►
From YouTube: Bloomington Board of Zoning Appeals, November 19, 2020
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).
C
Here,
thanks:
okay,
we
do
not
have
approval
of
meetings
for
this
month.
Those
june
meeting.
A
A
C
In
october,
where
we,
it
was
for
2670
east
second
street,
and
we
thought
a
variance
was.
C
Going
to
be
required
for
landscape
standards
for
that
petition
because
of
the
way
the
new
udo.
C
Thought
that
variance
was
required.
It
is
not
the
condition
of
approval
for
that
site
plan.
C
C
C
C
A
The
first
one
is
aa-8-20:
the
annex
group,
aa-17-20,
wdg
construction,
v-24-20.
A
318
llc,
so
we
will
begin
with
the
first
petition
aa-8-20
the
annex
group.
Can
I
please
have
the.
A
C
Okay,
sorry
about
that
way,
too
many
things
open
on
this
screen.
Okay,
the
first
petition
that
we.
C
Are
looking
at
tonight,
as
ms
clapper
said,
is
aa0820?
It
is
a
administrative
appeal.
C
So
we've
discussed
these
in
the
past.
The
petition
a
site
is
located
at
1100,
north
crescent.
C
And
the
petitioner
received
a
series
of
notice
of
violations,
including
a
final
fine
notice
of.
C
This
time
now,
having
one
building,
maybe
two
open
and
our
senior
zoning
compliance
planner.
C
So
multiple
notices
of
violation
were
issued
for
the
site.
The
first
was.
C
Three
environmental
violations,
so
those
were
listed
as
tracking
waste
and
material
and
soil.
C
For
compliance
of
those
was
january,
6th
of
2020.,
so
a
fairly
quick
turnaround,
not
a.
C
A
heavy
lift
to
fix
you
can
see
it
was
items
such
as
here
in
the
middle
of
this.
C
Picture
is
a
pile
of
basically
someone
washing
out
concrete
onto
the
ground.
C
They're
tracking
out
onto
the
public
roadways,
those
were
the
types
of
things
we
noticed
them
of.
C
So,
as
I
mentioned,
the
deadline
was
january
6th
on
january
7th.
A
second
nov
was
issued.
C
They
were
given
an
additional
week
from
the
first
deadline,
so
given
until
january,
13th.
C
So
on
the
13th,
an
inspection
was
completed.
The
violations
were
not
remedied,
as
well
as.
C
An
additional
violation
of
drainage,
inlet
protection
was
found
to
be.
C
13Th,
as
had
been
stated,
would
happen
in
the
violation
notice
that
was
sent
on
the
7th.
C
And
the
letter
here
on
the
13th
indicated
that
those
violations
would.
C
So,
then,
what
then
we
do
send
a
final
notice
of
violation
detailing
the
final
fine
amount.
C
Until
compliance
was
met
on
the
24th,
the
way
that
the
fines
are
described
in
the.
C
C
Could
see
those
as
separate
and
find
five
thousand
dollars
a
day.
We
instead
of.
C
Taking
the
three
violations
that
were
listed
in
the
novs
that
were
not
immediately
rectified.
C
Dollars
a
day
in
in
totality
instead
of
four
each,
so
the
petitioner
is
appealing
that
notice.
C
Of
violation,
the
department
feels
that
it's
clear
that
the
violation
occurred
as
we've.
C
Discussed
in
the
past,
the
board
of
zoning
appeals
cannot
weigh
in
on
the
amount
that
was.
C
Included
only
on
whether
or
not
the
violation
is
about
the
notice
of
violation
is
valid
and.
D
I
have
a
question
oops.
Thank
you,
jackie
sure,.
A
A
Is
there
a
petitioner's
representative
here?
Okay,
could
you
please
state
your
name.
E
Excuse
me,
my
name
is
christopher
christopher
lukhart.
I'm
general
counsel
with
the
annex
group.
E
Thank
you.
Do
you
swear
to
tell
the
whole
truth?
Do
you
swear
to
tell
the
truth
the
whole
truth
and.
A
Nothing
but
the
truth.
I
do.
Okay,
you
have
up
to
20
minutes
to
present
your
petition.
I
don't
think.
E
E
In
the
the
notices
and
that
kind
of
stuff,
so
I
think
our
you
know
I
I
want
to
go
back
and
just.
E
Paint
a
little
bigger
picture
as
to
why
we're
trying
to
appeal,
and
I'm
not
necessarily
peeling,.
E
The
per
day
dollar
figure
or
what
have
you,
but
you
know
back
in
in
december,
we
were.
E
Buildings,
a
certificate
of
occupancy,
as
this
is
an
affordable
housing
project
and
we
had
a
list
of.
E
E
E
Once
we
got
the
notice,
we
of
course
passed
it
on
to
the
contractor
on
site.
E
I
think
if
you
look
at
the
pictures
between
the
the
six,
which
is
when
we
got
the.
E
Or
I
guess
it
might
have
been,
the
third
notice
was
sent
there
was
there
was
a
progress
made.
E
Referenced
in
in
the
january
16
january,
15
notices
and
then
by
the
23rd,
which
was
that
next.
E
E
E
I
think
that
you
know
our
our
biggest
issue
was
just
the
timing
of
everything
we
didn't.
E
E
Until
the
15th
and
then
that
last
inspection
then
was
the
23rd
or
24th,
and
that
notice
wasn't.
E
Set
until
early
february,
and
so
I
feel
like
we
were
trying
to
get
ourselves
in
compliance
and.
E
Just
sort
of
you
know
had
one
issue
that
we
got
cleared
up
and
then
had
another
issue
pop
up.
So.
E
I
guess
I
would
ask
for
some
leniency
with
these
fees.
The
only
other
thing
that
I
would
say.
E
Issues
for
us,
of
course,
we
did
have
you
know
other
employees
on
sites,
but.
E
Almost
fully
leased
up
now-
and
you
know
at
the
end
of
the
day,
we're
happy
with
everything.
E
That's
done
and
we're
happy
to
be
partners
with
the
city
just
really
asking
for
some
leniency.
E
A
D
To
start,
thank
you
christopher
for
that
a
couple
of
questions
so,
first,
I
want
to
to.
E
So
I
think
the
grounds
are
that
we
we
didn't
receive
the
first
notice.
E
Until
the
six
and
each
and
then
we
immediately
started
working
on
compliance
and.
E
D
D
The
final
thing
you
said
was
what
weather
contributed
dealing
with
the
last
statement.
D
About
weather
contributed,
is
that
not
kind
of
why
there
are
many?
There
are
policies
in
place.
D
Because
weather
can
cause
mud
can
cause
runoff
can
cause
environmental
issues
so
yeah.
E
A
a
bit
of
you
know
the
rock
rock
road
as
required,
but
there's
a
lot
of
rain
and
snow.
E
Percolate
up
through
the
rock
and
and
what
have
you
and
then
once
it
would,
you
know
and
then.
E
After
a
day
or
so,
it'd
disappear
again,
and
so
you
know,
I
think
we
tried
to
be
in
compliance.
E
Having
other
ones,
if
you
look
at
the
dirt
pile
you
know,
disappeared
from
you
know,
one
notice
to.
E
The
you
know
somebody
came
out
to
inspect
other
issues
popped
up,
so
I
think
I
feel
like.
E
Same
code
but
different
actual
violations
on
the
site
so
not
sure
not
sure
that
it's
the
same.
E
D
D
E
We
were
closed,
but
I
guess
the
the
point
being.
You
know
as
soon
as
we
got
the
appeal.
E
Or
the
notice
we,
you
know,
started
forcing
the
contractor
to
put
the
site
in
compliance.
E
E
Well,
I
think
you
know
you
have
an
active
job
site
and
I
think
that
from
the
you
know
we
did
have.
E
So
we
were
doing
things
out,
you
know
to
keep
ourselves
in
compliance,
and
I
do
think
you.
E
Know
we
did
get
it
cleaned
up
in
in
the
10
days
from
the
13th
to
the
20th
or
24th
or
23rd.
So.
E
E
D
Is
the
the
statement
of,
admittedly,
we
did
not
play
as
close
attention
as
we
should.
D
D
D
That
was
the
question
to
him.
Yeah,
it's
a
declare
so
to
clarify
that
statement
in
december,
like.
E
I
said
we
were
working
hard
with
the
city
to
get
one
building
completed
so
that
we
could
get.
E
Residents
in
there
that
you
know
had
had
signed,
leases
and
and
had
been
approved
from
a
income.
E
Standpoint
they're
qualified
from
an
income
standpoint
to
live
in
in
the
affordable
housing,
so.
E
The
point
of
you
know
my
statement
and
so
the
we
weren't
focused
so
much
on
the
other.
E
A
Remedied
but
that
there
were
different
issues
that
arose,
that
kind
of
continued
the.
A
The
sequence
of
of
you
know:
society
sightings
of
non-compliance,
could.
C
C
They
they
stack
on
each
other,
so
it's
seen
as
a
second
violation,
not
a
new
one.
That's.
C
Not
exactly
the
same
situation
here,
but
just
to
just
as
we
just
as
seeing
that
we.
C
C
Date,
we
see
an
initial
violation.
Liz
had
been
out
to
the
site
twice
in
december
before
the
first.
C
C
Is
a
courtesy
that
the
city
does
not
have
to
do,
but
we
we
did
in
this
case
liz.
Can
you
speak.
C
To
the
idea
of
the
of
the
violation
being
in
different
spots
on
the
site,
each
time
and
jackie,
I.
A
Have
to
swear
liz
in
don't
I
oh,
I
she's
a
staff
person.
So
no
okay,
I
don't
think
so.
She'll
be
at.
C
The
table:
okay,
I'm
liz
carter,
I'm
the
senior
zoning
compliance
planner.
So
I
would
say
some.
F
F
A
Nothing
but
the
truth.
Yes,
thank
you,
okay,
so
the
picture
jackie
has
up
right
now
is
the
main.
F
Access
drive
that
went
all
the
way
through
the
project,
so
our
code,
for
example,
speaks
to
access.
F
F
Like
there
were
some
things
that
were
consistent
every
time
we
visited,
we
did
try
in
some
cases.
F
F
F
Disposed
of
paint,
that's
the
same
issue
as
the
concrete.
Our
code
just
has
improper
material.
F
F
A
Clarification,
that's
really
helpful.
Do
any
other
commission
members
have
questions.
G
I
have
a
question
yes,
so
I
heard
that
so
there
are
several
types
of
violations.
G
G
G
January
23rd-
and
I
don't
even
know
if
that
is
even
relevant.
But
I'm
just
curious
because
he.
G
F
Sure
I
would
say
sometimes
so,
for
example,
if
we
showed
a
picture
in
the
last
letter
of.
F
F
That
we've
noticed
violations
the
time
before
we
walk
the
entire
thing
so
and
that
was
sort
of.
A
So
the
violation
is,
is,
is
really
kind
of
a
comprehensive
thing
and
then
there
could
be.
H
Could
I
ask
a
question
to
staff
sure
thanks
jackie,
I
was
wondering
I
just
want
to
clarify.
H
H
C
Mike
is
oh
I'm
sorry
to
cut
you
off.
No,
no
okay,
mike
rooker,
can
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong.
C
But
but
what
you
will
be
saying
is
that
you
either
agree
with
them
that
the
administrative.
C
Appeal
or
parts
of
it,
I'm
sorry
that
the
notice
of
violation
or
parts
of
it
were.
C
Incorrectly
issued
or
not
mike
does
that
is
that
an
okay
way
to
describe
it,
I
mean.
C
It's
hard
because
usually
we
stayed
in
a
little
bit
more
of
a
cut
and
dry
way,
which
is
your
you.
C
Are
saying
whether
or
not
this
notice
of
violation
was
issued
properly,
but
their
argument
is
a.
C
Pictures
and
things
that
were
included
in
your
packet
or
that
it
seems
like.
C
H
Finish,
I
was
just
gonna
say
mike:
do
you
have
anything
to
weigh
in
on
that
description?
No,
that's.
I
Probably
accurate,
I'm
michael
rooker
city
attorney
for
the
city
and
just
a
way
in
there
you're.
I
I
Not
be,
but
that's
that's
the
board's
role
in
this
administrative
appeal.
Thank
you
that
so.
H
C
Every
two
weeks,
and
so
the
fine
amounts
that
we
chose
base
you
know
we're
based
on
the
whole.
C
Of
the
project
and
yeah,
that's
all
actually
just
to
follow
up
on
what.
H
You're
saying
there,
despite
the
fact
that
there
was
only
a
week
between
each
notice
or
a.
H
H
Address
the
notices-
yes,
I
can
let
liz
can
answer
that
better
than
I
can.
I
will
point
out.
C
C
C
But
liz,
can
you
speak
to
whether
or
not
we
got
contact
once
the
nov
started
being
issued.
C
Sure
so
I
did
not
receive
any
email
contact.
I
do
not
think
we
got
any
phone
calls
and.
F
Into
fines,
we
would
talk
to
them
a
little
bit
on
the
site.
I
they
would
kind
of
the
gentleman
on.
F
H
A
decision
about
it
is
to,
although
that,
if
they
engage
in
a
conversation
with
you,.
C
F
F
But
I
don't
believe
we
were
ever
asked
for
extensions
on
on
the
deadlines
given
in
the
novs.
F
So
it
just
sort
of
yeah
just
every
week
until
we
we
hit
fines.
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
and.
A
Just
to
follow
up
on
that
last
comment
by
you
liz,
I
I
think
that
I
saw
in
the
letters
that.
A
There
is
a
period
of
time
a
five-day
period
of
time,
after
which
the
the
citations
were.
A
Were
leveled
that
they
can,
they
can
lodge
a
the
administrative
appeal,
the
the
administrative.
A
G
G
On
the
process,
correct,
yes,
thank
you.
Okay,
if
we
have
no
further
questions
at
this
point,.
A
If
so,
please
are
we
raising
hands,
they
can
either
raise
the
digital
virtual
hand
or
turn.
A
A
E
I
don't
know
that
there's
a
whole
lot
else
to
say.
I
think
you
know
you've
heard.
E
What
we're
you
know
looking
for,
we,
you
know
your
decision.
I
guess
it
sounds
like
is
either.
E
There
is
some
discussion
about
whether
we
reached
out
or
contacted
liz
or
any
or
jack
jackie.
E
Or
anybody
at
with
the
city
after
receiving
these
notices,
I
do
not
know
if
that
occurred.
E
But
I
I
don't
know
if
that
occurred
or
not
so.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
So
we
are
back
to
the
board
for
action.
D
I'm
going
to
move
approval,
the
recommendations
on
aa-08-20
and
that
my
understanding,
if
I
write.
D
Correctly,
as
approval
is
to
agree
with
the
staff
findings
to
deny
the
aaa.
C
D
I
just
remember
president
just
want
to
make
one
comment,
which
was,
I
I
think
where
we
are,
is.
D
D
To
them
to
comply
in
those,
if
you
look
at
those
letters,
there
was
a
brief
period
of
time
where.
J
A
C
And
916
north
college
and
913
north
walnut,
the
property
at
the
time
of
the
violation.
C
Was
under
construction
when
the
construction
started,
the
property
was
zoned
cg
and
then
we.
C
Had
our
udo
update,
of
course,
and
now
it's
zoned
mm,
so
one
of
our
middle
commercial
zoning.
C
Non-Compliance
with
environmental
standards
and
the
petitioner
appealed
that
notice.
C
The
violations
listed
were
tracking
drainlit,
inlet
protection
and
sediment
control.
C
Around
the
property
making
them
impassable
and
out
of
compliance
with
pro-wag
standards
that.
C
The
city
follows
for
accessibility
of
sidewalks
in
this
violation
that
was
sent
on
the
26th.
C
A
deadline
was
given
of
july
3rd
indicating
that
fines
would
begin
to
accrue
at
that
time.
C
If
the
violation
standards
were
not
corrected,
we
did
not
actually
inspect
the
site
until.
C
The
6th,
which
was
the
following
monday,
giving
them
an
extra
weekend
an
extra
day
or
two
there.
C
And
then
compliance
was
not
found
at
this
site
until
the
22nd,
oh
actually,
that
should
maybe.
C
Say
the
11th
liz
will
have
to
correct
me
on
that
liz.
Is
it
the
11th
that,
yes,
they.
C
C
Thank
you,
okay.
So
then
we
sent
the
final
notice
of
violation
detailing
those
fines.
C
And
that
was
not
the
first
deadline,
but
that
was
the
deadline
where
we
said:
okay,
it
needs
to
be.
C
Fixed
by
this
day
or
fines
will
begin
to
accrue
and
then
find
the
site
came
into
compliance.
C
Eight
days
later,
I
believe
at
this
site
as
well.
The
notice
was
a
little
bit
different
in
this.
C
C
Required
to
give
any
time
at
all,
but
we
did
in
this
case
were
able
to
basically
immediately.
C
Notify
those
contractors
working
on
site
of
the
issues,
so
we
are
also
recommending
denial.
C
C
That
would
be
helpful.
Jackie,
I
think
chris
is
on
okay.
I
think
it's
chris
okay,
thank
you.
So
much.
C
C
F
Is
though,
okay
do
we
would
we
yeah
mike?
Can
we
oh
hello,
hello,
hello,
hi,
hello,.
K
Can
you
hear
me
now?
Yes,
are
you
the
petitioner
for
the
cdg
administrative
appeal.
K
K
Chris
deckard
deckard
and
do
you
swear
to
tell
the
truth
the
whole
truth
and
nothing
but.
A
The
truth,
I
do.
Okay,
you
have
up
to
20
minutes
to
present
your
petition.
Okay
again,
it
won't
take.
K
That
long,
basically,
we've
received
the
letter
that
was
dated
6
26
on
the
30th
of
june.
K
Rob
toll
on
july
1st,
at
which
time
we
tried
to
get
goodman
construction
out
there
to
remedy.
K
These
issues
with
soap
fence
and
some
of
the
dirt
areas
and,
unfortunately,
being.
K
Tenth
and
as
liz
was
stating
she
re-inspected
on
the
11th,
and
we
were
in
compliance.
K
Was
really
only
big
enough
for
two?
We,
we
did
our
good
faith
effort
from
trying
to
maintain.
K
The
self-fencing
and
and
cleaning
the
sidewalks
and
the
roads.
Obviously
the
pictures.
K
K
At
it-
and
I
believe
we
were
in
communication
with
liz
and
her
office
quite
often.
A
A
Correct,
I
believe
so
let
me
look
real
quick,
sorry,
8
29.
B
C
Issues
we
sent
another
notice
of
violation
with
a
much
shorter
turnaround
time
and
a
fine
date.
C
Remedying
them,
so
we
didn't
so
they
they
weren't
accruing.
As
of
the
may
nov.
A
A
K
Yeah
you
we
can
hear
you
now
chris
yeah,
okay,
I'd
just
like
to
reiterate.
You
know.
K
K
Down
we
were
putting
them
back
up,
our
one
superintendent
tried
to
do
it
himself
and
it.
K
We
struggled
with
it,
he
was
busy
with
work
or
couldn't
get
enough
people
to
address
the
self.
K
Fence
on
a
timely
manner,
but
other
than
that,
I
think
we
communicated
with
the
city
quite
often.
J
D
Which
was
it's
the
same?
Well,
it's
it's
another
issue
of
they
admit
a
failure
of
compliance.
D
I
appreciate,
madam
president,
the
pointing
out
of
the
fact
that
may
29th
was
the
first
contact.
D
D
H
At
this
point,
why?
Yes,
yes,
please
sorry,
jackie,
just
checking
in
these
types
of
violations
are
the.
H
Requires
correct,
so
we
have
yes,
so
I
you
know,
obviously,
if
you've
lived
in
bloomington
and
for.
C
C
Lot
of
trouble
with
that
you
know,
as
admittedly,
as
mr
decker
said,
they're,
they
seem
to
struggle.
C
More
than
most,
and
but
it
is
not
a
smaller
site
than
we
see
developed
in
other
areas
of.
H
J
Ask
a
follow-up
to
that
because,
as
a
relatively
new
member
of
this
body
and
of
course,
we've.
J
Heard
two
cases
now
where
there
seem
to
be
some
compliance
issues,
and
my
question
has
to
do.
J
I
mean
construction
is
messy,
and
but
we
have
our
our
environmental
concerns,
especially
when.
J
C
Yes,
so,
yes,
we
have
pre-construction
meetings
before
any
grading
permits
are
issued
where
liz.
C
C
Be
sending
in
comments
and
pictures
if
you're
not
keeping
it
buttoned
up
and
that.
C
Liz
and
emily
both
do
our
two
compliance
planners
they're
very
helpful
to
the.
J
Yeah
all
right,
thank
you.
I
will
just
add
that
the
set
of
drawings
that
are
submitted.
A
Silt
fence,
so
all
of
that
is
defined
in
the
scope
of
the
project
up
front
and
is
documented.
C
Yes,
thank
you
thanks.
Okay,
if
we
are
ready
for
a
vote,
I
think
I
have
one
more
comment.
Sorry
sure.
G
Flavia
so
I
guess
a
question,
so
the
petitioner
had
once
they
receive
a
letter
that
pronounces
that.
G
C
Appropriate
in
some
cases,
in
some
cases
it
has
borne
out
and
not
necessarily
this
one,
but.
C
The
beginning
of
the
accrual
of
fines,
and
so
sometimes
that
step
has
to
be
taken
for
the.
C
C
C
Soon
as
possible,
then
we
would
we
could
be
open
to
that.
Yes,
it's
possible
and,
and
then
I
guess.
A
Another
question
as
a
it
seems
as
a
matter
of
policy.
I
don't
know
if
it's
stated
anywhere,
but
it.
C
Correct
that
right,
that
is,
policy,
it's
not
code,
so
we
could
find
immediately,
but
we
almost.
C
Always
or
maybe
always
worn
first,
yes,
just
as
a
courtesy,
because
the
final
goal
is
compliance.
A
A
Okay,
our
third
petition
of
the
evening
is
v
dash
24-20,
catalan,
indiana
llc
staff
report.
Please.
N
M
Thompson,
factory
and
rca
factory
that
existed
on
the
site
for
a
lengthy
time
period.
M
Just
some
some
minor
modifications
which
they're
continuing
to
to
have
an
experience
now.
M
Catalan
has
been
growing
on
the
site,
both
in
terms
of
the
building
size,
but
also
employment,.
M
M
Crisis
that
we
are
currently
undergoing,
and
so
as
as
part
of
that
request,
they
are
requesting
to.
M
Is
recommended
or
directed
to
them
as
part
of
this
contract,
for
the
vaccine
is
to
secure.
M
Rca
factory
the
site
has
undergone
a
lot
of
changes
since
that
time.
So
when
the
property.
M
Was
initially
developed,
it
only
had
road
frontage
directly
on
allen
street
to
the
north
of
this.
M
There
was
a
driveway
in
connection
over
to
rogers
street
a
little
bit,
but
for
the
most
part.
M
Middle
of
your
screen
here
actually
is
an
old
railroad
bed
used
to
have
a
railroad
line
that.
M
Side
of
the
property
with
strong
dry
strong
drive,
accesses
best
beer
and
organized
living.
M
To
the
catalan
to
the
cook
site
here,
it's
very
narrow
on
the
front,
much
wider
in
the
back.
So.
M
M
To
them
for
this
contract
to
secure
this
building
and
the
property
as
part
of
this.
M
Contract
that
they
have
so
real
quickly
here
is
the
site
plan
that
I
kind
of
mentioned
of
the.
M
Existing
site
and
parking
area
along
the
front
there's
a
it's
also
important
to
note
that.
M
And
the
sidewalk
in
most
of
these
areas,
it's
well
over
20
feet
of
separation
from
the
sidewalk.
M
To
the
the
proposed
fence
so
that
distance
helps
mitigate
some
of
the
impact
to
vehicles.
M
And
pedestrians,
so,
although
the
fence
is
going
to
be
two
feet
taller,
you
know
the
increased.
M
Setback
here
really
mitigates
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
those
impacts,
so
the
fence
is
being
proposed.
M
Around
the
perimeter
of
the
parking
areas
right
up
against
the
parking
areas
as
best
as
possible,.
M
Would
be
a
wrought
iron
pole
design,
as
you
can
see
here,
with
limestone
columns
the
columns.
M
M
Of
the
reasons
for
the
limitation
on
fence
height,
you
know
it
would
certainly
be
most
impactive.
M
When
it's
right
along
a
sidewalk
and
when
it's
a
solid
brick
structure
or
a
solid
structure
of.
M
The
additional
so
as
I
I
mentioned,
both
the
in
the
in
early
presentation
with
the
aerial.
M
Photograph
and
how
this
site
has
changed
over
time.
The
shape
of
the
property,
as
I
mentioned,
was.
M
M
A
building
here
that
would
allow
this
property
to
meet
the
udl
requirements
for
fence
height.
M
M
M
It
should
be
bill,
rigger
yep,
I
see
him
down
there
am.
I
can
you
hear
me:
we
can
okay,
I'm
muted.
O
So
I'm
bill,
rigert
and
with
me
tonight
is
brian
ford
from
catalan
and
I
guess
do
I
need
this.
L
O
Okay,
I
think
eric's
done
a
really
good
job
of
of
explaining.
Why
our
our
need
for
this
particular.
O
Variance
for
a
taller
fence
than
what's
allowed
by
the
new
udo,
we
did
do
a
little.
O
O
Patterson
road
frontage
and
then
up
along
strong
drive.
We
want
to
try
and
hold
that
fence.
O
O
Just
to
point
out
that
the
catalan
property
is
a
little
bit
outside
of
the
limits.
O
I
just
wanted
to
point
that
out,
and
I
don't
know
if
brian,
if
you
want
to
add
to.
O
That
for
the
importance
of
the
security
for
the
facility
yeah,
so
I
mean
obviously
the
the
six.
P
That
you
know
barta
health
and
human
services
and
the
federal
government
have
kind
of.
P
Stipulated
as
what
the
benchmark
is
for
security,
but
and
so
the
fence
in
the
defense.
P
Height
is
is
definitely
a
security
must,
and
it's
been
echoed
with
those
partnerships,
but
also
I.
P
I
want
to
express
how
important
it
is
for
catalan
to
present
a
very
clean
and
welcoming
exterior.
P
And
aesthetic,
because
what
we
do
is
essentially
it's
pharmaceuticals.
You
know
we
have
to
make.
P
Sure
that
we,
you
know,
present
our
exterior
in
a
manner
that
is
appealing
to
clients,
appealing.
P
And
so
that
means
security,
but
that
also
means
a
place
that
you
want
to
work,
and
I
think
that.
P
Bill
and
the
rest
of
the
team
have
done
an
absolutely
amazing
job.
You
know
to
make
sure
that.
P
P
Parking
lot
are
going
to
be
an
improvement
for
both
security
and
aesthetics.
You
know
we,
we
are.
P
P
And
I
think
that
you
know
we
already
have
them
in
the
works
to
be
put
in
to
make
it
look
better.
P
P
A
Thank
you
both.
We
are
to
the
commission
for
questions
of
the
petitioners
or
staff
and.
A
I'll
start
off
for
the
petitioners,
please,
could
you
discuss
how
many
entrances.
A
Okay,
yeah
there
there
were
at
least
so
from
patterson
there's
one
main
entrance
that.
P
That
we
planned
to
put
a
site,
there's
actually
one
that
says
the
the
numbers
on
it.
I
believe.
C
P
Point
of
entry
number
two
is
our
main
entrance,
which
will
be
you
know
a
gated
entrance
point.
P
To
understand
better
what
the
flow
is
and
what
putting
gates
up
here
will
potentially
do.
P
If
we
had
to,
you
know,
restrict
the
number
of
entrances
to
our
site,
what
we
don't
want.
P
As
due
diligence,
I
think
that's
prudent,
so
point
of
entry
number
two
will
be
the
main
entry.
P
From
patterson
point
of
entry
number
four
will
be
another
employee
entrance
off
of
off.
P
A
strong
drive
and
and
point
adventure
number
three
is
kind
of
up
for
debate
right
now,
but.
P
Actually
leads
out
to
rogers,
which
is
currently
a
gated
entrance
that
has.
P
Of
the
other
entrances,
five
through
eight
are
commercial
vehicles
coming
off
a
strong
drive.
O
And
then
I
think
six
and
seven
are
more.
No
five
and
six
are
more
utility
oriented
for.
P
The
the
northern
face
the
building-
I
I
don't
know
if
they
are
applying
to
this
appeal
or
not-
is.
A
Impact
that
you
are
currently
assessing
so
yeah
we're
we're
considering
closing
it.
What
we.
P
P
As
a
safety
precaution,
if
that
gate
were
to
be
open,
it
would
just
be
open
for
a
period
of
time.
P
That
we're
reviewing,
but
it's
it's
we're
waiting
for
this
traffic
study
to
give
us.
C
A
The
petitioners
for
any
last
comments,
I'd
just
like
to
to
thank
eric
for
that
great.
P
P
Through
everything
point
by
point,
so
thanks
eric
and
thanks
bill
for
for
helping
out
as
well.
C
Yeah
and
susan
you
seconded
yes,
I
did
right.
Okay,
any
last
comments
before
we
vote.
J
As
much
speed
as
possible
with
the
vaccine
work,
I
so
appreciate
all
all
that
catalan.
J
Is
doing
and
has
done
for
the
community
and
so
pleased
to
support
this
on
your
behalf.
P
A
I'm
sorry,
mr
ford,
this
is
this
is
not
a
time
for
for
conversation.
I'm
sorry
go
ahead.
P
Response
I
apologize.
Okay,
any
any
other
commissioners
have
comments
before
we
vote.
C
B
M
Thank
you.
I
apologize
about
that,
so
I'll
go
back
here,
so
this
is
a
request
for.
M
M
The
equal
to
the
the
building
facade,
whichever
is
greater
so
in
this
case
here
it
would
have
to.
M
M
Does
not
meet
current
code,
so
the
petitioners
would
like
to
add
on
to
the
structure.
It
is
a
car.
M
25
feet,
or
even
with
the
building
facade,
whichever
is
greater
the
building
facade
on
the
west
side.
M
Of
this
building
would
determine
that
setback,
so
they
they
would
have
to
go.
Even
with
that.
M
And
so
they,
the
variance
to
allow
for
the
addition,
would
basically
be
bringing
the
the
garage.
M
M
Would
just
be
expanding
two
feet
further
to
the
north
and
would
allow
for
an
enclosed
garage
space.
M
So,
while
staff
did
not
find
any
negative
impacts
to
adjacent
properties
or
public
health.
M
Safety
or
moral
general
welfare
impacts,
one
of
the
the
third
criteria
that
the
board
is.
M
About
the
property
that
results
in
a
practical
difficulty.
M
M
Than
the
existing
residents-
and
so
you
know,
as
I
mentioned,
that
we
we
do
not
find.
Q
Mark
hood
and
I'm
christine
hack
I'll
do
each
elsewhere.
You
in
each
individually
do.
A
And,
and
do
you
swear
to
tell
the
truth,
the
whole
truth
and
nothing
but
the
truth.
Q
Have
a
technical
question
first,
is
it
am
I
allowed
to
screen
share
at
some
point?
Is
that
granted.
C
Q
With
some
notes,
so
I
apologize
for
looking
up
and
down.
We've
lived
in
this
house
and
owned
it
for.
Q
Q
Q
Worked
kind
of
constantly
expending
a
lot
of
time
and
money
to
maintain
and
improve
the.
Q
Q
Q
Q
And
we
also
have
had
people
come
under
the
carport
and
smash
the
windows
of
the
cars.
Looking.
Q
Q
Q
Q
So
in
fact,
the
the
udl
has
no
definitions
other
than
the
implied
definition
for
front.
Q
Q
Looks
like
a
front-loading
carport
to
them,
and
so
I
asked
them
what
they.
Q
Q
And
we
feel
that's
not
enough
of
a
basis
that
mr
grulik's
comments
throughout
the
process
have.
Q
Q
Q
This
is,
unfortunately,
from
google
maps
so
that
their
fisheye
camera
is
a
little
bit
weird,
but.
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
To
see,
is
it
what
the
legal
procedure
is
here
and
what
the
options
are
for
the
bza.
A
Respond
to
the
question:
yes,
so
what
is
what
is
before
the
board
of
zoning
appeals?
Tonight
is
a.
M
Aspect,
if
that's,
if
that's
what
their
belief
is
so
here
is
a
a
picture
from.
M
Elevate
of
the
front
of
the
structure,
so,
as
I
mentioned,
you
know,
we
looked
at
a
a
general.
M
M
M
D
Later,
let's,
let's
table
that
for
a
moment
that
the
ques,
the
petitioner
asked
for
clarification.
A
We
granted
that
I
don't
know
how
much
time
they
have
remaining
for
their
presentation,
jackie.
Q
Q
Property
values
he's
he
suggested
that
there
might
be
possible
negative
impacts.
We
disagree.
Q
With
that
strongly,
we
think
that
the
plans
that
we've
presented
sort
of
counteract
that
point.
Q
Q
Q
Practical
difficulties,
it
seems
to
be
based
on
lot
size,
but
our
particular.
Q
Q
Q
A
J
That
time,
with
the
current
carport,
how?
How
was
that
approved
to
begin
with
just
a
different
time,.
J
In
a
different
place
than
exactly
so
that
the
the
time
that
this
house
was
constructed
and
the.
M
Front
loaded
garage
there
was
not
a
different
setback
for
front
loaded
garages.
There
was
just.
M
One
setback
that
applied
and
the
house
itself
met
that
setback,
the
25-foot
setback
for
a.
M
Front-Loaded
garage
did
not
come
into
place
until
2007,
so
this
was
constructed
well
before
that.
J
Secure
garage
over
really
is
basically
going
to
be
in
the
same
place
as
existing.
J
Structure,
as
I
said,
it's
a
pre-existing
condition
and
I
kind
of
like
that.
J
Depiction
of
it,
what
are
the
objections
aesthetically
can?
Can
you
go
back
and
revisit.
J
Difference
of
interpretation
about
sure.
So,
as
I
mentioned,
the
the
purpose
of.
M
The
setback
requirement
in
the
udo
for
a
25-foot
setback
for
a
front-loaded
garage
was
two-fold.
M
One,
the
minimum
distance
of
25
feet
was
there
to
ensure
that
there
is
enough
room.
M
Between
the
house
and
the
property
line
to
get
at
least
a
car
in
there,
so
that
you're
not.
M
M
As
you
know,
if
you
drive
down
a
street,
imagine
driving
down
a
street
and
if
the
first
thing
you.
M
M
M
Of
the
house
and
the
front
loaded
garage
is
set
further
back
so
that
yeah
and-
and
I
remember.
J
I
recall
those
discussions
about
snot
houses,
but
again
I'm
kind
of
thinking
about.
J
Looking
structure
at
the
angle
that
it
is,
it
does
not
appear
to
me
to
be
in
violation.
J
As
the
code
was
intended
to
to
prevent,
you
know
things
eyesores
or
what
have
you
from
developing.
J
Petition
that
they
would
bring
forward
if
they
wanted
to.
I
I'm
trying
to
get
clarification.
J
And
I'm
not
really
great
at
asking
these
questions
being
new,
but
help
me
out
here.
What
are
we.
A
A
That
would
support
granting
the
variance,
so
we
would
need
to
look
at
what's
been
presented
to
us.
A
And
understand
what
about
this
circumstances?
What
about
this
circumstance
and
you've
already.
A
A
Build
build
that
evidence
build
those
findings.
So
let
me
just
ask
a
question
just
to
further.
A
Clarify
to
the
petitioners,
can
you
can
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
why
you
want
this
has
to
why.
A
Q
Q
To
have
room
for
an
accessibility
ramp
for
our
future
and
for
her
parents
present.
A
Okay,
but
eric
just
as
a
clarification,
the
only
the
only
issue
that
we're
looking.
A
M
A
Okay,
well,
I
have
another
question:
if
this,
if
the
carport
was
built
in
1952,.
G
A
Even
take
down
the
existing
carport
yeah
so
that
that's
that's
an
unknown.
You
know
if
we.
M
The
hpc
to
review
this
everything
has
to
work
concurrently.
So
you
know
your
granting
of.
A
Yes,
susan,
do
aging
in
place.
Considerations
have
any
merit
or
bearing
on
a
request
for
a
variance.
J
What
we
can
and
cannot
do
here
with
respect
to
the
appeal
being
made.
J
Yeah,
so
so
the
the
petition,
that's
before
you
for
a
variance.
You
know
the
comp
plan
is
not.
M
M
M
What
is
unique
about
this
property?
Not
necessarily
the
house
or
you
know,
a
broader
goal
within
the.
M
Community,
but
what
is
unique
about
this
specific
property?
So
you
know
that's
that's
what
is.
M
D
Aging
in
place
is
not
a
peculiar
circumstance,
so
it
doesn't
apply.
That
would
be
the
same
as.
D
D
Purposely
designed
so
so,
certainly
it
is
unique
to
the
property
that
where
the
building
is.
M
M
M
So
I
I
know
this
is
difficult
that
may
be
parsed
a
little
bit.
I
think
there
in
the
language.
D
D
It
wasn't
built
on
later,
and
it
was
designed
at
the
time
when
it
was
allowed.
M
Is
this
front
letter
and
your
question
a
business,
a
front
loaded
garage.
D
Question,
madam
president,
which
is
let's
say
that
if
this,
if
this
variance
is
denied.
D
Already
override
that,
no
those
are
two
separate
things.
M
A
So
that
it
splayed
away
from
incoming
traffic,
would
would
could
those
be
construed
as.
A
A
A
But
that
it
is
a
dead-end
street
seems
to
me
that
that
the
architect
did
not
point
the
garage
to.
A
The
to
the
west
on
purpose,
they
pointed
it
to
the
east
so
that
it
would
obscure
the
car.
A
Which
does
kind
of
speak
to
the
whole
purpose
of
the
code?
To
begin
with,
to
try.
A
And
mitigate
what
we
consider
less
attractive,
you
know
front-facing
garages
that
come
at
you.
G
If
you,
if
you
will
architecturally
speaking
so
in
terms
of.
J
J
J
A
singular
house
there
on
the
block
that
was
built
with
the
carport
and
not
an
enclosed
garage.
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
And
we
are
the
only
still
the
only
carport
in
the
neighboring.
In
my
our
written
statement,
I.
Q
Q
M
A
A
They
were
when,
in
you
know,
typically
than
when
they
were
depending
on
the
car.
It
goes
both.
A
A
There
was
a
peculiar
condition
related
to
that.
Potentially,
okay,
I
have
another
question.
A
And
this
is
a
udo
question
eric
until
the
udo
change.
Was
it
not
possible
to.
M
A
Required
a
variance
correct
yes,
so,
prior
to
that,
this
wouldn't
have
required.
However,.
M
Community
to
regulate
these
structures
even
further,
so
that
could
go
either
way
right.
A
I
wanted
you
to
speak
to
that
actually
yeah
about
the
decision
to
make
that
change.
Since.
M
Was
a
specific
amendment
that
was
brought,
I
I
believe
by
a
council
member
piedmont,
smith.
M
As
the
reason
for
that
okay-
thank
you
that's
helpful.
Yes,
susan.
J
Okay,
okay,
any
other
any
further
questions
for
the
petitioners
or
or
eric
at
this
point.
A
Okay,
see,
none
will
go
to
the
public
for
any
comments.
Do
we
have
anybody
here
from.
R
No
one
on
facebook,
okay,
thank
you.
So
then
I
don't
know
how
much
time
the
petitioners
have.
A
Remaining
they
got
about
one
minute,
okay,
so
you
have
one
minute.
If
you
have
any
further.
Q
Q
Q
A
D
Streak
alive,
no,
I'm
not
gonna,
I'm
not
gonna
move
it.
I
have
a
question
if
that's
all
right.
J
Before
with,
if
we're
able
to
craft
some
sort
of
reasonable
conditions
or
variances
here,.
M
M
D
A
Well,
frankly,
just
just
to
say
that
it
that
the
orientation
of
the
of
the
existing
garage.
D
Eric
do
you
need
him
to
to,
or
can
we
just
well
we'll
need
to
write
something
up,
so
you
do
not.
M
Have
to
state
it
here,
but
in
your
findings
of
fact,
that
will
need
to
be
written
up.
L
D
D
The
entrance
of
the
street
and
towards
the
dead
industry,
so
it
is
already
mitigated.
So
I.
D
Floppy,
do
you
want
to
add
some
additional
language
or
voice,
because
it
is,
it
is
a.
H
I
also
want
to
note
that
it
appears
that
we
need
to
address
number
two
as
well,
not
just
the.
A
H
Peculiar
and
that
it
does
not
affect
adjacent
property
in
an
adverse
manner.
M
M
Streak,
it
does
address
condition
2
in
relation
to
the
use
and
value
of
the
adjacent
area,
because.
M
View
is
not
of
the
garage
space
so
that
that
does
address
number
two.
Okay.
D
D
Angle
of
garage
and
the
facing
of
the
road
plus
the
idea
that
the
expansion
is
not
going
to.
D
Actually,
the
the
taking
it
out
of
further
compliance.
That
is
not
going
to
be
an
adverse.
J
D
Ready
for
a
second,
I
think
we
have
enough
finding
okay,
I'll
just
give
you
a
second.
A
D
D
Supporting
this,
this
request
for
variance
they
can
actually
achieve
a
major
part
of
what
they.
D
D
How
aesthetically
it
meets
what
the
udo
is
trying
to
do,
and
I
think
that
they
have
a
very.
D
Garage
door
and
that's
why
I
was
a
little
kind
of
short
of
saying
yes
or
no
is
it?
Is
it.
D
Front-Facing,
that's
that's
the
reason
why
I
think
that
we
need
to
grant
this
variance.
I
think.
D
That
there's
enough
of
a
question
and
enough
other
evidence
in
our
findings
that
would.
D
A
What
the
unique
circumstances
for
this
property!
It's
interesting
to
think
about
the
historic.
A
A
The
new
garage
are
wanting
to
to
honor
that
original
design
intent
from
putting
my
my.
A
My
historic
preservation
hat
on,
however,
what
the
owners
are
doing
is
is
basically.
A
A
To
the
house,
and-
and
so
I
I
well,
I
understand
the
the
architectural
argument
and
honoring.
A
The
the
original
idea,
that
of
how
it's
configured
from
a
strictly
preservationist
point
of
view.
A
Impact
that
it
has
for
people
on
the
street,
I
do
really
think
that
there
is.
A
The
variance
and
the
fact
that
it's
two
feet
not
ten
feet
also
makes
a
difference.
It's
a.
A
It's
a
pretty
small
amount
that
makes
the
the
the
garage
more
practical.
A
Please
vote
please
so
the
motion
that
is
on
the
table
from.
M
Kind
of
discussed
here
so
I'll
start
with
mr
throckmorton.
Yes,.
M
Clapper,
yes,
okay,
the
variance
is
approved,
good
luck
and
thank
you
and
we.
A
Will
have
to
work
afterwards
to
finalize
that
language
yeah
so
I'll
write
that
up.
M
And
we'll
send
that
to
you
barry
to
review
when
we
send
the
findings
form
for
your
signature.
A
Okay,
we
are
on
to
v
dash
26-20
ace,
318
llc
staff
report.
Please.
R
All
right,
thank
you,
sorry,
this.
This
petitions
for
the
property
located
at
318,
east.
R
West
and
east
are
all
in
the
same
district.
The
property
directly
to
the
south
is
in
the
rh.
R
Residential
high
density
district,
the
property
received
a
site
plan
approval
for
a
mixed-use.
R
R
R
A
minimum
of
roughly
10
percent
of
the
proposed
7
300
square
foot
ground
floor.
R
So
it
came
out
to
be
about
757
square
feet
to
be
used
for
any
permitted
non-residential
use.
R
That
was
allowed
by
again
by
planning
commission
to
be
non-residential.
They
would.
R
Is
residential
and
the
20
feet
behind
rule
would
not
be
met?
The
petitioner
is
requesting.
R
Residential
or
the
non-residential
unit,
so
with
that,
the
recommendation
there's.
R
The
use
and
value
of
the
area
in
adjacent
properties
is
not.
R
And
then
there
are
no
practical
difficulties
found
in
the
results
of
a
peculiar
condition
on.
R
Surrounding
properties
to
the
east
and
west
support
commercial
uses
in
the
supply.
R
R
Along
ground
floors
of
buildings
facing
public
roads
within
the
downtown,
this
is
a
kind
of
a.
R
R
However,
the
pandemic
is
not
unique
to
the
property
and
the
variance
again
is
not.
R
A
Thank
you,
ryan
petitioners,
representative.
S
Hi,
my
name
is
tim
cover
with
studio
3
design,
just
representing
the
petitioner
ace.
S
S
Ryan
for
running
through
everything-
I
know
it's
been
a
long
evening
for
everybody,
so
I'll,
try
and.
S
Run
through
it
quickly-
and
you
know,
save
the
best
for
last
year,
so
this
particular
variance
again.
S
We
are
talking
just
from
a
scale
standpoint,
the
757
square
feet.
It
represents
27
feet.
S
Of
frontage
along
third
street,
the
current
third
street
elevation
has
two
other.
S
Units
along
third
street
that
are
full
ada
units
that
was
unique
for
this
location.
S
S
At
this
location
and
be
a
two
bedroom,
which
is
you
know,
adding
to
the
mix.
S
I
guess
that
would
be
allowed
or
available
in
the
area
staff
went
through
and
gave
their.
S
Recommendations,
as
you
know,
or
aware,
under
a
variance,
there
are
basically
three
criteria
that.
S
Are
being
weighed
against
the
first,
one
on
approval
is
not
going
to
be
injurious
to.
S
Public
health
or
safety
staff
did
agree
that
there
is
no
problem
there.
The
second
finding.
S
Or
or
item
to
be
considered,
the
use
and
value
of
the
areas
adjacent
to
the
property
will
not.
S
S
But
the
third
item,
looking
for
a
peculiar
particularity
to
this
particular
site.
S
In
question
that
had
a
practical
difficulty
staff
disagreed,
they
did
note,
I
will
say.
S
Kind
of
in
general
four
items,
one
was
that
the
city
had
previously
granted
a
reduction.
S
But
just
to
be
clear
that
wasn't
a
give
me
at
the
time
the
owner
committed
to
150
000
to
the.
S
S
Of
the
bike
parking
on
site
covered
and
long
term,
the
second
item
that
was
presented
was
that.
S
Throw
the
the
letter
up
here
kind
of
throw
that
in
the
middle
here
and
enlarge
a
little
bit.
N
S
Basically,
I'll
just
I'll
read
it's
a
short
letter,
my
name,
we
do
see
it
tim.
You
do
see.
S
It
okay,
so
basically
mike
is
just
pointing
out
that
he
was
a
previous
owner.
He
had
extreme.
S
Challenges
in
leasing
commercial
space
at
the
look
at
this
location
shortly
after
purchasing
the.
S
S
S
Tenant
was
very
difficult,
if
not
impossible,
so
just
want
to
share
that
letter
with
you.
S
You'd
rather
bring
up.
S
And
so
that
was
as
far
as
commercial
retail,
basically
that
the
location
has
had
difficulty.
S
S
Location
you're
talking
about
an
office
user
you're,
not
really
gonna
with
that
or
a
very.
S
Small
retailer,
but
again
you
don't
have
parking
to
support
it.
There
is
unfortunately,
currently.
S
Talking
about
a
a
small
space
competing
against
a
lot
of
existing
established
retail
space.
S
And
then
it
also
has
no
parking
and
it
has
limited
pedestrian
traffic
at
that
location.
So.
S
S
S
S
That's
an
easy
solution
and
why
pay
rent
we're
gonna
work
from
home
and
save
the
money.
S
So,
what's
unique
from
a
covid
standpoint
here
again
is
just
the
the
size
of
the
space.
S
S
A
Thank
you
tim
we're.
We
are
back
to
the
commission
for
questions.
R
So
no,
the
the
primary
objection
isn't
that
it
can't
be
reverted
back.
It's.
R
A
Yes,
cassandra
thanks
ryan.
I
know
that
stick
with
me
here
for
a
second,
I
understand
that.
H
Some
of
this
may
not
be
relevant,
but
I'm
going
somewhere
else
with
it
in
2017
when.
H
R
I
think
I
may
have
phrased
it,
I
mean
poorly,
I
guess
what
I'm
saying
is.
Would
they
have
allowed.
H
Wanted
10
of
it
for
his
own
office,
they
could
have
if
they,
yes,
they.
If
that
was
something
the.
R
Plane
commission
wanted
to
grant
a
waiver
for
that
would
have
been
allowed
at
the
time.
Okay,.
R
Was
never
requested.
Yes,
sorry
you're,
further,
saying
that
if
it
had
been
requested
that
they.
D
A
Explain
the
process
by
which
the
50
went
to
the
10
percent
originally.
A
When
that
approval
came
through
plan,
commission
sort
of
how
that
was
done
so
there
there
was.
R
Previously
there
was
a
process
in
which
planned
commission
had
the
ability
to
make.
R
Adjustments
or
waivers
to
to
site
plans
to
allow
things
outside
of
strict
application.
R
Made
and
so
one
of
the
things
they
proposed
to
do
was,
as
tim
mentioned,
the
affordable
housing.
R
Addition
to
that
fund
and
and
other
of
the
ada
use
for
the
other
two
units
so.
R
So
things
like
that
they
would
be
allowed
to
make
adjustments.
Okay,
could
you
just
speak
a.
R
We
have
it,
especially
in
the
downtown
the
big
one
is
generally
walkability.
R
R
R
I
said
it
slows
down
traffic,
it's
also
just
the
downtown
is
where
commercials
uses
are
so
it.
R
G
The
commercial
I
mean
this
has
been
established
in
the
downtown.
G
Multi
residential
places
are
requested
to
have
commercial
spaces
in
the
front
in.
G
The
first
floor,
and
if
they
have
any
residential,
it
has
to
be
20
feet.
G
Had
some
dealings
with
affordable
housing-
and
he
explained
also
the
solar
panels
and.
G
To
have
10
only
10
percent
of
a
commercial
space
in
because
they
have,
they
already
have.
G
A
Yes,
okay,
so
a
couple
couple
items
number
one:
this
owner
the
current
owner
ace.
S
Purchased
the
building
and
the
and
the
project
from
the
previous
owner
mike
brahms
in
2019,
so.
S
All
of
the
approvals
that
happened
and
they
request
to
go
from
50
to
10,
occurred.
S
With
a
different
owner,
and
so
now
that
ace
llc
is
the
current
owner,
they
inherited.
S
Solar
and
everything
else,
so
they
are
staying
in
compliance
and
honoring
all
the
things.
S
That
were
agreed
to
originally,
but
what
they
are
finding
is
all
right.
We
have
a
very
small.
S
He
has
no
interest
in
being
there
now
he's
sold
the
building,
so
you
have
a
new
owner.
S
That
I
understand
is
affecting
everyone
and
agree
with,
but
on
the
other
hand,
is.
S
Very
much
geared
towards
a
small,
very
small
tenant
and
you
are
at
a
location
where
there's.
S
No
parking
for
commercial
there's,
no
parking
required
for
commercial
in
the
in
this
location.
S
S
H
S
S
S
Will
somebody
pull
their
blinds
at
you
know,
times
of
the
day?
Absolutely
it's
you
know,
they're.
S
Living
in
there,
but
the
as
a
even
a
retail
space,
this
is
raised
slightly
from
the
street
level.
A
This
is
currently
in
construction,
correct.
Yes,
it's
currently
the
building's
demolished
at.
D
This
point,
the
this
building
is
gone
and
and
they're
working
on
making
a
new
building.
So.
A
A
No,
so
it's
it's!
It's
really
not
about
that!
So
much!
No,
the
the
coronavirus!
I
just
brought
that.
S
Into
the
mix,
because
it's
listed
as
a
reason,
the
question
was
for
ryan.
Oh
I'm
sorry,
yeah,
sorry.
R
You
know,
but
it
was
not
this
specific:
it's
not
specific
to
the
correct
okay,
okay,
so
the
building.
S
Is
considered
by
the
owner
to
be
slim
based
on
the
amount
of
retail
space
based
on
all
of.
A
S
If
I
can't
you
should,
can
you
share
the
plan
because
I
can't
oh,
is
it
not
showing
this
yeah?
I.
A
S
S
Okay,
it's
a
elevation
up.
S
So
I'm
sorry,
are
you
seeing
the
elevation?
We
are
okay,
so
the
area
in
question.
S
Is
behind
these
columns
here?
It's
this
glass
storefront
zone
through
here
and
here.
D
S
It's
permit
parking,
that's
all
permit
parking
there
down
through
the
street
here
just.
R
D
Yeah
and
may
I
ask
a
question
about
the
parking
is:
not,
is
there
not
any
designated
parking
on.
S
What
we
could
fit
on
site-
and
so
there
is
as
part
of
the
original
petition
force,
four.
S
H
S
And
I
only
say
that,
because
each
each
version
opens
a
new
can
of
worms
yeah
so.
M
M
Really
stuck
with
what
was
shown
and
approved,
so
the
the
small
signs
of
the
commercial
space.
M
A
A
The
commission
for
action-
I
I
just
want
to
say
to
start
off
the
conversation
anyhow.
A
The
mixed
use
buildings
having
a
commercial
facade
and
slipping
a
residential
use
behind.
A
A
Third
street,
so
there's
really
a
conflict
with
all
that
glass
and
a
residential
use.
A
Potentially
this
to
me
seems,
I
don't
know
premature,
and
so
I
move
denial
of
v
dash
26-20.
A
I
second
okay,
and
can
you
just
state
what
the
could
you
more
fully
state
you
said?
Did
I
I'm.
D
At
the
right
at
the
right
lease
rate
in
the
downtown
area,
there
is
actually.
D
In
my
opinion,
based
on
my
experience,
there
is
a
lack
of
this
type
of
space
for
business.
D
Owners
like
myself,
who
need
a
smaller
space,
and
so
I
agree
with
what
the
udo
is
trying
to
do.
D
In
order
to
provide
these
spaces,
the
question
then
becomes:
is
it
rentable
based
on
the
cost,
but.
D
Third
street,
with
similar
spaces,
all
the
way
back
towards
walnut
on
that
street.
So
that's
why
I'm.
D
H
That
the
20-foot
rule
is
is
a
good
rule
and
that
we
don't
want
residential
right
on
the.
H
Street,
especially
with
a
lot
of
visibility,
I
also
agree
with
the
petitioner
with
regard
to.
H
A
Any
further
thoughts,
if,
if
not
we're
ready
for
a
vote,
so
I
just
want
to
make
clear
that
joe.
M
Your
motion
is
to
adopt
staff's,
proposed
findings
and
deny
this
petition,
so
just
so,
everybody's.
M
Clear
a
yoast,
a
yes
vote
is
for
denial,
yes,
based
on
being
chastised
earlier
by
jackie,
dating.
D
M
Yes,
clapper,
yes,
the
petition
is
denied.