►
From YouTube: Pittsburgh City Council Public Hearing - 9/30/20
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Hello
and
welcome
to
pittsburgh
city
council's
public
hearing
for
wednesday
september
30
2020.
My
name
is
kim
clark
baskin
and
I
am
the
assistant
city
clerk
with
us.
Today
we
have
our
sign
language
interpreter
nick
miller.
The
following
is
a
piece
of
legislation
up
for
discussion
by
pittsburgh
city
council,
bill
number,
198,
ordinance,
amending
and
supplementing
the
pittsburgh
code
title
ix:
zoning
code,
article
6
development
standards,
chapter
914,
parking
loading
and
access
in
order
to
eliminate
minimum
parking
requirements
for
single
family
attached
dwellings.
A
B
B
We
may
we
may
have
other
others
join
us
periodically,
and
I
may
announce
their
name
I'll
announce
her
name
when
they
join
our
first
aura
of
business
will
be
a
presentations
by
our
sanity
planning
department
director.
If
you
would
present
your
your
presenters.
D
Councilman,
so
the
the
bill
is
one
to
eliminate
the
parking
requirements
in
single
unit
for
single
unit
attached
residential
uses.
So
in
addition
to
myself,
I'm
joined
by
andrea
lavinkos,
who
is
a
staff
member
that
will
give
a
brief
presentation
and
then,
if
the
council
members
have
questions
after
the
public
testimony,
corey
lehmann,
zoning
administrator,
kate,
rakes
who's
staff
in
our
zoning
and
development
review,
division,
katie,
reed
who's
staff
at
and
then
andrea
and
myself
will
be
available
for
questions.
F
E
E
Currently,
these
uses
are
required
to
provide
at
least
one
off
street
parking
space
per
unit
and
can
provide
up
to
four
that's
shown
in
this
picture
here
of
a
variety
of
townhome
units
with
garages.
On
the
first
floor
and
cars
parked
in
the
driveway
outside.
E
So
the
first
impact
we're
going
to
talk
about
is
shown
pretty
well
by
this
picture
of
two
townhome
units
with
garages
on
the
first
floor
and
with
a
car
parked
laterally
in
front
of
one
of
the
units
on
narrow
city,
lots
of
street
parking
often
is
put
in
the
first
floor
of
a
residential
unit,
and
that
really
removes
presence
from
the
street.
It
removes
eyes
from
the
street
and
it
makes
it
a
much
less
approachable.
E
Being
the
requirement
to
include
off-street
parking
also
removes
public
parking,
so,
as
you
can
see
here,
the
typical
width
of
a
single
on-street
parking
space
is
18
feet.
The
typical
width
of
a
single
vehicle
curb
cut
is
13
feet
if
you
remove
13
feet
out
of
an
18
feet
of
on-street
space,
you're
left
with
five
feet,
and
you
really
can't
park
much
of
anything
there
so
for
every
curb
cut
for
a
for
a
private
parking
space,
you're
removing
publicly
available
on
street
parking.
E
This
also
decreases
pedestrian
safety.
On-Street
parking
provides
a
buffer
between
moving
vehicles
on
the
street
and
people
using
the
sidewalk
curb
cuts
that
people
can
use
to
access
their
off-street
parking,
create
opportunities
for
moving
vehicles
to
cross
the
pedestrian
realm
and
then
create
opportunities
for
cars
to
hit
pedestrians.
E
As
you
can
see
from
this
study
conducted
by
safe
kids
worldwide,
39
percent
of
deaths
from
accidental
car
back
overs
happen
in
a
driveway
at
home,
an
apartment
parking
lot
or
townhome
complex.
So
really,
these
curb
cuts
are
making
sidewalks
much
less
safe
for
people
who
are
walking
and
riding
their
bikes
around
the
neighborhood
and
then
finally,
the
required
off
street
parking
has
an
impact
on
housing
price.
This
2020
study
shows
that,
based
on
typical,
affordable
housing
development
costs,
one
parking
space
per
unit
increases
costs
by
approximately
12.5
percent.
E
E
We
have
tried
to
address
some
of
these
problems
in
our
more
recent
rezonings,
so
the
uptown
eco
innovation
zone,
shown
here
in
red
on
the
map,
exempts
all
uses
from
providing
off-street
parking
in
the
riv
zoning,
which
is
shown
in
purple
on
the
map.
We
created
a
parking
maximum
and
cut
the
parking
minimum
in
half
to
try
to
decrease
the
number
of
cars
that
had
to
be
parked
and,
in
addition,
we
created
curb
cut
standards
for
townhomes.
Now,
I'm
going
to
be
super
boring
and
just
read
what
those
are.
E
These
restrictions
are
found
in
section,
90504
g2e,
and
they
say
that
garages
and
parking
spaces
must
be
accessed
from
a
rear
yard
if
access
is
available,
corner
lots
with
or
without
rear
access.
May,
alternatively,
access
garages
and
parking
spaces
from
the
exterior
side
yard
in
cases
where
front
loaded
garage
design
is
the
remaining
option.
Share
driveways
with
one
curb
cut,
are
encouraged,
so
essentially
what
this
boils
down
to
is
in
the
river.
E
Today,
we're
proposing
a
change
to
the
number
of
required
spaces
associated
with
new
town
home
developments.
Instead
of
a
minimum
of
one
parking
places,
we
are
proposing
that
no
parking
places.
No
excuse
me.
No
off
street
parking
places
be
required
as
part
of
town
home
development.
This
will
give
developers
the
option
to
include
off
street
parking
or
not.
E
When
this
proposal
visited
planning
commission
on
30th
on
june
30th
of
this
year,
they
made
the
following
recommendations.
They
recommended
that
city
council
approve
the
proposed
amendment.
They
also
recommended
that
city
staff
and
council
undertake
fact-finding
around
the
city-wide
elimination
of
or
a
limitation
on,
the
placement
of
curb
cuts
and
draft
legislation
based
on
those
findings.
E
They
did
make
it
clear
that
they
would
like
those
two
things
to
happen
separately,
and
I
believe
that
you
will
be
hearing
some
feedback
on
the
second
bullet
on
both
bullet
points.
Today
from
members
of
the
community
who
are
going
to
speak
at
this
public
hearing.
E
G
B
All
right
well,
thank
you,
director,
dash
and
andrea.
For
that
presentation.
We
will
now
move
to
the
testimony
for
our
registered
speakers.
All
speakers
please
give
your
name
and
address
for
the
public
record.
Each
speaker
will
have
three
minutes
to
address
counsel,
and
I
want
to
note
that
councilwoman
gross
has
joined
us.
Thank
you,
and
so
our
first
speaker
will
be
david
brangin.
H
Hello
good
afternoon,
my
name
is
dave.
H
Brengan,
I'm
executive
director
of
lawrenceville
united,
my
address
is
118
52nd
street
suite
2026
in
coalition
with
11
other
organizations,
we're
here
to
command
the
goals
of
these
zoning
text
amendments
and
to
ask
the
council
go
further
with
this
legislation
to
constrain
the
damage
done
by
off
street
parking
on
primary
streets
in
row,
house
neighborhoods,
specifically
we're
calling
on
council
to
immediately
amend
this
legislation
to
apply
the
curb
cut
design
standards
that
are
already
present
in
the
zoning
code
under
the
riv
and
to
apply
those
standards
to
r1a.
H
We've
submitted
a
joint
letter
that
outlines
in
detail
many
of
the
points
you'll
hear
today,
but
I
wanted
to
quickly
summarize
to
first
explain
what
we're
talking
about
here.
Off-Street
parking
along
primary
streets
almost
always
takes
the
form
of
integral
garages
on
new
construction
homes
and
the
driveways
and
curb
cuts
that
come
with
them.
These
create
significant
and
permanent
negative
impacts
to
our
row
house
neighborhoods,
like
lawrenceville.
H
The
curb
cut
required
for
the
off-street
parking
permanently
eliminates
public
on-street
parking
and
privatizes
it
for
a
single
user
by
introducing
vehicles
and
changes
in
terrain
along
the
sidewalk
off-street
parking
along
primary
streets
makes
our
blocks
less
safe
and
less
accessible.
Off-Street
parking
is
also
proven
to
drive
up
housing
prices
and
further
encourage
residents
to
use
vehicles
which
only
adds
to
traffic
congestion
and
our
city's
poor
air
quality.
H
Furthermore,
driveway
curb
cuts
permanently
prevent
the
ability
to
plant
street
trees
and
it
destroys
the
kinds
of
neighborly
interaction
that
are
so
critical
to
building
community
vibrancy
and
our
beloved
porch
culture
in
row
house
neighborhoods.
Consequently,
we
support
the
city's
goals
here
and
we
totally
support
eliminating
the
minimum
parking
requirement
for
row
homes.
H
While
developers
will
now
be
permitted
to
not
include
off
street
parking,
most
developers
will
not
use
this
option
and
our
communities
will
continue
to
have
no
tools
to
prevent
the
next
integral
garage
on
an
otherwise
pedestrian
friendly
block.
If
we're
going
to
set
goals
as
a
city,
we
should
strive
to
meet
them.
One
way
to
do
this
would
be
to
make
off
street
parking
along
primary
streets
in
r1a
require
a
special
exception,
or
a
variance
at
the
zoning
board,
so
community
can
have
voice
in
the
process.
H
Our
group
of
organizations
is
happy
to
help
the
city
think
through
how
that
would
operate.
In
the
meantime,
council
can
and
should
immediately
incorporate
the
design
standards
for
curb
cuts
from
the
riv
and
r1a
zones.
This
would
require
garages
and
parking
spaces
to
be
accessed
from
rear
alleyways
when
available
and
incurred
in
shared
driveways.
H
While
this
wouldn't
totally
stop
driveway
curb
cuts,
this
would
improve
the
current
legislation
and
since
it's
already
in
the
zoning
code
under
the
riv,
which
had
substantial
input
into
it,
already,
council
shouldn't
need
to
delay
on
the
matter
and
could
immediately
adopt
this
language
for
r1a
zones.
Thank
you.
I
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
barbara
rudiak
and
I
live
at
1908,
jane
street
and
I'm
the
current
president
of
the
southside
community
council.
Our
mission
is
to
maintain,
improve
and
protect
the
quality
of
life
for
the
residents
of
the
south
side.
My
board
and
I
support
the
r1a
zoning
text
amendments,
but
we
do
not
feel
they
go
far
enough.
Although
the
legislation
would
not
require
developers
in
row,
house
neighborhoods,
like
the
south
side,
to
include
a
garage
in
their
housing
plans.
It
is
doubtful
that
many
of
them
would
choose
that
route.
I
Many
of
the
blocks
in
south
side
are
similar
to
those
in
the
2200
block
of
jane
in
the
2300
block
of
sarah,
where
there
are
italianate
and
romanesque
style
row
houses
that
were
built
in
the
late
1800s.
These
blocks
are
also
lined
with
many
street
trees
on
other
blocks.
This
view
is
disrupted
by
the
hardy
paneled,
suburban
townhouses
with
garages
in
the
front.
I
The
lack
of
trees
is
also
evident.
Many
of
our
blocks
continue
to
have
that
porch
culture
that
is
characteristic
of
the
r1a
neighborhoods.
It
provides
an
opportunity
for
the
residents
to
become
acquainted
and
interact
on
a
casual
daily
basis,
which
is
so
important
to
building
community
for
those
with
a
garage
that
experiences
lacking
since
upon
exiting
their
cars.
They
enter
their
homes,
as
I
mentioned
before,
these
blocks
with
townhouses
and
garages
do
not
have
many
trees.
Each
curb
cut
permanently
eliminates
one
to
two
street
trees
on
a
primary
street.
I
We
all
know
the
trees
are
benefit
to
the
community
through
beautification
slowing
traffic
and
improving
emotional
and
psychological
health.
A
good
example
of
newer
development
that
conforms
to
the
neighborhood
with
row
house
front
facades
with
garages
in
the
back
and
uninterrupted
sidewalks
with
beautiful
landscapes
and
trees
is
south
shore
near
the
riverfront
trail.
I
We
also
would
like
to
see
the
legislation
incorporate
the
design
standards
for
the
residential
curb
cuts
in
the
riv
district
under
the
ribs
curb-cut
design
standards,
as
andrea
mentioned
garages
and
parking
spaces
must
be
accessed
from
the
rear
of
the
yard
if
available,
when
not
available,
share
driveways
with
one
curb
cutter
encouraged.
I
To
emphasize
this
point,
I
would
like
to
share
a
meeting
that
community
council
board
members
and
residents
had
with
an
architect
to
review
the
design
to
eight
to
to
to
design
eight
townhouses
on
a
plot
of
land
at
22nd
and
wharton,
which
is
in
the
rib
district.
The
developer
had
planned
the
garages
in
the
front
of
each
home,
which
would
have
resulted
in
a
need
for
eight
curb
cuts,
four
on
wharton
and
four
on
merriman
way,
because
the
development
was
in
the
riv
district.
I
We
were
able
to
convince
the
developer
to
place
the
garages
in
the
back
of
each
of
the
townhouses,
with
one
curb
cut
on
south
22nd
street.
Otherwise
we
indicated
that
we
would
have.
They
would
have
needed
to
go
before
the
zoning
board
asking
for
curb
cut
variances,
which
we
would
have
vehemently
opposed.
This
is
the
power
of
good
legislation.
B
Brielle
we
have
christine
on
the
line,
I'm
not
seeing
her
okay,
we
will.
We
will
touch
back
after
the
last
speaker
if
she
joins
us.
Our
next
speaker
is
eric
bohr.
J
Hey
there,
can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
okay,
hi,
my
name
is
eric
orr.
I
reside
at
4904
hatfield
street
in
lawrenceville.
I
am
the
advocacy
director
of
bike
pittsburgh,
a
3
500
member,
non-profit,
bicycle
and
pedestrian
advocacy
organization,
our
headquarters
in
lawrenceville,
and
I
myself
live
in
the
neighborhood.
J
I
want
to
express
our
support
for
the
proposed
amendment
to
eliminate
minimum
parking
requirements
for
single
family
attached
dwellings
in
a
city
where
about
a
quarter
of
households,
don't
have
access
to
a
vehicle.
We
need
to
ensure
that
to
ensure
users
of
all
modes,
especially
those
who
rely
on
transit,
walking
and
bicycling,
have
a
market
where
housing
costs
are
not
escalated
due
to
a
garage
that
they
made,
that
they
may
not
want.
Removing
this
minimum
offers
developers
the
flexibility
to
build
homes
without
garages
or
often
unsightly
street
front
driveways
at
a
lower
cost.
J
All
too
often,
and
especially
lawrenceville
we've
seen
new
houses
go
up
each
with
their
own
curb
cut,
leading
to
their
individual
garage.
This
has
a
major
detrimental
effect
on
the
pedestrian
environment
and
safety,
for
instance,
in
order
to
accommodate
a
car.
The
sidewalks
in
front
of
these
developments
are
often
not
level
making
it
difficult
for
people
in
wheelchairs
or
who
have
trouble
walking
to
use
the
sidewalk
safely,
which
is
compounded
when
snow
and
ice
season
is
upon
us.
J
To
sum
up,
we
commend
the
appreciate
we
commend
and
appreciate
the
direction
of
eliminating
parking
minimums
in
the
single
family
attached
housing
and
support
the
amendment,
preferably.
We
would
like
to
see
the
language
in
the
river
that
recommends
parking
access,
not
not
be
located
on
the
primary
street,
but
on
an
alley
or
side
street,
if
possible,
also
applied
to
r1a
neighborhoods.
You
would
even
support
a
prohibition
or
variance
requiring
if
the
developer
needs
the
curb
cut
or
driveway
to
be
located
along
the
primary
street
as
well.
Thanks.
K
So
I'm
here
today,
because
we
agree
with
my
colleagues
that
have
spoken
before
me-
that
curb
cuts
on
primary
streets
of
r1a
neighborhoods
do
serious
and
long
long-lasting
damage
to
the
essential
character
and
quality
of
life
of
dense
urban
communities.
Like
lawrenceville
lawrenceville
has
experienced
incredible
and
significant
development
over
the
last
decade,
but
we
are
now
experiencing
the
cumulative
impact
of
each
of
the
individual
curb
cuts
and
the
fundamental
and
detrimental
changes
to
the
character
of
many
blocks
and
streets.
K
We've
attempted
to
respond
to
the
increasing
number
of
curb
cuts
implemented
for
the
front-facing,
integral
garages
of
hundreds
of
market
rate
homes,
with
no
real
tools
or
available
processes
for
the
community
to
raise
concerns
as
development
pressures
increase
across
pittsburgh
and
especially
in
dense
neighborhoods
like
ours.
The
city
must
ensure
that
this
new
development
builds
on
and
protects
the
character
that
makes
our
neighborhoods
vibrant
places
to
live
and
not
undermine
it.
K
K
Off-Street
parking
further
exacerbates
our
poor
air
quality
by
encouraging
single
occupancy
vehicle
trips,
while
also
preventing
the
planting
of
street
trees
residents
with
guaranteed
off-street
parking
are
much
more
likely
to
drive
to
work
even
when
viable
transit
options
exist.
Additionally,
each
curb
cut
can
permanently
eliminate
one
or
two
street
trees
on
a
primary
street.
K
Given
the
size
of
our
cut
the
size
of
the
tree
cut
and
tree
pit
in
lawrenceville,
we've
been
working
to
plant
more
street
trees,
given
the
benefits
they
bring
related
to
improving
air
quality,
slowing
traffic
and
improving
overall
emotional
physiological
and
environmental
health.
As
the
legislation
stands,
curb
cuts
will
still
be
permitted
by
right.
Therefore,
we
are
requesting,
with
our
shared
goals
in
mind,
that
curb
cuts
along
primary
streets
and
r1a
be
prohibited
or
require
special
exception
or
variants.
K
K
B
L
Hi,
my
name
is
sam
spearing.
I
am
a
bloomfield
resident
at
256,
south
matilda
street
and
I'm
also
a
pedestrian,
but
I'm
speaking
today
on
behalf
of
bloomfield
development
corporation
as
their
housing
and
mobility
coordinator,
we
are
supportive
of
the
r1a
legislation
eliminating
the
parking
minimum,
but
we
believe
that
it
should
be
amended
to
also
adopt
the
residential
curb
cut
standards,
as
outlined
in
the
riverfront
zoning.
L
L
Real
market
pressures
have
driven
recently
proposed
bloomfield
attached
residential
developments
to
cater
to
demographic,
with
substantially
higher
income
than
is
usual
for
our
neighborhood,
including
expensive
amenities
such
as
elevators
and
multi-vehicle.
Private
garages,
neighborhoods
and
organizations
such
as
the
bloomfield
development
corporation
need
real
tools
and
policies
with
teeth
to
help
provide
a
balanced
housing
and
development
market.
L
The
elimination
of
parking
minimums
will
offer
much
needed
relief
to
those
developing
affordable
units
in
the
city
of
pittsburgh,
for
which
we
know
there
is
a
shortage
of
over
20
000
units,
with
an
average
cost
increase
of
12.5
percent
per
unit
for
a
single
parking
space.
The
parking
minimum
elimination
will
create
the
potential
for
greater
availability
of
affordable
units
by
eliminating
the
current
off-street
parking
requirement.
L
The
river
parking
standards
address
many
of
the
concerns
about
the
impact
of
driveway
curb
cuts
on
the
pedestrian
experience,
but
they
continue
to
give
developers
the
ability
to
further
drive
up
the
cost
of
market
rate
units.
The
inclusion
of
all
street
parking
as
a
means
to
drive
up
prices
only
furthers
the
gentrification
and
displacement
issues
that
many
r1a
neighborhoods
are
currently
facing.
L
We
believe
that
the
amendment
should
at
minimum
include
the
roof
standards
for
driveway
curb
cuts
in
order
to
address
the
considerable
negative
impact
that
off
street
parking
can
have
on
affordability.
We
believe
that
consideration
should
be
given
to
prohibiting
driveway
curb
cuts
without
a
required
special
exception.
B
G
M
M
We're
concerned
about
this
issue
because
we
recognize
the
inexorable
connection
between
housing
and
transportation,
they're
highly
correlated
to
everything
in
a
person's
life,
from
education
to
job
opportunities,
the
diversity
of
life,
experiences
that
you're
able
to
have,
and
the
people
that
you're
likely
to
encounter
on
a
daily
basis
and
overall
public
health
outcomes.
M
M
But
again
these
are
only
first
steps
having
the
ability
to
live
in
a
city
and
not
need
a
car
is
a
benefit
to
everyone,
not
just
the
person
who
doesn't
have
to
pay
for
the
car
that,
theoretically,
the
transit
rider
transit
riders
are
more
likely
to
support
businesses
that
are
close
to
their
houses,
because
we
can
walk
to
them
or
take
a
short
bus
ride
which,
and
that
in
turn
helps
keep
businesses
in
our
neighborhoods.
M
But
if
transit
riders
have
to
pay
for
parking
that
we
don't
use
or
yeah
and
and
if,
if
housing
costs
go
up
because
of
the
parking
that
is
provided
for
others,
then
that's
an
inequality
and
it
only
typically
only
serves
to
push
transit
riders
away
from
the
places
where
they
currently
live
and
near
the
places
that
they
support
and
their
friends,
families
and
connections,
and
all
that.
Additionally,
my
neighborhood
of
manchester
was
fortunate
enough
to
have
a
master,
a
tree
master
plan
developed
for
us
by
tree
pittsburgh.
M
We
are
the
hottest
neighborhood
in
the
city
and
there
are
portions
of
the
neighborhood
that
we
cannot
plant
trees
on,
because
there
are
just
way
too
many
curb
cuts,
specifically
pennsylvania
avenue
if
you've
ever
been
down
there-
and
this
is
despite
the
fact
that
that
the
lots
that
they
were
built
on
do
go
all
the
way
back
to
the
alleyway,
like
it's
just
a
complete
mystery
as
to
why
they
didn't
put
the
parking
in
the
back.
M
And
we
also
have
some
new
a
lot
of
new
development
coming
in
the
neighborhood
because
of
our
desirable
location.
And
there
are
projects
in
the
neighborhood
that
have
that
that
have
been
coming
to
us,
that
that
are
looking
to
do
primary
street,
curb
cuts
for
their
driveways
and
there's
just
no
way
for
us
to
prevent
that.
M
At
this
point,
the
the
leverage
that
that
us
as
a
community
have
is
in
our
local
governments
and
and
our
elected
officials
and
the
z
and
and
and
the
code,
and
that
is
passed
by
the
elected
officials.
M
And
we,
we
would
just
like
to
see
a
more
forward-thinking
code
in
place
for
all
of
pittsburghers
to
benefit
from
and
not.
M
B
Thank
you
and
just
want
to
look
once
more
for
christine
brielle.
I
don't
see
christine
or
peter
quintanilla.
Okay,
so
having
go
through.
Have
I
haven't
gone
through
our
list
of
speakers?
I
will
now
call
on
members
to
to
comment
councilman.
B
F
Yeah,
thank
you
very
much,
and
I
really
want
to
thank
the
speakers
for
very
well
thought
out
and
and
professionally
delivered
comments.
I'm
in
agreement
with
what
I
heard
here
today.
F
I
will
offer
up
two
examples:
we
have
a
church
at
19th
and
mary,
it's
the
old
saint
matthews,
and
it
was
vacated
by
the
diocese,
probably
15,
17
years
ago,
something
like
that
and
this
sat
vacant
and
any
number
of
times
it
came
up
for
consideration
for
development
by
people
that
wanted
to
come
in
bulldoze
the
church
and
build
six
town
homes
with
off
street
parking
via
garages
and
would
eliminate.
I
would
argue,
probably.
F
As
many
as
10
to
12
on-street
parking
spaces
in
the
heart
of
of
18th
and
mary's,
where
I
live,
this
is
at
19th
and
mary.
It's
the
the
center
of
of
the
south
side
and
everybody
parks
on
street
and
and
to
lose
10
as
many
as
10
on-street
parking
spaces
in
an
intersection
would
have
been
catastrophic,
but
thankfully
none
of
those
developments
ever
came
to
be
and
luke
desmond,
who
I
know
the
councilwoman
knows
well
and
who's
really.
F
It
has
six
units
in
it
now
and
one
driveway
cut
at
the
very
back
of
the
building
so
that
all
six
part
cars
come
in
through
one
point
of
entry
and
we
only
lost
one
off
street
parking
space.
And
yet
we
have
a
wonderful
property.
That's
been
redeveloped
that
did
not
go.
The
way
of
the
wrecking
ball
continues
to
contribute
to
the
architectural
history
of
the
south
side
and
we
lost
one
parking
space
and
and
helped
create
new
housing
and
increase
property
value.
F
Then
the
second
one
is
a
property,
just
two
doors
down
from
me
right
on
18th
street,
and
I
don't
mean
to
to
mean
mouth.
You
know
this
in
in
any
way,
but
a
young
developer
came
in
to
develop
a
vacant
lot
with
exactly
what
we're
talking
about.
F
It
is
a
very
modern
structure
on
the
market
for
seven
hundred
thousand
dollars
right
now
and
has
a
curb
cut
and
a
private
garage
on
18th
street
between
edwards
and
mary,
and
if
any
of
you
are
familiar
with
that
section
of
18th
street,
it's
a
freeway
to
begin
with,
and
of
course
we
only
lost
my
parking
spot,
but
I
believe
we
created
this
very,
very
difficult
and
challenging
point
of
ingress
in
egress
in
an
incredibly
busy
section
of
18th
street,
with
parking
in
front
of
it
parking
behind
it
and
a
total
blind
spot
by
which
one,
if
they're,
following
state
law,
are
going
to
back
out
onto
18th
street
they're,
not
going
to
pull
out
because
they
you're
required
by
law
to
back
into
that
garage
and
pull
out
face
forward,
which
we
know
is
not
going
to
happen.
F
So
they're
just
they're.
Just
two
examples
of
when
development
works
and
when
development
doesn't
work
and
I'm
all
in
favor
of
seeing
development
when
it
does
work.
So
I'm
going
to
be
supportive
of
this
and
I
appreciate
again
the
the
people
that
took
time
out
to
to
make
the
comments
today.
F
F
I
don't
have
definitive
proof,
but
I
do
have
some
documentation.
That
would
take
it
back.
That
far
and
you
know
I've
been
doing
some
work
on
the
outside
of
the
house
and
I
okay,
a
neighbor
came
by
and
said
you
know
they
just
bought
a
house
here,
they're
like
where
do
you
park.
F
F
I
appreciate
the
the
quiet
frustration
of
those
that
have
testified
that
they
wished.
It
went
further.
F
Government
takes
small
steps
and
you
know
we
don't
always
perhaps
move
as
quickly
as
we
might
like,
but
I
believe
that,
ultimately
we
get
better
reception
and
you
know
better
long-term
success
if
we
move
a
little
slower
at
times
than
others.
So
we'll
do
our
best
to
beef
this
up,
if
in
in,
if
and
as
it
is
appropriate,
we're
happy
to
have
those
discussions,
but,
as
presented
you'll,
find
support
from
me,
and
I
would
I
would
especially,
though
I'd
like
to
thank
barbara
rudiak
for
being
here
today.
F
I
don't
know
if
she's
still
on
the
call,
but
I
found
her
comments
to
be
very,
very
well
thought
out
and
very
professionally
presented
and-
and
I
think
you'll
find
that
to
be
the
the
tone
and
the
flavor
of
many
of
the
southside
residents
encapsulated
and
barbara's
comments.
So
with
that,
thank
you
very
much
appreciate
your
time
and
I'll
give
it
back
to
you,
mr
chair.
B
Thank
you,
councilman
and
councilwoman
gross.
N
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
also
thank
you
to
all
the
people
who
were
able
to
testify
today.
We've
also
gotten
emails
to
let
you
know
that
we
got
your
emails.
N
It's
especially
striking
that
there
were
12
different
community
groups
from
across
the
city
who
collaborated
in
some
of
the
testimony
that
we
got
by
email
and
here
at
the
hearing
director
dash
I'm
trying
to
remember
if
it's
been
a
year
and
a
half
two
years
since
we
first
started
talking
about
this
problem,
maybe
more,
but
especially
about
this
amendment
to
r1a.
So
I
want
to
thank
planning
for
bringing
this
forward
acknowledging
that
this
is
a
kind
of
first
step
right.
N
N
We
I
believe
this
is
damaging
to
the
neighborhoods,
where
we're
seeing
a
lot
of
these
front-facing
townhouses
come
in
there's
even
you
know
when
you
have
like
one
driveway
after
another.
Imagine
the
experience
of
having
to
literally
kind
of
go
up
and
down
it's
almost
like
a
crazy
kennywood
roller
coaster
ride
to
go
across
these
multiple
driveways
and
having
had
small
children.
N
These
curb
cuts,
remove
your
personal
safety
and
so
you're,
suddenly
having
y'all
like
watch
out
for
the
driveway
watch
out
for
the
driveway,
you
know
when
you're,
instead
of
being
able
to
just
walk
on
the
sidewalk
thinking,
that's
it's
supposed
to
be
pedestrian
space
and
these
neighborhoods
were
built
for
it
to
be
pedestrians
space
and
it
remained
pedestrian
space
for
a
hundred
years
and
now
we're
taking
that
away.
Every
curb
cut.
N
We
do
every
driveway
we
put
in
it
fundamentally
changes
the
dynamics
of
navigating
these
neighborhoods
and
it
really
is
a
detriment
to
everybody
in
the
neighborhood.
So
I
I
don't
think
that
the
you
know
the
private
developers
wishes
outweigh
the
the
neighborhoods,
which
is,
and
certainly
the
neighborhoods
wishes
to
have
experience
in
their
neighborhood,
the
way
that
it's
intended
to
be
experienced.
So
I
I've
supported
lawrenceville
stakeholders,
lawrenceville
united
and
lawrenceville
corporation
and
their
work
on
this
issue
financially
with
legal
challenges.
N
Sometimes
in
fact
so
I'm
all
in
here
I
want.
Can
I
ask
some
clarifying
questions?
I
think
I
mean
I
don't
want.
G
N
Fix
up
our
format,
because
this
is
just
we
repeatedly
heard
the
word
that
was
quoted
from
the
rib-
the
driveway
should
not
be
on
primary
streets
and
I
wanted
to
get
planning
to
clarify
that
definition,
because
in
other
contexts
we
sometimes
refer
to
primary
street,
just
like
the
main
thoroughfares
and
secondary
streets
and
tertiary
streets
in
terms
of
like
you,
know
the
reigning
of
our
street.
So
director,
could
you
or
any
planner
here?
Could
you
clarify
that
for
us
we're
not
just
saying
that
the
riv
requires
driveways
between
alleys?
N
If
it's
on
like
a
35
mile
per
hour
street
right
or
are
we.
D
Yeah
I'll
actually
direct
this
question
either
to
zoning
administrator
layman,
or
you
know,
zoning
development,
review
staff
and.
O
Alright
good
afternoon,
council,
members
and
and
those
that
are
attending
and
watching
corey
layman,
zoning
administrator.
So
first
of
all,
the
zoning
code
does
not
have
this
sort
of
primary
tertiary
street
definitions
in
the
way
that
transportation
planners
might
have
who
work
like
adobe.
O
We
do
have
a
distinction
and
a
defined
distinction
in
the
code
between
streets
and
waze,
which
you
know
in
a
pittsburgh
way
of
saying,
ally
and
I'm
trying
to
quickly
pull
up
the
riv
zoning.
P
So
the
rip
code
says
single
unit
attached
residential
uses
are
subject
to
the
following:
curb
cut
standards.
One
garage
and
parking
spaces
must
be
accessed
from
the
rear
yard
if
the
rear
yard
access
is
available,
corner
lots
with
or
without
rear
access.
May,
alternatively,
access
garages
and
parking
spaces
from
the
exterior
side
yard.
P
G
N
O
Yeah,
the
way
that
we
created
the
riv
was
or
that
standard
within
the
riv
was
intended
to
address.
You
know
addressed
this
in
the
most
contextual
and
fair
way
we
didn't
want
to.
We
wanted.
We
didn't
want
to
encourage
a
a
whole
lot
of
variances.
So
that's
why
we
allowed
for
when
there
isn't,
you
know
allowed,
for
there
may
be
cases
where
homes
don't
have
and
lots
don't
have
access
from
the
rear,
rear
yard
and
side
yard.
O
N
So
that
was
just
clarification:
I'm
not
advocating
one
way
or
another
here.
Similarly,
I
just
want
to
remind
everyone
here
that,
when
we're
talking
and
the
public
who
might
be
tuning
in
or
paying
attention
to,
the
legislation
in
every
case,
both
either
applying
it
to
r1a
and
also
what
you
just
read
on
the
rib,
this
discussion
is
restricted
to
those
townhouses
or
shared
wall
development.
However,
you
just
stated
it
right.
So
no,
actually,
no
one
here
in
testimony
or
in
this
landing
department
is
talking
about
detached.
N
That's
right.
Just
for
clarification
that
this
amendment
in
front
of
us,
which
applies
to
r1a,
it's
not
the
rib,
it's
r1a,
r1a
citywide
are
those
neighborhoods.
Where
you
see
you
know
homes
with
party
walls
right,
so
those
are
the
town
houses,
they're,
really
they're,
really
squished
together
townhouses
in
lawrenceville,
especially
you
know,
I've
seen
them
at
like
12
feet
wide.
I
think
it's
the
smallest,
I
know
of
right.
I
mean
there's
very
many
who
are
15
feet
wide
20
feet
wide.
N
These
are
the
way
before
cars
neighborhoods,
where
everybody
was
squishing,
really
close
together
to
get
closer
to
that
main
street
that
had
the
trolley
tracks
on
it,
especially
and
that's
kind
of
the
historic
form
so
that
you
were
really.
Everybody
was
wanting
to
be
as
close
to
that
main
street
as
possible,
and
then.
N
Complementary
to
that,
when
we
hear
people
talking
about
discussing
it
more
city-wide,
I'm
I'm,
I
think
it.
It
is
a
question
for
the
council
whether
we're
going
to
be
applying
that
beyond
the
townhouse
to
other
housing
forms
that
are
maybe
detached
or
something
like
that.
What
would
be
what
would
be
citywide
because
r1a
is
in
all
parts,
not
all
parts
but
is
distributed
around
the
city,
but
it
is
that
kind
of
historic
form
that
you
see
or
new
construction
that
is
similar
to
that
form.
So
I
think
that's
kind
of
an
open-ended
question.
N
No
one
has
to
answer
here
that
there
would
be
a
kind
of
open
question
about
what
would
that
look
like
citywide,
but
a
question
you
can't
answer
for
us
today
is
what
happens
if,
next
week,
when
this
legislation
is
on
standing
committee
table,
if
council
amends
it?
What?
If
we
take
that
section
of
the
rib
and
plop
it
in
here?
What
procedurally
would
happen.
N
We'd
have
to
refer
it
back
to
plant
report
and
recommendation
for
planning
when
we've
I've
had
this
discussion
in
the
weeks
before
this
hearing.
I've
said
like
a
substantial
amendment,
because
we
encountered
this
possibility
when
we
did
the
riv
right.
It's
like
well,
if
there's
a
a
little
tweak
like
you
know
your
technical
amendment,
you
forgot
a
comma
or
something
it
doesn't
have
to
go
back
to
your
public
process,
but
if
we
make
a
substantive
amendment,
I'm
assuming
that
council
could
like
make
that
amendment
like
rush
it
to
a
man
make
the
amendment.
N
D
That's
correct
councilman,
and
so
I
think
that
was
a
part
of
the
planning
commission's
recommendation.
I
think
you
know
they
were
encouraged.
Staff
was
encouraged
by
you
know
the
testimony
of
the
organizations
and
the
interests
of
the
organizations
and
in
continuing
to
look
at
this
and
look
at
this
further
planning.
Commission's
recommendation
was
to
you
know,
to
take
this
amendment
to
city
council
and
forward
this
amendment
to
city
council,
but
then
look
further
with
you
know,
interested
parties
to
amend.
You
know.
N
Other
sections
of
the
code
or
yeah
exactly
so:
I've
had
this
kind
of
parallel
conversation
for
two
years
now
with
domi
as
well,
possibly
right
and
there's
other
parts
of
the
code
that
refer
to
like
parking
code
or
something.
But
this
part
is
just
the
zoning
code.
N
So
I
think
all
of
these
topics
are
really
great
to
have
they're
long
overdue.
I'm
really
glad
to
hear
the
other
support
on
council
and
thank
you
all
for
putting
in
the
good
work
to
bring
this
to
the
table.
N
At
this
point,
and
certainly
I
think
we
heard
today
that
what
I've
been
hearing
in
community
meetings
and
in
testimony
from
my
own
constituents
and
feedback
for
years
now
is
that
we
really
it's
just
above
and
beyond
what
we
can
tolerate
here
right
when
it
was
just
one
when
it's
one
town
house
in
your
neighborhood,
you
really
don't
doesn't
impinge
or
impair
the
neighborhood
experience,
but
now
that
we've
seen
dozens
or
more,
it
really
makes
a
difference,
and
I
I've
said
this
as
a
cautionary
tale
to
both
councilman
krauss
and
councilman,
wilson,
guelph's,
big
crowds.
N
N
Q
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
thanks
to
everyone
who
has
prepared
for
today,
both
from
the
city
planning,
zoning
and
also
those
who
testified
today,
really
appreciate
your
time.
I
won't
belabor
the
point.
That's
already
been
made
I'll
just
add
my
two
cents
that
I
too
sh.
Q
I
share
the
concerns
about
safety
on
sidewalks,
for
pedestrians,
for
people
who
are
walking
riding
a
bike:
children
riding
bikes,
children,
walking
people
using
wheelchairs,
it's
simply
unsafe,
to
have
that
many
curb
cuts
in
a
especially
in
a
in
a
more
densely
built
environment,
and
so
frankly,
I'll
be
honest
anything
I
I
look
forward
to
the
day
when
parking
isn't
the
tail
that
wags
the
dog
of
planning
and
we
can
plan
without
having
to
think
about
parking.
Q
But
since
we
do
have
to
consider
parking,
I
you
know
I
am
in
favor
of
doing
everything
we
can
to
minimize
these
dangerous
curve
cuts
and
I'll
admit
you
know
I
don't
have
as
many
of
these
these
attached
units
in
my
disc
in
the
district
that
I
represent,
but
I
am
interested
in
having
these
conversations
with
city
staff,
with
advocates
with
constituents
and
with
council
colleagues
to
see
what
we
can
do
and
what
appetite
there
is
for
making
this
as
strong
as
possible.
So
I'll
just
leave
it
at
that.
B
Thank
you
councilwoman,
and
so
I
I'm
okay
with
further
comment.
I
was
gonna
make
a
comment
now,
so
you
know
on
the
north
side,
we
are
well
first
off.
Thank
you.
Everyone,
for
you,
know
the
public
speakers
that
came
and
other
council
members
that
joined
us.
B
It's
important
conversation
so,
as
I
was
gonna
just
start
talking
about,
which
is
the
north
side
and
the
district
that
I
represent,
we're
going
to
implement
a
parking
protected
bike
lane
and
some
of
the
struggle
with
the
design
was
the
amount
of
curb
cuts
on
the
one
side,
who's
going
to
go,
and
you
know
number
one
people
that
were
interested
in
barking
at
limited
parking
because
there
had
to
be
a
lot
of
sighting
issues
involved
and-
and
there
was
you
know,
a
lot
of
parking
that
was
taken
away
and
this
neighborhood
really
one
of
their
parking.
B
But
really
what
what
struck
me
is
as
as
interesting
as-
and
you
know
tragic
is-
is
how
dangerous
it
is
for
all
these
curb
cuts
along
something
like
a
parking
protected
bike
lane,
and
you
know
so,
as
we
move
forward
with
streets
of
work
for
everyone,
eliminating
as
much
as
possible
these
curb
cuts
on
all
levels.
I
actually
appreciated
the
comment
of
of
you
know:
walking
your
kids
on
the
street
by
counseling
straussberg,
I
mean
not
gross
because
you
know
it
is.
B
This
piece
of
legislation
is
zoning,
change
that
you
know
it's
gonna,
it's
not
attractive
to
people
who
want
to
buy
a
new,
a
new
town,
home
or
a
new
house,
but
I
can
continue
to
see
these
old
structures
desire
and
people
move
in
with
you
know,
eager
to
pay
more
and
more
each
year,
and
I'm
not
sure
if
they're,
if
some
of
them
that
have
commented,
are
really
tapped
into
what's
happening
in
pittsburgh
and
and
how
people
really
desire
this
this
way
of
urban
living
and
you
know
to
get
back
their
their
space
on
the
sidewalk.
B
So
with
that
said,
I
am
in
support
and
it's
you
know.
I
realized
the
process
that
we
want
to
make
amendments
that
we'd
have
to
take
it
back
to
the
planning
commission,
so
I'm
open
for
that
discussion.
I
do
have
a
couple
of
questions.
I'm
not
sure
if
corey
layman
would
be
able
to
answer
this
question
or
director
dash
so
currently
the
way
the
the
way
it
is
with
with
the
zoning
prior
to
this
change,
this
possible
change.
B
O
O
B
Okay,
I
am
curious
about
that.
Maybe
I'll
follow
up
with
you
to
get
to
get
those.
You
know
how
many
times
that
happens,
and
you
know
director
dash.
Would
you
be
able
to
to
give
a
a
like
a
history
of
of
how
this
came
about?
Why
why
this
is
an
important
piece
of
legislation
to
move
forward
with,
with
or
without
amendments.
D
Well,
I
think
that
you
know
I
mean
what
we're
doing.
What
we
do
now
is
we,
unfortunately,
in
this
case,
legislate
behavior
that
we
don't
want
to
see
so
right
now
the
way
that
the
the
parking
requirements
are
set
up
for
these
single
unit
attached
dwellings
is
that
we
do
require
them
to
provide
parking
spaces
and
given
just
the
layout
of
many
of
our
row
house,
you
know
our
home
neighborhoods,
you
know
lawrenceville
the
south
side,
areas
of
the
lower
north
side,
et
cetera.
D
You
know
we,
we
have
narrow
lots
and
you
know
we
we
don't
have
alleys
or
ways
and,
and
you
know,
or
we
have
homes
on
the
allies
or
ways
in
many
of
these
neighborhoods,
and
so
you
know,
unfortunately,
we've
been
legislating
to
a
design
and
an
outcome
that
we
don't
necessarily
want
to
see
and
so
eliminating
you
know,
you
know
eliminating
the
parking
requirement
at
least
takes
away
the
kind
of
incentive.
You
know
where
we're
where
we're
legislating.
D
So
I
think
that's
where
it's
important
for
for
this
amendment
to
to
be
able
to
move
forward-
and
I
think
you
know
especially
given
you
know
the
interest
by
organizations
and
if
there's
the
interest
at
you
know,
council
as
well,
you
know
we
would
definitely
be
willing
to
to
look
further
into
you
know
into
further
revisions.
That
may
be
more
prescriptive
as
to
you
know
as
to
how
people
you
know
how
we
would
further
limit
the
opportunity
for
people
to
create
parking.
D
You
know,
for
these
types
of
you
know
whether
it
be
the
single
single
unit,
attached,
uses
or
or
other
uses.
That
council
may
you
know,
may
direct
in
that
in
that
case,
so
you
know
so
I
think
it's
it's
something
that
the
department
is
is
definitely
willing
and
interested
in
continuing
that
discussion
and
working
further
on
on
further
amendments,
but
I
think
really
just
helping
us
legislate
so
that
you
know
you
know
change.
D
You
know
this
with
this
immediate
legislation
so
that
you
know
the
outcome
that
we're
acquiring
is,
you
know
is
one
that
we
want
is
important.
I
appreciate.
B
That
yeah
and
the
other
part
is,
is
the
affordable
component
and
how
there's
options
to
keep
it
more
affordable,
for
you
know
whether,
whether
it's
the
h
the
housing
opportunity
fund
that
I
would
like
to
invest
in
in
more
of
our
more
walkable
areas,
land
trusts
that
can
maintain
long-term
affordability
and
their
properties
or
new
properties,
and
how
you
know
that
may
be
able
to
adjust
the
price
down.
B
You
know
even
even
the
bill
price,
not
just
the
selling
price,
but
the
bill
price
as
well.
I
mean
we've
been
hearing
how
much
spaces
are
just
in
a
parking
garage,
how
much
each
space
it
is.
I
think
it's
50
grand
or
somewhere
along
the
lines
of
that.
So
I'm
not
sure
what
the
relative
cost
is
to
the
the
curb
cut
and
everything
with
what
the
addition
is
for
each
different
neighborhood.
B
I'm
sure
that
changes,
but
just
that
there
is
that
that
affordable
component,
that
you
know
we
could
see
if
we
continue
to
to
implement
a
code,
that's
going
to
work
for
you
know
for
the
affordable
care
act.
B
You
know
having
our
right
of
way
back.
So
thank
you
and
are
there
any
other
comments
by
members
yeah?
May
I,
mr.
F
Please
please
I'm
almost
kind
of
embarrassed
to
ask
this
question,
but
I'm
going
to
ask
you
because
I'm
not.
I
want
to
make
certain
that
I
I'm
settled
in
in
my
thoughts,
the
the
zoning
code.
Amendment
is
applicable
solely
to
new
construction
or
or
is
it
to
be
interpreted
that
if
one
wish
to
retrofit,
if
someone
came
in
and
bought
a
property
with
which
they
could
retrofit
a
first
floor
garage
with
curb
cut,
would
it
be
applicable
in
that
situation
as
well.
O
O
O
Our
our
code
doesn't
require
if
it
changed
from
residential
or
changed
from
commercial
to
residential.
Our
code
doesn't
require
us
to
have
new
parking
for
the
change
of
use
only
for
the
additional
parking
that
would
be
required
so
in
in
that
case,
most
likely
we'd
look
at
it
and
say
well.
This
was
built
without
parking.
It's
existing,
it's
not
a
change.
That
requires
an
additional
parking
space,
so
we
wouldn't
have
been
requiring
a
space
in
that
case
anyway.
N
O
Well,
yeah,
I
mean
we'll
look
at
it,
we'd
be
looking
at
a
doing
a
zoning
review
on
a
change
of
use,
but
we
wouldn't
necessarily
if
it's
an
existing
structure.
That
was
you
know
that
we
have
evidence
that
it
was
occupied.
You
know,
and
it's
changing
to
a
similar
intensity
or
a
lesser
intensive
use.
Like
a
single-family
residence.
We
wouldn't
require
new
parking.
N
So
if
it
was
built
for
parking
is
that's
why
this
is
like
a
first
step.
You
can't
tell
someone,
no,
you
can't
have
your
front
facing
garage
and
curb
cut
if
they
say
well,
you're
requiring
me
to
have
parking,
and
this
is
the
only
place
I
can
put
it.
Then
we,
you
know
we
have
to
remove
the
requirement
to
have
the
conversation
at
all.
O
F
So
with
the
introduction
of
registered
community
organizations,
if
one-
and
this
is
hypothetical-
I
don't
want
you
to
think
as
though
I'm
going
to
take
your
answer.
As
is
gospel,
but
with
the
onset
of
a
community
registered
community
organization
working
with
a
developer,
explaining
the
importance
of
not
providing
for
the
off-street
parking
developer
intends
to
go
forward
against
the
wishes
of
a
rco
it
ends
up
at
the
zoning
board.
Is:
is
there
teeth
in
the
rco
legislation
that
would
find
a
home
in
in
within
the
zoning
code
that
they
could
actually.
O
Yeah
so
yeah
the
rco
requirement
is
that
there's
a
develop
development
activities
meeting
if
it's.
O
If
they're
going
to
the
zoning
board
they're
going
there
because
they
don't
comply
with
the
zoning
code,
one
of
the
standards
in
the
code
for
at
least
if
they're
going
for
variances
yeah
and
so
that's
what
the
board
would
be.
Considering
if
the
the
issue
about
parking,
I
mean,
if
it's.
F
F
D
D
The
place
that
someone
would
have
to
go
to
the
zoning
board
now
would
be
to
not
provide
parking,
and
that
would
be
something
that
would
trigger
a
development
activities
meeting
and
where
there's
an
rco,
then
the
rco
would
be
involved.
What
we're
doing
is
eliminating
that
process.
For
you
know
the
variance
process,
the
you
know
the
kind
of
affiliate
you
know
if
there's
an
affiliated,
you
know
if
there
were
an
affiliated
developer
activities
meeting
or
anything
like
that
that
were
required
by
the
zoning
district.
D
You
know
so
you
know
the
intent
is
to
you
know,
make
it
legal
for
people
to
to
build.
You
know
single
unit
attached
buildings
without
parking,
and
you
know
to
be
able
to
do
so
in
a
way
that
you
know
goes
over
the
counter
and
through
typical
zoning
review,
but
happens
in
the
same
way
that
someone
would
build
that
same
that
same
building
if
it
did
have
parking
and
and
not
create
additional
hurdles
to
to
people
who
want
to
make
sure
that
you
want
to
not
provide.
D
You
know
want
to
not
provide
parking
and
therefore
you
know
not
create
those
curb
cuts,
not
create
that
loss
of
on
street
parking
not
create.
You
know
those
other.
You
know
those
other
advantages
to
these
uses.
You
know
without
parking.
F
So
just
one
last
question
and
then
I
promise
I'll
leave
this
alone
and
we
can
all
go
about
our
day.
Was
there
an
argument
to
be
made
for,
in
addition
to
removing
the
parking
requirement
to
reduce
the
number
that
are
actually
permitted?
Look
at
mr
councilwoman
gross
she's.
She
knows
where
I'm
going
with
this.
Was
there
a
desire
to
reduce
the
numbers
or
the
maximum
that
they
could
have
in
unison,
with
removing
the
parking
requirement
altogether.
F
Well,
I
was,
you
know.
F
D
I'll
have
other
staff
follow
up.
If,
if
I
miss
anything,
but
you
know,
I
don't
think
that
that
was
really
the
the
discussion.
I
think
that
a
lot
of
the
discussion
was
around.
You
know
you
know,
okay.
Well,
how
do
we
go
beyond
just
now
allowing
these
units
to
be
built
without
parking?
How
do
we
get
to
creating
more
whether
it's
design,
standards
or
restrictions
to
making
sure
that
we
are,
you
know,
kind
of
going
further
to
reduce
the
amount
of
curb
cuts?
You
know
that
that
you
know
that
people
could
get
by.
D
You
know
creating
these
units
with
first
floor
garage
condition,
and
that's
where
a
lot
of
the
reference
from
you
know
from
you
know
from
residents
and
stakeholders
who
have
testified,
you
know
get
to
the
standards
that
is
that
are
in
the
riverfront
zoning
district
around
that,
where
you
know
the
intent
is
to
you
know,
is
to
push
you
know,
curb
cuts
to
you
know
to
alleys
or
ways
or
to
you
know,
side
yards.
You
know
on
corner
lots.
D
You
know
to
try
to
keep
them
off
of
that
primary,
that
front
entrance
you
know,
and
so
that
that's
where
a
lot
of
the
discussion
has
been
not
necessarily
if
there
needs
to
be
a
change
to
that
maximum.
It's
just
that
if
there's
going
to
be
a
curb
cut,
whether
it's
one
parking
space
or
four,
you
know
how.
How
is
that
designed
in
a
way
that
better
meets
the
city's
goals
of
how
it
wants
to
see
itself
develop?
Yep.
N
To
remind
everybody
that
that
we
are
currently
just
talking
about,
if
you
look
at
the
entire
zoning
map
of
the
entire
city,
this
is
not
a
whole
lot
of
land
mass
that
is
r1a
and
r1a
are
those
very
historic
parts
of
the
city
that
were,
you
know,
built
in
the
like
1860s,
1870s
and
they're
built.
That's
the
bones
of
the
neighborhood.
So
I
am
completely
immutable
to
the
idea
of
just
not
allowing
car
storage
on
site.
N
They
weren't
built
with
car
storage,
because
cory's
laughing
at
me
and
like
this,
wants
to
interrupt,
but
I'm
just
saying
how
I
feel
I
think
it's
consistent
with
all
of
our
city
goals
and
what
our,
what
we
see
in
our
neighborhood
plans
as
well,
that
are
in
formation.
Some
of
them
aren't
written
plants
that
haven't
been
codified
but
have
been
in
place
for
a
very
long
time.
F
I'm
a
dinosaur,
you
know,
and
I
get
that
and
you
know,
and
I'm
on
my
way
out
and
what
I
hope
we
accomplish
as
a
council
here
is
that
we
leave
behind.
You
know
the
beginnings
of
the
city
that
this
up-and-coming
generation
wishes
to
see.
You
know
I'm
not
going
to
be
around
to
see
a
whole
lot
of
the
kinds
of
changes
we
put
in
place,
but
I
am
committed
to
the
mission.
F
As
I
know,
the
councilwoman
is
too
to
to
you
know,
leaving
behind
a
city
that
you
know
our
next
generations
wish
to
inhabit.
So
I'm
I'm
all
open
to
ideas
and
suggestions
that
you
wish
to
to
put
before
us
for
consideration.
B
O
We
got
on
the
nuance
track
and
I'll.
Let
us
wrap
up.
I
promise
first
of
all,
councilman
wilson,
I
I
also
like
numbers,
and
so
I
did
a
quick,
a
really
quick
and
dirty
count
from
last
year
without
going
into
the
individual
cases
and
looking
at
the
cba
decisions.
But
it
looks
like
roughly
about
a
dozen
cases
that
that
were
variances
for
residential
dwellings
to
that
code.
Section
again,
I
can't
say
for
sure
that
that's
the
exact
number,
but
that's
a
rough,
gives
you
a
rough
idea.
O
I
think
I
didn't
look
that
far.
I
think
most
of
them,
I
think
they
were
probably
approved,
but
you
know.
Q
O
You
know
either
approved
or
approved
with
conditions,
but
you
know
I
could
we
could
do
a
more
thorough
reporting.
Another.
O
And
then
a
technical
note
on
the
on
this:
it's
actually
addressing
the
r1a
use
the
attached
residential
use.
So
even
if
you're
in
a
different
zoning
district,
if
you
have
that
typology
you're,
you
know
if
you're
building
that
typology
you're
exempted
from
the
parking
requirement
and
then
similarly
or
sort
of
transversely
if
you're
in
a
r1a
district.
But
you
have
you're
building
a
detached
home
you're
in
the
same
you
know
you,
you
would
be
treated
differently.
B
Yeah
yeah,
I'm
I'm
welcoming,
and
I'm
appreciating
that
I
appreciate
the
conversation.
Actually
I
I
was
hoping
you
could
just
clarify
that
for
me
what
I
you
know
I
was
having
trouble
following
you
actually
on
that
last
one.
You
were
saying
that
if,
if
someone
you
know
what
what
do
they
have
to
do
to
actually
get
that
approved.
O
N
It's
corey.
May
I
interrupt
cory.
You
had
numbers
just
now
for
councilman
wilson
about
the
or
councilman
crosstalk.
I
think
councilman
wilson
about
the
numbers
of
appeals.
K
O
Oh,
I
mean
that
yeah
that
might
be
easier
to
get
that
number
from
domi,
because
there
would
be
a
number
of
cut
permits.
N
As
I
said
in
my
my
response,
that
there
was
like
you
know,
you
remembered
when
there
was
one
or
two
but
we've
kind
of
lost
track
of
how
many
dozens
and
it's
again
it's
it's
overwhelming,
as
well
as
the
kind
of
giant
form
of
the
new
construction,
it's
starting
to
really
overwhelm
the
the
the
fabric
of
the
neighborhood,
and
certainly
it's
overwhelming
the
experience
on
the
sidewalks,
so
yeah
we'll
we'll
try
to
get
those
numbers
somewhere
from
domi.
Thank
you.
R
Actually,
this
is
katie
reed
from
domi,
oh
yeah,
that's.
R
That's
right,
I
don't
know
the
exact
number,
but
I
know
it
was
somewhere
between
150
and
175.
Curb
cuts
approved
in
2019.
C
N
B
No,
I
definitely
have
plenty
in
my
district
as
well,
so
all
right
well
does
anyone
else,
have
any
comments,
all
right?
Well,
thank
you.
Everyone
for
joining
us
and
so
having
exhausted
the
business
of
this
public
hearing.
Have
a
motion
to
adjourn.