we ever want to do something in the future, we have to come back and ask again.

So in lieu of asking for a zoning change, where obviously we would have a lot more uh uses and operating hours and things like that.

So I'm hoping this is a compromise that allows us to get back to work.

And I want to thank you for your uh consideration.

We may have some questions after.

Of course.

Mr.

Bailey.

My name's Roger Bailey, 415 Allen Two Saint Boulevard.

I'm here two purposes.

One is I I support support the concept and support the idea that Jared asked me to help him develop.

And I'd like to point out that when we review the provisos, I believe that it hits on all except the 3,000 square foot uh requirement.

Okay.

One of the things that was noted in the provisos and is noted in this uh document today that you know has him on the docket, is that it's two lots of record.

Well, it's been resubdivided into a single lot of record.

That was one of the proviso requirements.

So having said that, and looking at what else could have been done with a property, you could do residential, and we wouldn't be here today.

So the commercial is very similar in that it if it's utilized as a personal office, he's not increasing the parking count or demand.

He's already accommodated it on the site.

So in many ways, it's a lot easier to look at this in terms of whether it meets the spirit of the law.

Other thing I'd note is because of the way the structure was designed, we're not really impacting on the neighbors in terms of height or bulk.

The adjoining section of the property that creates a buffer to the neighbor, also there's a the buffer of Orleans Avenue, and we would look at the uh rear side of the site or the front if you're looking at it from the ground floor office space, then you still have a buffer to that neighbor, which is the church.

So I think I think we're in a very nice compromise in terms of how this all works.

So, without saying anything else, if there are any particular questions that I could answer, I'd be happy to do so.

I have a question for staff.

This is more procedural.

Considering that this has already been built, um, you know, the two-story structure, and we're here, I guess I'm trying to understand how we got here.

Was this something that you know came as a part of safety and permits when they permitted this project, or is it something that came up after the fact given the square footage was larger than what was listed?

Yeah, I think the applicant can speak to the the details of that better than I can.

Um, but now that we've got it, it's it's kind of to do a after the fact approval, which you know the the space that was built is permissible.

It's the use of that space for commercial purposes that is being requested here rather than risking.

I see.

And is again back to procedures with like within departments.

Is that something that doesn't normally get you know the box is not checked in terms of doing a building permit?

So if the if the building permit does not define like specify a commercial use, um I believe safety and permits would kind of do a you know a white box not use specific permit review.

Um if it if it does uh contemplate a specific use, zoning is gonna chime in and say that requires this zoning process.

Okay, thank you.

I had a follow-up question.

Um the provisos are already in the underlying conditional use that applies to the property.

Yeah, the the restrictions on neighborhood commercial establishment are within the use standards um applied to them, and the see if they're listed in here.

Um there was reference to a conditional use.

I'm trying to so in 2017 or so, uh the building that existed at the time, which I believe was one store, it got a conditional use to allow its use as office space.

Um more recently there's been construction of the Camelbacks level.

Um the that the use of the entirety of that space, including the new construction, is not permissible under the neighborhood commercial establishment regulation because it's it exceeds 3,000 square feet.

The neighborhood commercial establishment limits it to 3,000 square feet and just the first floor.

So it would need to be a waiver of the 3,000 square foot limit and the first floor only regulation to allow the second floor uh to be used commercial.

And if the waiver were granted the can the provisos of the conditional use from 2016 17 would apply to the whole structure.

That's right.

They would remain in UI just had the waivers.

No, that there's no opposition here.

There's no opposition here, and as far as I read, there is no opposition in the packet either that was submitted with the docs.

So I have a motion um to grant the waiver to go against staff recommendation for the reasons that were stated because the a that the properties already subject to these uh provisos and it will still be, and that um it seems preferable than then going through a rezoning.

So uh I'm gonna go against staff recommendation and vote for the approval of the waivers.

I mean move for the approval of the waivers.

I second.

And can I just restate quickly for clarity?

So you're you're doing a waiver of the 3,000 square feet limit, a waiver of the requirement that uh the commercial use be limited to the ground floor, and then retaining the the existing provisos except to modify the ones that were state the regulations that are being waived.

Exactly.

And thanks, Steven, for clarifying.

Is there any discussion?

All right, let's vote.

The motion carries.

Let's move on to zoning docket 013-26.

This is a conditional use to request um a neighborhood commercial establishment in an H URD2 district.

Uh it's an existing commercial or mixed use structure that is located at the corner of Aerato Street and South Gaioso Street.

It was previously operating as a candy store until uh the the business was forced to shut down due to a fire in the adjoining residential units.

Uh what the applicant is proposing is to reopen and continue commercial operation as a neighborhood commercial establishment.

Um the master plan specifically encourage uh reuse of existing commercial structure um into commercial use.

Um for those reason the staff is recommending approval of the proposal subject to three provisos.

Are you aware of the three provisos?

Yes.

Okay.

Staff recommendation recommendation is approval with three provisos.

There's no opposition, anyone.

Commissioner Flick will make a motion for approval subtract three provisos.

Is there a second?

A second.

Thank you.

Commissioner Kepper.

Is there any uh discussion?

If not, let's vote.

Thank you.

Motion carries.

Do you mind filling out a card before you leave?

Thank you.

We're gonna move on to zoning docket 014-26.

Zoning docket 01426 is a request to modify an existing conditional use permitting reception facility to include a plan development for a live performance venue.

Uh the applicant is requesting deferral to the meeting on February 24th, and we concur with that to make sure signage is properly posted for the site.

So the applicant requested deferral because of the signage or well.

Is the signage up?

The signage is now up, but we are we're it we don't believe it was up in time for this meeting.

Okay.

Okay.

So we want to make sure there's proper notice is what you're all right.

So is there a uh motion to defer until February 24th?

It's the 24th.

Right?

Is there anyone here to speak on this matter?

I'll make a motion to defer to February 24th meeting zoning docket.

1426.

Is there a second?

Commissioner Poche, second.

Thank you.

Any discussion?

If not, let's vote.

The motion carries for deferral to our next meeting.

Thank you.

Um, sure.

So we have uh one item which is an extension request for a subdivision and subdivision docket 114.

Uh this came to the commission in January of last year to allow um an a church site to be expanded such that the church itself could expand.

That was approved by the commission, and there's a one-year deadline to sort of complete the paperwork aspect on the back end of the proposal.

While that was going on, the applicant was going through a design review through CBC and a waiver process through the BZA.

So I think they kind of lost track of time and the deadline slipped, and so you would you're being requested here to extend the deadline for additional year to allow them to complete the process.

And CBC staff is in favor of granting the extension.

Great.

Is there a motion commissioner fleck will move?

Uh to extend approval to extend the date one year.

Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion?

If not, let's go ahead and vote.

The motion carries.

Oh, go ahead.

Sure.

I was just gonna say finally, we have a list of uh several subdivisions that uh the staff deems eligible for administrative approval per the subdivision regulations, and you would be ratifying that determination.

Can I please have a motion to approve Commissioner Poche?

Motion to approve item 114 that's 24.

No, that's the wrong subdivision ratifications.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you, Commissioner Flick.

Any discussion?

No.

Okay, let's vote.

The motion carries.

Are were you all here to speak on a matter?

Are you sure?

No?

Okay.

All right.

Um I'm gonna need motion to adjourn.

A motion to adjourn, but everyone have a happy and safe Mardi Gras.

We'll see everybody um at the next meeting.

Second.

Thank you.

Any objection here?

All right.