►
From YouTube: Chattanooga City Council Agenda Meeting - 7/11/23
Description
Chattanooga City Council Agenda Meeting
A
A
D
D
A
F
Have
an
appeal
on
form
based
code
that
is
at
least
been
requested
from
the
form-based
code
committee
present
to
the
provisions
of
the
city
code
that
would
come
to
this
body
and
then
it
could
potentially
go
to
court
afterwards
on
here.
It
requires
a
public
hearing
by
this
body
and
review
of
evidence
that
is
based
upon
a
report
that
you
will
receive
from
the
Land
Development
Office,
on
what
the
form-based
code
committee
did
and
so
I
guess.
F
A
G
A
G
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
something
that
I
wanted
to
bring
to
our
attention
is
the
work
that
the
park
committee
is
doing.
Councilman
Henderson
I
know
that
you're
aware
of
of
that
issue
and
I
wonder:
when
might
we
expect
a
Public
Safety
Committee
to
talk
about
the
implications
of
the
new
state
legislation
on
our
Park
committee?
Or
could
you
just
put
that
on
your
radar
please
and
get
something
on
Kim.
G
E
I
Item
age,
a
resolution
authorizing
the
administrator
for
the
Department
of
Public
Works
to
enter
into
an
agreement
with
Tally
Construction
Company
relative
to
contract
number
t-23-004-201
for
Construction
Services
associated
with
fiscal
year.
2024-2025
city-wide
resurfacing
in
the
amount
of
20
million
168.
I
I
I
The
transfer
of
ownership
of
the
parcel
at
6
000,
Cornelius
Road
from
Hamilton
County,
Water
and
Wastewater
Treatment
authority
to
the
city
of
Chattanooga,
item
g,
a
resolution,
rescinding
resolution
number
31559
and
authorizing
the
mayor
or
his
designee
to
enter
into
a
lease
with
the
Industrial
Development
Board
of
the
city
of
Chattanooga
and
substantially
the
form
attached
for
the
design
and
construction
of
the
city's
proposed.
Wet
weather
Equalization
stations
to
be
located
at
220.
Cornelius
Road
identified
as
a
portion
of
tax
map
number.
C
B
All
right
good
afternoon,
everyone
Welcome
to
our
planning
and
zoning
committee
meetings
for
July
11th
I
can
get
a
motion
for
the
minutes.
Please
motions
will
stand
without
objection.
Today
we
have
17
items,
two
items
that
are
withdrawn:
By,
Request,
five
opposition,
one
special
exceptions
permit
miss
renick
good
afternoon
Council.
B
If
you
don't
mind
and
I
want
to
thank
Vice
chairwoman
Hill
for
setting
up
our
format
when
she
was
in
this
position,
I
think
it's
worked
very
efficiently,
we're
going
to
cover
the
items
that
had
opposition
first
and
if
there's
any
cases
that
Council
needs
to
hear
or
wants
to
hear,
we
will
cover
those
following
up
Karen
starting
off.
If
you
look
in
your
packet,
k02620263
Thornhill
Management
in
District
Six
both
have
a
request
for
withdrawal.
That's.
J
Correct
and
I'm
gonna
I
have
a
few
kind
of
housekeeping
items.
To
start
with,
the
guests
wanted
to
note
that
we
had
an
email
data,
July
5th,
requesting
that
these
cases
be
withdrawn
and
the
applicant
was
told
that
that'll.
You
know
that
we
would
convey
that
to
council
and
then,
depending
on
Council
action,
Karen.
B
B
J
That's
correct
so
the
applicant's
aware
that
this
will
need
Council
action,
very
good,
okay
and
then,
if
you
can
just
kind
of
bear
with
me
for
some
housekeeping
based
on
the
comment
about
when
a
case
was
withdrawn,
we
had
case
2023.0092
was
rezoning
on
Jenkins
Road.
That
was
I
believe
recommended
for
both
denial
by
staff
and
Planning
Commission.
That
case
was
withdrawn
prior
to
getting
on
council's
agenda,
but
just
for
the
the
record
and
anyone
who
might
be
tracking
that
just
to
be
aware
that
that
case
was
withdrawn
and.
E
J
This
also
helps
us
because
the
minutes
then
could
document
the
activity
and
that
helps
us
close
out
the
case
yeah.
Thank
you.
So
then,
again,
as
I
mentioned
some
housekeeping,
we
had
a
case
previously
tabled.
This
is
just
a
kind
of
a
cut
and
paste
from
Council
minutes
in
March
8
2022
case
2021.0213,
pbd
development,
Gun,
Barrel,
Partners,
trending
to
hotel
properties.
Napier
Associates
had
a
zoning
case
to
lift
conditions
to
excuse
me.
It's
a
case
to
men
conditions.
J
There
have
been
quite
a
bit
of
discussion
with
the
city,
I
think
we're
at
the
point
with
the
applicant
and
partners
working
together
with
CDOT,
that
we
are
ready
to
bring
this
case
off
the
table,
if
that's
the
appropriate
term
for
Action
by
Council
and
communicated
with
Phil
noblet
on
this,
my
understanding
was.
If
we
brought
this
up
at
committee,
there
could
be
action
to
put
that
on
back
on
Council
agenda
and,
if
appropriate,
staff
would
ask
that
we
be
four
weeks
out.
J
B
So
I
have
a
technical
question
for
Phil,
but
I
want
to
thank
you,
RPA
Ben.
Thank
you.
We've
been
working
on
this
for
quite
some
time.
Things
have
changed,
and
parameters
have
changed.
Expectations
have
changed
the
way
the
ordinance
was
originally
written
and
through
staff's
guidance
and
Ben's
assistance.
Tremendously.
We've
we've
found
good
ground
here.
I
think
that
makes
makes
sense
for
everybody.
So
so
my
technical
question
for
Phil
this
was
tabled
by
myself.
It
was
seconded
by
councilman
Smith.
Do
I
need
to
bring
that
out
off
of
the
table
today.
F
H
B
We
do
that
right
now,
okay
and
there's
a
second
all
right,
so
we
got
what
we
need.
Karen.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
councilman
Smith
and
then
this
will
be
placed
on
our
for
our
next
planning
and
zoning
committee
meeting.
So
we'll
review
it
in
full
at
that
time
and
I
appreciate
your
help,
but
then
again,
I
can't
thank
you
enough
for
working
working
through
this.
J
The
two
that
were
just
mentioned,
the
Lee
Highway
zoning
cases,
and
then
this
also
hopefully
went
to
the
council
members
that
had
cases
in
the
district
Alan
Jones
with
Stone
Creek
Consulting
has
four
cases
on
tonight's
agenda.
He
is
out
of
town
and
asks
that
they
be
deferred
one
week
to
July
18th
I
believe
I
asked
put
an
asterisk
by
k-city.
Five
I
believe
there's
a
potential
interest
by
chair
one
dotley
to
move
that
to
three
weeks.
B
A
K
F
F
K
J
J
Okay,
this
is
a
request
to
rezone
307
West
42nd
Street
in
Alton
Park
from
M1
manufacturing
Zone
to
rtz
residential
townhouse
Sierra
lot
line
Zone
to
develop
two
single
unit,
detox
dwellings
and
I
think
I'm
going
to
skip
to
the
end
to
show
you
what
the
desire
is
it's
to
there's
one
lot
that
has
Frontage
on
41st
and
42nd
Street.
The
applicant
would
like
to
kind
of
recreate
the
probably
maybe
the
original
lot
pattern.
Input
to
single-family
homes
in
this
did
have
opposition,
though
so
I'll
speak
to
it,
speak
to
it
briefly.
J
The
site
zoned
M1
manufacturing
shown
in
purple
as
as
much
of
the
surrounding
property,
4105
and
4107
Highland
Avenue
are
the
yellow,
R1
properties
at
the
corner
of
West,
42nd
and
Highland.
Those
were
rezoned
in
2006
and
then
the
R3
property
just
to
the
northeast
of
the
site,
was
rezoned
from
M1
to
R3
into
2016.
So
there
is
some
press
in
the
area
from
rezoning
from
manufacturing
to
residential
the
site's
located
in
the
Alton
Park
master
plan,
which
recommends
Recreation
as
the
land
use
for
the
site.
J
I,
don't
know
if
that
was
a
use
23
years
ago.
At
this
location,
but
the
plan
provides
following
goals,
which
include:
increase
the
number
of
quality,
diverse
and
affordable
homes
in
Alton
Park
through
rehab,
and
fill
in
new
construction
and
encourage
new
single-family
ownership,
and
so
just
as
a
reminder
in
the
M1
Zone,
you
cannot
buy
or
cannot
build
housing
when
the
requested
rtz
Zone
would
allow
for
a
slightly
denser
Urban
infill
than
other
residential
zones,
but
would
allow
the
development
of
the
proposed
single
those
two
single
unit
residences.
G
J
Of
the
plan
surrounding
land
uses
and
development
form
and
recommended
approval,
there
was
opposition
present
at
Planning
Commission
a
major
stakeholder
mentioned.
They
were
not
contacted
about
the
project
head.
Quite
a
few
questions
about
impact
and
the
stakeholder.
If
you'll
notice,
labeled
Union,
Grove,
Baptist
Church
parking
lot,
Union,
Grove's
kind
of
caddy
corner
across
Highland,
Park
Avenue.
That
was
the
the
per
the
person
kind
of
with
questions
and
wanting
to
understand
impact.
Just
it's
a
little
bit
off
the
slide,
but
it's
just
across
Holland
Avenue
from
kind
of
where
their
parking
lot
is.
J
J
The
next
case
is
85
and
it's
a
request
to
rezone
a
half,
an
acre
in
the
2800
block
of
jobs,
Avenue
from
M1
manufacturing
to
ugc,
General,
commercial,
Urban,
General,
commercial
Zone
to
build
12
townhouse
units
and
eight
of
them
are
proposed
to
be
live,
work
units
and
we'll
talk
about
that.
A
little
bit
later
related
to
zoning.
The
property
is
at
the
intersection
of
East
29th,
Street
and
Dodds
Avenue,
and
because
opposition
spoke
to
the
concerns
about
traffic
and
at
the
intersection
I'll
just
note,
East
29th
Street
goes
up.
J
The
Ridge
and
intersects
with
the
roundabout
was
West
Side,
Drive
just
west
of
the
tunnels,
so
I
think
that
the
just
understanding
that
that
kind
of
is
coming
down
from
the
tunnels
coming
off
the
ridge
might
kind
of
help
understand
the
the
opposition's
comments
a
little
bit.
The
development
form
consists
of
urban
single
unit,
residential
and
active
unit,
lots
to
the
East
and
Northeast
and
larger
manufacturing
industrial
uses
along
Dodds.
There
are
some
office
and
Commercial
uses
south
of
the
site
on
Dodds
across
29th
Street.
J
The
development
forms
reflected
in
that
zoning,
so
R1
residential
is
shown
in
yellow
and
then
kind
of
that
block
of
manufacturing
along
Dodds
Avenue
sites
located
in
the
Rossville
Boulevard
community
plan,
which
recommends
low
density
residential
for
the
site
with
some
mix
of
town
homes,
patio
homes
and
two
family
dwellings.
A
staff
noted
that
the
proposed
ugc
Zone
would
introduce
potential
nuisance
uses
and
higher
density
residential
to
the
area,
but
that
a
residential
Zone
would
achieve
the
goals
of
the
Russellville
Boulevard
community
plan.
J
The
applicant
has
stated
that
the
live
work
units
would
function
similar
to
home
occupations
rather
than
kind
of
a
traditional
office.
Commercial,
retail
use
and
staff
felt
that
a
residential
zoning
District
would
allow
for
home
occupations
and
home
office
uses
the
R3
Zone
staff
is
recommending.
The
R3
Zone
instead
of
the
ugc,
would
allow
for
moderate
density
development
without
posing
conditions
related
to
use
and
height
to
be
more
compatible
with
the
plan,
recommendations
and
the
residential
uses
in
the
area
in
the
R3
Zone.
J
The
applicant
is
able
to
construct
eight
town
homes,
home
occupation
structures,
so
staff
had
recommended
to
deny
the
applicant's
request
of
ugc
and
approve
the
R3
residential
Zone.
There
was
opposition
president
as
mentioned
about
traffic
and
that
high
traffic
intersection
at
29th
and
Dodds
Planning
Commission
found
that
with
conditions,
the
applicant
request
meets
the
plan,
recommendation,
form
and
adjacent
land
uses
and
is
subject
to
the
following
conditions.
So
Planning
Commission
is
recommending
ugc
subject
to
the
following
conditions:
residential
uses
only
and
maximum
Building
height
of
three
stories.
J
Okay:
okay
next
case
with
opposition
was
case
93,
which
is
Jay
on
the
agenda.
It's
a
requestry
Zone
45
acres
in
Alton,
Park
from
M1
manufacturing
to
C3,
Central,
Business
District
zone
with
conditions
to
develop
single-family,
multi-family
and
mixed-use
development,
and
the
applicant
provided
a
list
of
South
and
Coast
conditions
as
part
of
the
request.
They're
quite
robust,
so
I
didn't
put
them
all
on
the
slide,
but
we
will
get
to
them.
J
This
is
the
former
Acme
Brick
site
shown
highlighted
in
red
and
the
55-acre
property
that
wraps
around
the
site
to
the
west
and
south
is
Zone
M1
manufacturing,
but
it
has
a
deed
restriction
that
reserves
the
property
for
conservation.
So
due
to
that
deed
restriction
and
the
fact
that
it's
under
the
same
ownership
as
the
rezoning
site
staff
is
viewing
that
acreage
is
being
used
for
open
space
just
showing
the
map
a
lot
of
times.
J
The
applicant
came
back
to
amend
a
couple
of
the
conditions
from
the
2017
resounding
and
then
earlier
this
year,
the
2023
just
there
at
West,
57,
51st
and
Central.
We
had
a
zoning
request
rezoned
from
RT.
Excuse
me,
our
two
residential
zoned
Urban
General
commercials
Zone
in
that
case
was
withdrawn.
J
The
site
has
slopes
that
rain.
This
is
a
slope
map
and
to
try
to
show
these
when
some
of
the
the
comments
or
opposition
or
plan
mentioned
slow.
The
site
has
slopes
that
range
from
26
to
63
percent
grade
on
the
site,
and
then
we've
been
trying
to
be
clearing
our
staff
reports
that
a
site
has
developed.
The
applicant
will
be
required
to
comply
with
a
vegetative
planning
requirements
with
steep
slopes
of
30
or
more
Disturbed
during
construction,
and
so
I
mentioned.
J
This
is
because
the
slopes
are
mentioned
in
the
adopted
plan
and
as
a
condition
is
using
the
application,
narrative,
their
list
of
requested
conditions
and
the
site
plan
and
the
totality
to
review
the
requested
Zoning
for
this
new
mixed-use
community,
and
this
is
a
site
plan
that
was
provided,
shows
the
area
proposed
for
single-family
attached
and
detached
residences,
five-story
multi-unit
residential,
that's
in
the
light
green
along
Central
and
four-story
multi-family,
which
are
shown
in
pink
so
mentioning.
As
mentioned,
there's
kind
of
the
three
things
we
looked
at.
J
That's
the
site
plan
application
narrative
is
part
of
the
application
materials.
This
is
something
we
started
doing
about
a
year
ago
to
get
a
little
bit
more
detail
about
the
project.
This
is
I'm,
going
to
kind
of
read
some
of
the
points
that
are
more
specific
to
the
zoning.
It's
a
multi-year
multi-phase
project.
J
It's
going
to
be
high
density,
single
family,
detached
single
family
attached,
multi-unit,
residential
buildings
and
neighborhood
commercial
buildings,
a
diverse
range
of
unit
sizes,
diverse
Parking
Solutions,
including
Surface
Street
and
garage
share,
Community
spaces
and
Parks,
interconnected
Trail,
Network
priority
and
focus
on
pedestrian
experience,
limited
impact,
grading
plans,
utilizing
existing
topography,
preserving
a
woodland
buffer
along
the
western
edge
of
the
property
and
leveraging
and
then
R
being
the
applicant.
Our
interest
in
the
Hawkins
Ridge
can
serve
land,
50,
plus
acres,
immediately
adjacent
to
this
parcel
and
into
a
publicly
accessible
amenity.
J
So
if
you'll
bear
with
me,
I'm
going
to
touch
on
a
a
couple,
a
couple
items
related
to
this.
It's
a
little
bit
more
robust,
but
just
staff
noted-
and
you
heard
this
before
in
a
couple
other
zoning
cases-
there's
been
a
market
change.
It's
occurred
where
industrial
errors
are
being
converted
to
residential
mixed-use
developments.
This
is
evident.
The
recent
rezonings
of
industrial
Zone
land
in
uses
to
residential
mixed
zones-
and
these
were
zoning
requests,
demonstrate
the
need
for
additional
housing,
our
community
and
the
value
of
mixed
use.
J
Back
together
with
the
community
So,
the
plan
recommends
that
heavy
industrial
mix,
so
staff
acknowledges
the
applicant's
request
to
introduce
mixed-use
residential
uses
on
the
property,
and
just
kind
of
the
mixed
use
component
can
be
a
benefit
to
the
immunity,
but
the
proposed
mix-use
develop
could
have
even
more
activity,
however,
than
the
former
Brick
Company
the
plan
again
just
pointing
to
the
specific
goals
about
housing.
So
the
introduction
of
residential
uses
in
ten
area
zoned
and
use
for
manufacturing
can
cause
land
use
triggers
for
certain
uses.
J
So
we've
mentioned
before
that
in
converting
manufacturing
property
to
residential.
We
like
to
look
at
the
other
manufacturing
uses
to
make
sure
it's
not
going
to
put
them
in
a
situation
where
they
might
have
a
use.
That's
now
prohibited.
A
windshield
survey
did
not
show
any
concerns
by
that
and
the
applicant
started
with
the
kind
of
the
typical
C3
conditions
is
what
they
submitted.
J
Those
conditions
have
been
used
established
over
time,
is
typical
standards
for
Quality
Urban
Development
and
were
traditionally
applied
to
downtown
and
other
developments
primarily
before
the
form-based
code,
and
these
conditions
help
ensure
an
urban
street
Edge
along
the
city.
Streets,
require
development
standards,
support
walkable
places
and
Screen
parking
and
building
equipment,
so
staff
recommended
recommended
approval
with
conditions
with
just
adding
the
R3
zone
is
a
zone
that
would
trigger
transition
standards.
There's
a
neighborhood
just
to
this
to
the
north
east
of
the
site.
Excuse
me
Northwest
of
the
site,
the
zoned
R3,
but
single-family
homes.
J
We
want
to
trigger
setback
standards
from
that
and
then
recommending
the
condition
no
masquerading
or
mass
clearing
above
the
800
Topo
line,
and
then
tension
of
that
condition
is
to
support
the
plan
recommendations
of
developing
an
environmentally
sensitive
way.
So
no,
that
was
a
lot,
but
this
is
a
large
project
with
quite
a
few
aspects
and
staff
just
wanted
to
make
sure
we
gave
it
a
thorough
review.
There
was
opposition
present
and
both
support
present
at
Planning
Commission.
J
Can
you
see
the
list
there?
Higher
taxes,
gentrification
concern
about
big
box
retailers,
kind
of
versus
neighborhood
serving
concerns
would
not
serve
existing
residents
and,
and
then
there
was
a
note
that
there
was
a
need
for
change
in
the
community
and
that
this
could
support
the
change
Planning
Commission
found.
The
request
is
compatible
with
adopted
plan
development
form
and
adjacent
land
uses
in
the
area
and
recommended
proving
the
C3
with
conditions
and
the
conditions
the
Planning
Commission
recommends
are
the
same.
J
The
conditions
the
applicant
initially
recommended
or
kind
of
self-imposed
the
additional
conditions
for
a
little
bit
more
transition
buffering
and
no
grading
above
the
Topo
line,
and
so
those
are
moved
forward
and
I
am
happy
to
speak
to
those
but
I'm
just
going
to
kind
of
flip
through
to
kind
of
you
can
kind
of
see
the
kind
of
the
elements
that
they
all
cover
and
then
you're,
seeing
that
transition
standard,
the
R3
Zone
there
and
the
no
masquerading
I
apologize.
That
was
a
lot,
but
it's
a
pretty
robust
review.
Pretty.
A
A
Whatever
the
case
is,
but
either
way,
the
neighborhood
is
very
excited.
I
am
very
excited
about
this.
It's
going
to
bring
much
needed
density
home
ownership.
A
lot
of
the
things
that
the
community
has
been
asking
for
for
20
plus
years
is
now
coming
to
fruition
for
them
and
I'm
very
happy
for
their
participation
and
their
Clarity
and
understanding
that
this
isn't
about
gentrification.
A
B
A
B
J
Okay,
this
is
on
Elmendorf
Street,
a
request
reads
on
2404
Elmendorf
from
R1
to
R3,
with
conditions
to
develop
eight
single
unit,
residential
detached
dwellings.
The
proposed
conditions
or
the
conditions
proposed
by
the
applicant
are
only
single
family.
Detached
homes
shall
be
allowed
and
a
maximum
of
eight
units.
So
do
you
know
the
R3
Zone
allows
that
multi-unit
project
and
products,
and
the
applicant
was
saying
that
they
were
only
doing
single
family
detached
the
site
is
part,
was
part
of
a
zoning
study.
J
J
Let's
skip
that
the
the
tin
dwelling
unit
acre
density
proposed
for
this
is
parking
in
the
front,
is
not
suitable
for
an
urban
residential
single-family
neighborhood.
The
river
to
Ridge
plan
recommends
Urban
residential
single
family,
which
is
an
overlay
that
is
described
as
single
family
detached
an
accessory
dwelling
units.
J
J
The
Equestria
zone
is
not
compatible
with
arie3,
which
again
recommends
just
that
single
family
detach.
The
R3
Zone
introduces
a
higher
intensity
zoning
which
is
not
identified
for
that
use,
and
it's
also
not
compatible
with
the
surrounding
development
form.
The
sign
is
comprised
currently
of
six
lots
of
record,
which
would
allow
for
the
potential
development
of
a
single-family
detached
dwelling
in
Adu
on
each
lot.
So
the
applicant
originally
wanted
to
do.
J
Eight
units
and
staff
was
just
noting
that
there's
already
six
lots
of
record
there
that
would
allow
the
potential
development
of
a
single-family
detach
dwelling
in
Adu
on
each
live.
So
this
development's
under
current
zoning
would
allow
the
existing
neighborhood
form
so
staff
was
recommending
to
reinforce
existing
neighborhood
form
that
you,
and
by
using
the
lots
of
record,
which
would
still
produce
units
there
was
opposition
present
notes
about
the
quality
of
the
street.
Bedrock
looks
like
the
development
looks
like
a
mobile
home
park,
steep
slopes,
protection
of
historic
landmarks.
J
I
think
that
it
is
an
R1.
It
is
an
R3
Zone,
but
the
product
is
intended
to
be
single
family
detached
and
the
applicant
conveyed
at
Planning
Commission
they're,
trying
to
work
with
the
topography.
I
mentioned
the
slopes
on
that
site,
but
there
was
concern
from
the
neighbors,
so
Planning
Commission
found
the
request
is
compatible.
Adjacent
land
use,
isn't
with
adjacent
land,
uses
in
development
form
and
recommended
approval.
But
I
did
want
to
note
that
planning
commission's
recommendation
to
approve
the
R3
Zone
doesn't
include
the
original
conditions
proposed
by
the
applicant.
J
B
L
J
J
And
this
is
the
last
case,
and
this
is
a
request
to
rezone
from
R1
and
R3
residential
Zone
to
ugc
also
and
the
the
idea
is
to
develop
10
Town
Homes
and
a
Planning
Commission
the
residents
every
resident
called
this
OB
street
instead
of
obey
street,
and
they
all
said
that
we
call
it
Obi
street,
so
I'm
calling
it
OB
Street.
Unless
someone
knows
differently,
because
we
were
not
aware
of
that,
the
developers
ideas
to
develop
townhomes
and
bring
the
existing
multi-use
structure
into
compliance.
J
There's
no
recent
rezoning
history
for
the
site
and
there
is
no
ugc
C
zone
property
near
the
site.
I'm
gonna
go
to
the
picture
and
then
I'm
going
to
back
up.
This
is
the
development
that's
on
Shallowford
Road,
because
that
way
it
keeps
you
kind
of
Orient,
and
this
is
the
back
of
the
development.
This
is
from
Obie
Street
and
then
this
is
the
site
from
OB
Street,
just
to
kind
of
help.
You
Orient.
J
The
site
is
surrounded
by
single
unit
residences
and
vacant
land
along
the
ridge.
It
has
sloping
topography
on
Missionary
Ridge
with
slopes
that
range
from
26
to
63
percent
grade
and
staff
noted
that
we
don't
have
specific
planned
guidance
for
this
area
related
to
introducing
higher
density
residential
in
this
naturally
sensitive
area.
We
do
not
have
an
adopted
plan
as
specific
to
this
area,
so
again,
staff
noting
that
those
vegetative
planning
requirements
with
steep
slopes
of
30
or
more
would
be
need
to
be
addressed,
and
so
I
will
kind
of
go.
J
Though
the
you
see
on
Shallowford
Road,
you
have
the
that
kind
of
the
existing
multi-unit
building
fronts
on
shell,
for
the
applicant
would
like
to
add
the
additional
the
structures
on
Obie
street
so
kind
of
looking
to
help
Orient
from
this
picture.
It
would
be
a
little
bit
kind
of
to
the
west
of
the
side.
If
I'm,
we
would
kind
of
only
have
the
picture
that
to
you
Orient
from
this
picture.
J
So
there
is
mentioned.
There's
no
adopted
community
plan.
The
proposed
ugc
Zone
will
introduce
an
urban
form
density
mix
of
uses.
It's
not
supported
by
an
area
plan,
and
it's
just
similar
to
the
surrounding
development,
so
staff
is
recommending
to
deny
the
urban
General
commercial
Zone
and
approve
our
three
residential
zones.
J
So
staff
noted
that
proving
the
R3
residential
zone
for
the
entirety
of
the
site
will
bring
the
existing
multi-unit
residential
structure
into
zoning
compliance,
as
you
can
tell
from
the
zoning
map,
there's
a
little
strip
of
brown
R3
that
runs
through
the
site
and
that
a
portion
of
the
site,
even
where
the
multi-units
are,
is
zoned
R1.
So
staff
was
recommending
R3
for
the
entirety
of
the
site
to
bring
the
existing
structure
into
compliance
and
allow
limited
additional
residential
development.
J
L
You
hit
my
like
thanks,
chair,
Ethan
I,
thank
you
for
investing
in
District
9,
and
you
took
those
condos
and
you
got
them
back
to
life,
because
that
area
had
been
just
an
ass
off
for
decades.
I've
spoken
with
the
residents
of
Missionary,
Ridge
and
Ethan
and
I
have
been
in
communication
as
well,
so
we're
going
to
defer
it
to
August
the
8th
to
kind
of
give
the
community
educate
them
about.
You
know
what
ugc
is
and
what
all
the
things
that
we
can.
L
B
Ma'am
and
on
that
note,
it
was
noted
yesterday
at
Planning,
Commission
too,
that
ugc
is
the
go-to
Zone
these
days,
Square
pegs
round
holes,
so
we're
all
getting
very
excited
to
have
more
tools
to
be
able
to
address
situations
like
this
than
just
our
go-to
ugc.
Can
you
talk?
Karen
do
I,
remember
conversation
on
this
case
about
widening
street.
Can
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
that.
J
J
So
the
intersection
of
Shallowford
and
OB
is
to
kind
of
to
the
right
of
this.
To
this
picture,
the
applicant
would
require
to
reconstruct
it
to
the
end
of
their
development,
to
accommodate
increased
traffic
for
the
roadway
and
just
to
know
that
currently,
Obi
Street
cannot
support
increased
volume.
Very.
D
J
K
B
B
You
much
Aaron
that
ends
our
cases
with
opposition
this
afternoon.
I
know
we
have
a
special
exceptions.
Permit
you
want
to
run
through
that
real,
quick
and
then
I
do
want
to
ask
you
to
give
us
an
update
on
something
that
you
talked
about
or
Dan
might
have
talked
about
yesterday
about
the
alcohol
in
ugc
being
under
a
residential
use.
Only
I
think
that
was
important,
because
I
believe
that
conversation
originated
from
this
bias.
Sure
and-
and
we've
made
movement
on
that
so
okay.
J
I'll
start
with
the
special
exceptions.
Permit
is
approving
a
new
special
exceptions.
Permit
for
an
existing
liquor
store
in
Council,
probably
remembers
not
too
long
ago.
There
was
a
special
exception
permit
for
this
liquor
store
I
believe
that
was
maybe
December.
My
understanding
has
been
there's
been
a
change
of
applicant
change
of
ownership,
which
is
triggering
the
need
for
the
new
special
permit,
but
we
did
not
update
the
staff
report
because
it
is
just
a
change
of
ownership.
It's
my
understanding.
Okay,.
B
G
I
just
wanted
to
make
a
note
that
in
planning
item
a
I'd
like
to
add
some
conditions
to
that,
and
they
will
be
some
of
our
pretty
standard
conditions.
I've
spoken
with
the
applicant
or
communicated
with
the
applicant,
and
they
understand
the
conditions
and
are
aware
of
this.
The
conditions
I'd
like
to
add
will
be
prohibition
of
using
this
for
vehicle,
vehicular
repair
facilities,
new
and
used
dealerships
and
repair
facilities,
adult
oriented
establishments,
automobile
wrecker
services,
outdoor
storage,
menu,
warehouses,
wholesale
with
accessory
warehouses
and
off-premise
signs
shall
be
prohibited.
E
D
B
B
L
B
J
J
E
B
I
heard
yesterday
was
that
we,
we
determined
or
staff,
has
determined
that
when
you
apply
for
the
red
or
put
a
condition
on
ugc
as
a
residential,
only
that
it
does
not
quantify
or
qualify
the
alcohol
and
that
basically
you're
covered
it
does
it
excludes
it.
I
should
be
more
clear.
It
excludes
that
use
because
we
had
talked
about.
We
had
talked
about
that,
whether
or
not
that
was
part
of
ugc,
but
when
you
move
into
that
residential
it
I'll
just
use.
This
word
cancels
that
sure.
J
J
How
does
that
trigger
short-term
vacation,
rentals
and
I
think
it's
related,
and
so
we
have
a
drafted
a
because
we
had
several
cases
for
people
wanting
to
lift
the
condition
and
then
so
we
had
lots
of
discussion
right,
and
so
yesterday,
Planning
Commission
recommended
to
move
forward
a
amendment
that
would,
if,
in
this
example
of
the
case,
is
residential
East
only
we
have
all
we.
This
came
from
all
the
discussion
about
ugc
residential
use.
J
Only
that
that
meant
that
short,
that
short-term
vacation
rentals
were
considered
commercial
use
for
purpose
of
that
zoning
condition.
So
if
someone
has
ugc
residential
use
only
and
wanted
to
lift
the
condition
to
allow
short-term
vacation
rentals
that
they
would,
it
would
trigger
the
waiting
period.
So
it
is
trying
to
bring
a
little
bit
of
clarity.
It
is
what
happens
because
we
know
it
came
up
here
with
all
those
ugcs
with
residential
use.
Only
so
that'll
be
coming
to
you
next
month,
there's
also
a
little
bit
of
housekeeping.
J
We
noticed,
after
we
had
been
using
the
short-term
vacation
rental
ordinance
that
we
had
a
couple
items
in
the
zoning.
Excuse
me
the
zoning
warrants
that
needed
to
be
cleaned
up,
but,
yes,
we
it
clarifies
for
the
purpose
of
residential
use,
only
conditions
that
the
the
short-term
vacation
rentals
are
considered.
A
commercial
use
very
good.
B
B
H
You
know
inside
the
urban
overlay
we
had
sort
of
done
away
with
the
500
foot
restriction,
but
now
that
this
is
moving
outside
the
500
foot
overlay,
the
the
old
C2
has
the
500
foot
restriction
where
the
ugc
does
it
and
I
thought
we
were
going
to
somehow
come
up
with
a
maybe
an
amendment
or
something
to
address
a
ugc
outside
of
the
urban
overlay.
That
would
address
that.
J
I'm
happy
to
give
a
brief
answer
to
fur.
To
you
know
we
did
discuss
that.
We've
had
some
discussion
about
the
the
interaction
between
the
alcohol
kind
of
the
code
requirements
and
zoning
and
we've
had
some
discussion
with
that
with
the
Consultants
Camaros
are
giving
us
guidance
on
the
zoning
code.
So
we
started
the
discussion.
I,
don't
I
would
defer
to
Phil
if
he
wants
to
give
an
update,
but
I
think
we
do
need
to
have
a
little
bit
more
talk
about
what
that
looks
like
and
where
responsibility
lies.
B
Any
other
comments
further
on
that
councilman
Henderson
all
right.
Thank
you
for
bringing
that
up.
Appreciate
it.
Council
I'll
go
back
to
asking
you
if
there
are
any
other
cases
that
you
need
to
discuss
this
afternoon,
I
am
seeing
none
Madam
chair.
Is
there
any
further
business
that
needs
to
come
before
planning
and
zoning.
L
There's
an
area
that
I
split
with
District
Five
called
Greenwood
Terrace
Apartments.
So
a
lot
of
people
refer
to
it
as
D
drive
I.
Really
it's
more
so
not
a
question
for
you.
Miss
Karen,
but
I
need
to
know
who
would
I
need
to
speak
to
in
regards
to
dumpsters
being
placed
in
front
of
the
residence
homes
like?
Is
that
strictly
cha?
Or
is
it
the
city
doing
with
these
dumpsters
being
placed
there.