►
From YouTube: 6-4-20 Plan & Zoning Commission
Description
Des Moines Plan & Zoning Commission meeting via teleconference on Thursday, June 4, 2020.
Help us caption & translate this video!
https://amara.org/v/C1UX9/
C
C
A
D
D
C
C
D
E
E
C
D
B
F
A
E
C
E
E
C
C
E
C
And
we've
already
approved
a
minute.
So
thank
you
very
much
content
item
number
one
request
from
airport
development
else
be
represented
by
Amy,
south
review
and
approval
of
AB.
You
see
my
dated
at
six
thousand
Park
Avenue
to
allow
development
of
a
six
point:
five,
three
acre
site
for
fifty
seven
thousand:
seven
hundred
twenty
square
foot
flex
warehouse
buildings
in
accordance
with
the
airport,
Commerce
Park,
West,
easy
conceptual
plan
requirements.
If
you're
anyone
would
like
to
hear
is
this
item
from
the
Commission.
C
E
C
Two
item
number
two:
requests
from
the
village
of
Grayslake,
represented
by
Jason
Grove
for
review
and
approval
a
PUD
final
development
plan
village
at
Gray's
lake
lot,
three
for
property
located
at
2584
drive
to
allow
renovation
of
the
existing
three-story,
1634
squares,
office
buildings
and
required
site
improvement.
Is
there
anyone
is
online
who
wishes
to
qualified
up
we'd
like
us
to
hear
it
again
raise.
A
C
C
E
C
C
A
Will
page
make
a
comment,
please
on
number
seven
absolutely
well
I'm
glad
that
the
city
agreed
to
install
the
medical
at
the
mechanical
equipment.
Screening
I'm
on
the
new
facility
for
the
municipal
service
center
I
think
it'd
be
difficult
or
commissioners
on
planning
zoning
to
improve
other
mechanical
equipment
screening
on
private
property
owners.
If
they,
if
the
city
doesn't
act
as
a.
C
E
G
C
C
B
C
C
A
C
F
C
E
E
C
B
A
E
F
E
C
A
Yes,
madam
chair
Eric,
Lundy
senior
city
planner,
this
items
about
a
half
acre
property
west
of
the
drink,
University
campus
on
34th
Street,
just
north
of
University.
If
you
see
the
gold
outlined
property,
it's
just
south
of
another
set
of
row
type
dwellings
and
this
project
exceeds
to
integrate
and
do
the
same
type
of
arrangement
due
to
the
narrowness
of
the
property.
So
they
are
orient.
A
Orienting
units
towards
the
common
private
drive
between
those
two
buildings,
chair
of
only
the
end
unit,
would
have
a
entrance
facing
34th
Street.
So
that's
why
you
have
the
item
numbers
see
on
the
on
the
appeal,
because
the
design,
standards
or
road
type
dwellings
would
require
that
each
unit
face
of
primary
screen
front.
So
that's
that's
one
of
the
considerations
here,
so
you
can
see
the
photos.
This
is
the
existing
unit
to
the
north
and
then
the
on
the
area
on
the
left
is
where
the
new
units
would
be
develop.
A
The
driveway
shall
be
designed
to
mimic
the
appearance
of
a
street
to
the
satisfaction
of
the
planning
administrator,
including,
but
not
limited,
to
parallel
parking
and
retreat,
and
then
revision
of
the
site
planning,
in
accordance
with
other
administrative
review,
comment
again.
The
recent
middle
has
not
been
looked
at
I.
Believe
they've
probably
made
some
revisions
to
to
come
into
conformance
with
a
couple
of
these
things,
but
we
need
to
make
sure
that
that's
meeting
the
intent
of
our
recommendation.
A
A
A
A
A
D
A
A
A
E
C
E
C
C
B
C
D
F
A
C
C
A
C
C
C
Staff
does
not
believe
that
is
compliant
with
the
code
and
is
recommending
denial
of
the
request
for
a
six-foot
fall.
Would
privacy
fence
that
would
be
solid
along
those
particular
areas
of
the
yard
that
are
in
the
front
yard
area
best
addressed
work
with
the
applicants
to
find
some
alternative,
but
I'll.
Let
the
applicant
explain
why
they
did
not
feel
that
those
met
the
rationale
behind
why
they
want
to
expect
Falls.
C
C
A
Right,
could
you
go
back
to
the
aerial
photo
or
their
plan
that
shows
where
they
would
like
to
install
the
fence?
Could
you
show
what
we
had
recommended
or
provided
to
them
as
an
alternative
with
the
mouse,
just
kind
of
show
where
we
had
proposed
that
the
six-foot
wooden
fence
should
should
be
certainly.
C
So
bastard
were
with
the
applicants
with
a
couple
of
different
recommendations.
There
is
I,
don't
know
if
you
can
actually
see
that
little
line
that
I
just
drew
in,
but
that
would
be
approximately
where
the
applicant
would
be
allowed
to
put
a
football,
would
been
in
the
she
yard
is
about
23
feet
back
from
the
property
line.
C
E
A
Okay,
so,
like
she
noted
it's
a
very
unique
property,
our
backyard
is
in
the
yard,
and
so
we
aren't
afforded
the
privacy
of
most
people's
backyard
because
our
backyard
goes
straight
up
against
his
street.
You
know
people
just
order
one
or
two
trees
on
their
back,
so
we
have
an
issue
with
pedestrians
accessing
our
yard
notice.
A
I
was
commonly
kid
like
to
cut
through
our
yard
because
they
can
use
it
as
a
shortcut
to
go
between
Plainview
and
Cottage
Grove,
so
they're
jumping
our
fence.
Yes,
concerns
that
they
could
injure
themselves
jumping
off.
Then
we
have
concerns
where
they've
gone
into
our
yard.
While
our
dog
was
out,
and
then
we
also.
D
A
G
A
And
then
also
people
stopping
because
we
maintain
our
yard
well
they'll,
stop
and
just
tear
their
take
their
time
to
rest
and
just
loiter
it
in
that
space
back
there
and
staring
how
to
find
it
in
the
yard
on.
So
it
doesn't
allow
us
to
enjoy
the
space
in
regards
to
the
setback.
That's
proposed,
I
think
they
said
it
was
23
feet.
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
E
A
This
is
very
one
thing
and
I
guess
some
comments
for
the
board
to
think
about.
I,
live
and
Beaverdale
and
trust
me.
We
have
a
lot
of
unique
properties.
Unique
situation
happen
to
have
a
house
three
homes
down
for
me
that
goes
from
Street.
The
street
has
a
back
here
at
six
foot
fence.
However,
they
installed
it
like
Mike
suggested
where
it
was
not
all
the
way
out
to
the
sidewalk.
A
You
know
they
we
just
at
the
same
time,
we've
got
to
be
careful
that
one
of
the
knocks
on
suburb
is
they
got
fences
out
to
everything
and
everything's
kind
of
off
and
I.
Don't
know,
there's
got
to
be
a
right
answer
in
the
middle
here,
but
I'm
curious
to
see
what
other
conditions
the
applicant
sends.
Our
area.
E
A
I
agree
with
Gregoire
da
I
think
if
you're
in
the
public
realm
you're
walking
down
a
public
street,
it's
very
awkward
to
have
a
fence
that
is
right
next
to
where
you
want
it's
uncomfortable.
That's
why
we
have
the
regulation
that
we
do
know
that
we
don't
want
that
fully
screened,
then
right
next
to
you
or
in
that
front
yard.
That's
why
we
have
so
I.
A
You
know
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
they
want
to
enjoy
their
rear
yard,
but
on
the
other
hand,
it
looks
like
to
me
that
it
was
too
lot,
so
it
could
have
been
too
lot
and
somebody
just
had.
It
is
one
lot
and
it
really
is
the
front
yard
to
clean
view,
and
they
just
happen
to
have
a
great
deep
lot,
but
it
has
it
two
front
yards,
and
so
they
I
think
there's
only
need
to
treat
them
as
two
front
yards.
A
A
A
A
Compromise
where
maybe,
if
we
could
have
a
defense
but
not
have
it
back
to
the
hole
25
feet.
This
is
Greg
what
he
a
I'm
I'm
on
Google
Earth,
a
nice
to
it.
You're
saying
the
house
to
the
west
of
you
on
the
back
side
appears
to
be
a
little
bit
more
modern
home
it.
It
setback
deeper
than
the
one
two
away
and
three
away
yeah,
quite
a
bit.
A
A
A
Of
some
particular
height
at
some
particular
instead
back
with
the
code,
allow
a
in
the
offense
of
that
the
property
owner
good
model
and
care
for
the
front
part
basis
plane.
You
drive
yes
well.
This
is
Michael
Eric
planning
administrator,
yes
suite.
We
did
point
that
out
that
they
could
put
a
gate
in
the
in
the
fence
at
the
front
yard
setback
to
allow
them
access
to
that
yard.
A
Not
used
to
it,
so
this
is
okay,
two
or
three
houses
down
on
cleaned
view,
where
a
tall
fence
that
was
almost
all
the
way
up
to
the
sidewalk
it
it
uses
like
a
privacy
barrier
between
the
two
neighbors,
so
it
doesn't
run
on
a
block.
But
if
you
go
to
the
next
picture,
you
can
be
taller
than
my
wife,
so
she's
about
5'4.
It's
pretty
small
sense.
There.
A
Madam
chair,
if
I
could
just
ask
the
applicant,
it's
Michael
living
playing
administrator
again
the
photos
that
show
the
the
wood
fence.
As
you
can
see,
under
our
old
code,
we
did
had
requirements
that
the
fence
had
to
drop
down
in
height
when
it
got
into
the
front
yard.
The
applicant
said
that
a
shorter
fence
was
not
acceptable
in
the
front
yard
because
of
their
dogs
and
people
looking
into
the
yard.
A
So
we
wanted
to
allow
them
the
right
to
have
the
full
eye
fence,
but
certainly
under
our
old
code,
a
six-foot
fence
was
never
allowed
in
the
front
yard
this.
That
example,
that
was
just
on
there
with
the
picket
fence
I
mean
that
would
be
a
fence
that
would
be
allowed
in
a
front
yard,
but
it's
only
three
feet
in
height
and
it's
not
entirely
solid,
there's
pickets
on
the
fence.
A
That
would
be
the
difference
there
and
then
the
other
issue
is:
we've
adopted
a
new
code,
I
can't
speak
to
permits
and
whatever
for
each
fence,
that's
shown
whether
permits
were
acquired,
but
we
certainly
have
a
new
code
in
one
of
the
things
we've
tried
to
address
in
this
new
code
is
the
presence
of
and
kind
of
the
street
presence
properties
in
trying
to
address
the
architecture
houses
on
those,
as
well
as
fences
in
front
yards.
So
again
that
was
that
was
where
the
staff
had
come
from
in
their
recommendations.
A
B
A
Don't
have
much
to
say
on
that
one
other
piece
that
does
commander
the
uniqueness
of
this
line
is
that
it
not
shutting
through
in
the
middle
of
the
street,
so
I
only
visually.
If
you
were
coming
down
playing
you,
it
would
just
look
like
my
direct
neighbors
that
was
just
kind
of
the
end
of
the
block.
A
It
wouldn't
be
like
obscuring
a
view
down
a
lane,
because
we
do
turn
right
right
at
that
corner,
and
then
there
is
another
there's
a
tall
chain-link
which
again
because
your
code
has
updated
I,
understand
that,
but
there's
a
tall,
chain-link
fence
which,
because
that
yard
difficult
taller
winds
up
being
about
four
and
a
half
feet
above
the
sidewalk.
That
is
just
to
be
I'm.
Eased
of
my
property.
So
again,
I'm
not
obscuring
a
view
of
anything.
By
putting
this
thing.
A
A
I'd
be
curious,
this
is
Greg
watching
again
the
applicant
did
sort
of
allude
to
or
indicate
they
might
be
willing
to
do
a
setback
for
a
six-foot
tall
fence
that
aligns
not
with
the
adjacent
home,
but
the
home
may
be
one
over
to
the
west
and
I
I.
Don't
really
know
what
looking
at
Googler
that
might
be
half
of
it.
Okay,
quite
tell
I'm,
guessing
10
15
feet,
ish
curious.
If
the
board
would
have
any
thoughts
on
that
there's
a
confidently
Greg,
just
as
Greg
Joan
I
was
thinking
10
or
15
feet.
A
C
A
C
A
A
E
C
A
C
B
C
B
C
E
A
A
B
A
Chair
members
of
the
Commission,
so
this
is
you'd-
seen
the
rezoning
on
this
recently.
So
it's
a
very
large
site
expands
across
the
southeast
14th
Street
Viaduct,
which
is
in
this
area.
The
eastern
portion
here
is
owned.
I
to
the
western
portion
of
the
west
of
the
viaduct
is
i1.
Mostly
over
here
would
be
trackage.
A
A
A
There
challenge
due
to
the
death
north
to
the
south
and
to
get
the
maneuvering
function
of
all
the
truck
maneuvering
that
would
occur
on
both
sides
of
the
building,
so
that
one
of
the
first
wave
of
item
a
is
the
waiver
of
the
loading
to
allow
the
loading
in
the
front
yard
area
and
then
design
alternative
B
is
to
allow
the
overhead
doors
to
face
down
toward
East
ml
King
jr.
Parkway.
A
A
A
Proposing
a
sidewalk
right
here
all
the
way
to
the
west
edge
of
the
site,
but
it
stops
at
southeast
15
intersection.
Their
intent
is
to
get
it
over
to
the
crossing
at
the
intersection
so
that
pedestrians
can
get
south
across
East
ml
King
jr.
and
gets
to
the
multi-purpose
trail
on
the
south
side
of
these
developing.
A
A
A
Then
I
think
I
will
go
down
to
well.
Let's
go
back
to
this
one.
So
then
the
other
piece
is
the
requirement
to
get
a
pedestrian
connection
that
has
the
main
entrance
into
the
facilities.
As
you
can
see,
the
proposed
parking
to
the
west
for
the
people
that
would
access
the
main
entrance
to
the
facility
on
a
regular
basis
of
we
think
that
the
quickest
route
would
be
something
through
this
area.
Can
you
see
the
crosshairs
of
the
cursor
that
would
cross
over
here
and
then
get
south
again
to
the
ticket
this
crossing
right
here?
A
They've
also
agreed
to
put
the
landscaping
around
the
enclosure
that
you
see
and
G.
In
the
first
paragraph,
there
were
three
sides,
so
that's
a
and
I
believe
they've
also
indicated
there.
They
would
agree
to
separate
pedestrian
entrance,
which
is
an
ass
which
I
just
mentioned,
and
then,
if
I
can
get
to
the
landscaping.
F
A
A
Well,
I'm
going
to
zoom
in
on
this,
so
the
typically
because
of
the
amount
of
paint
area
it
triggers,
what's
called
the
firm
frontage
buffer
along
where
paint
areas
front
the
public
streets,
they
are
doing
an
extensive
amount
of
landscaping.
However,
they
are
not
proposing
through
the
berm
or
fencing
and
in
lieu
of
it,
they're
just
doing
significant
landscaping
item
five
that
you
put
on
the
consent
tonight
include
area.
A
A
We
can
go
directly
to
again
I'm
gonna,
let
them
percent
the
other
bit
of
the
other
thing.
I
forgot
to
show
you
just
what
the
elevation
their
of
their
overhead
doors.
So
these
are
the
boughs
elevations,
so
you
can
see
that
they're
putting
loading
docks
in,
but
they
still
have
a
significant
detail
and
transparency
up
above
on
higher
portions
of
the
building.
Given
the
scale
of
the
building,
we
did
waive
the.
A
A
So
this
is
the
staff
recommendation.
We
are
recommending
approval
of
the
design
alternatives
in
items
a
and
B
with
regard
to
the
overhead
doors
to
the
south
and
parking
and
loading
in
front
of
the
building
along
East
ml,
King,
jr.,
Parkway
and
in
item
G
for
the
waiver
of
the
free
landscaping
element.
A
Then
that
would
be
subject
to
compliance
with
any
administrative
review
comment
of
like
plan
by
the
permanent
development
center
vacation
of
the
necessary
furnish
buffer
planting
area.
That
was
on
item
five,
that
you
recommended.
Approval
of
that
will
go
to
the
Council
for
vacation
organ,
then,
provision
of
additional
landscaping,
trees
and
shrubs
plantings
in
the
open
space
area
between
the
West
parking
lot
and
the
South
loading
area
to
the
satisfaction
of
the
planning
administrator
not
going
to
dip
back
up.
Then
to
that
to
get
point
out
what
we're
talking
about
there.
A
So
if
you
see
the
on
the
screen,
I'm
going
to
scroll
down
a
little
bit
and
it's
only
it
only
at
a
close
level,
it's
only
showing
up
or
a
portion
of
it
and
then
I'll
zoom
out
again
or
go
to
a
different
page.
But
this
area
of
right
here
on
the
west
edge
of
the
loading
dock
area,
there's
opportunity
for
additional
tree
planting
and
still
stay
out
of
the
maneuvering
area
of
the
loading
function
going
through
coming
through
this
driveway
over
here
and
then
going
to
the
south
entrance
loading
entrances.
So.
F
A
A
C
A
A
Eric
I'm
I
want
to
make
sure
I'm,
looking
at
my
notes
here
with
what
you
just
detailed
and
I'm,
going
to
try
to
follow
with
what
you
said
here,
but
please
feel
free
to
interrupt
me
if
I'm,
not
tracking,
this
correctly
I'm
gonna
skip
past
a
and
B,
unless
we
need
to
talk
about
that
in
your
opinion,
Eric
and
start
with
B,
which
is
the
waiver
of
payment
requirement
for
the
railroad
service
road.
So
our
stand
on
this.
A
Additionally,
if
we
were
to
pour
concrete
next
to
the
our
railroad
tracks,
we
have
extremely
heavy
equipment
that
will
very
infrequently,
but
it's
very
heavy
equipment.
That
would
be
utilizing
this
service
road
that
was
and
what
we're
being
told
you
just
destroy
these
road.
So
the
last
piece
that
I
want
to
make
sure
the
Commission
is
clear
about
from
our
position
on
this
is
that
this
is
going
to
be
extremely
infrequent
utilization
of
this
service
truck.
A
A
What
we
are
proposing
and
what
we're
very
agreeable
to
in
Eric,
if
you
can,
can
you
go
to
slide
two
and
zoom
in
a
little
bit
for
me?
Please
so
there's
an
existing
sidewalk
that
dead-end
on
about
these
12
right
there,
exactly
so
from
a
a
30,000
foot
view
on
this
facility.
We're
constantly
designing
and
stressing
safety
at
all
times,
and
so
what
we
don't
want
to
do
is
encourage
a
lot
of
pedestrian
or
extra
or
unnecessary
pedestrian
traffic
yeah
in
a
heavily
in
a
heavy
industrial
zoned
area.
A
We're
gonna
have
meaningful
truck
traffic
train
traffic,
heavy
equipment,
loaders,
forklifts,
and
so
our
goal
is
to
not.
You
know
encourage
a
lot
of
humans
walking
around
there,
so
what
our
solution
is,
we
believe,
makes
a
lot
of
sense
is
to
go
from
southeast
12
to
our
main
entrance
at
southeast
15
and
cross
MLK
to
the
north
in
this
existing
wonderful
sidewalk,
slash
bike
path
and
the
same
argument
can
be
made
in
our
opinion
for
connecting
the
sidewalk
from
South
East
15,
all
the
way
to
South
East
18.
A
We
just
don't
want
to
encourage
a
lot
of
pedestrian
traffic
in
this
heavily
heavy
heavy
industrial
zoned
area,
and
we
really
don't
think
it
makes
sense
to
have
a
sidewalk
on
southeast
18,
which
would
lead
directly
to
9
train
tracks
in
addition
to
that,
there's
no
sidewalk
on
the
other
side
of
those
train
tracks.
So
what
we
do
have
is
a
perfect
sidewalk
on
the
south
side
of
em,
okay
and
we're
just
simply
trying
to
connect
existing
infrastructure
to
that.
A
Regarding
the
internal
sidewalk
from
southeast
15
to
our
office.
It's
the
same
argument
from
us,
which
is
we
don't
want
to
encourage
pedestrian
traffic.
This
is
going
to
be
a
high-visibility
best,
hardhat
safety,
glasses
area,
and
we
just
can't
control
pedestrian
traffic
coming
in
and
out
of
an
area
like
that.
We
very
strongly
view
this
as
a
significant
safety
problem
with
our
facility
II
waiver
pedestrian
connection
from
primary
knives.
Talking
about
that,
Eric
I
think
you
may
have
misspoken
on
F,
which
is
pedestrian
access
to
the
trash
enclosure.
A
We're
agreeable
intend
to
comply
with
that
for
the
record.
There
I
was
wondering
if
that
was
concluded
in
what
you
were
indicating
earlier
yeah,
so
we're
grateful
to
the
pedestrian
access
to
the
trash
enclosure
gee.
This
is
multifaceted,
so
they're
probably
going
to
be
a
couple
people
on
our
team
who
addressed
this
with
me:
waiver
of
landscaping,
requirements
for
screening
for
trash
enclosure,
area
interior,
a
lot
landscaping,
dimension,
loading
stalls,
berm
frontage
buffer.
A
We
are
agreeable
and
kind
of
complies
which
I
believe
you
stated
area
earlier,
Eric
with
the
screening
for
the
trash
enclosure
area,
the
interior
lot,
landscaping
I.
Think,
please!
You
know
you
set
up
well,
which
is
this:
just
logistical:
II
doesn't
work
with
trucks
pulling
in
and
out.
You
know,
we'd
be
destroying
certain
things
there.
The
area
that
you
did
point
out
directly
to
the
south
of
our
office.
We
are
agreeable,
tend
to
comply
with
whatever
the
city
would
like
to
be
there
from
additional
planting
standpoint.
A
One
of
the
things
I'd
like
the
Commission
to
understand
is
that
for
this
site
we
meet
all
the
plan
requirements
for
the
frontage
buffer
on
the
street
trees
along
MLK
and
in
general
we
exceed
the
requirements
by
30
percent.
So
we
have
gone
big
time
above
and
beyond
on
the
landscaping
for
a
number
of
different
reason.
A
A
So
this
is
the
view,
the
east
view
and
I.
This
was
done
by
genius,
landscape
architecture
and
I.
Think
you
can
see
it's
a
pretty
robust
landscaping
plan
and
Eric.
Can
you
go
to
the
next
slide?
Please
more
of
the
same
here.
This
was
a
design
that
was
approved
by
the
Urban
Design
Review
Board.
We
had
lots
of
feedback
from
that
board
on
on
this
design
and
we
did
take
that
feedback
into
design
round
two
of
our
urban
design
review
board
process.
A
A
A
A
A
C
A
F
A
Paul
I'll
do
my
best
to
address
it
from
a
design
standpoint.
Here,
we've
got
significant
constraints
throughout
the
entire
facility
in
our
civil
engineers.
They've
done
an
outstanding
job.
Coming
up
with
these
solutions.
To
me,
this
is
simply
the
logistical
constraint
that
was
our
best
to
work
with.
A
A
And
you're
topping
out
on
me
I,
do
repeat
that,
because
they're,
what
they're
proposing
is
it
does
the
proposed
plan
does
not
dimension
or
identify
the
loading
space
and
distinguished
from
the
maneuvering
areas.
So
are
they
gonna?
Do
that
or
not
yeah
and
I
thinking
was
gonna?
Have
Gabe
answered
that
South
Gate
would
respond
to
that?
A
Yeah,
so
the
the
deficiency
on
the
plant,
this
is
Erik
lending
again.
The
deficiency
on
the
plan
that
was
submitted
was
not
showing
the
area
between
the
loading
spaces
and
then
or
the
maneuvering
is
to
occur
and
delineating
that,
on
the,
if
it
might
just
come
down
to
pavement
markings
I,
don't
think
you're
missing
this
necessary
distance.
A
D
A
A
A
So
the
deficiency
this
is
Eric
Wendy
against
the
deficiency
would
be
just
marking
that
you
are
achieving,
that
the
loading
space
dimensions
and
providing
the
adequate
of
track,
maneuvering
and
I
don't
know
if
throwing
a
template
on
that,
you
know
make
you
know,
make
that
obvious
or
because
you
do
have
the
drive
passing
through
at
the
south
edge
as
well.
So
there
does
need
to
be
some
clearance
to
make
sure
that
the
two
wake
or
the
drive
traffic
and
also
get
through
this
hey
Eric.
This
is
Paul
County,
will
agree
and
comply.
That.
A
A
Well,
there's
existing
sidewalk
leading
up
to
South
East
12th
Street,
which
is
off
screen
there.
You
go
well,
that's
right
there,
okay,
so
so
what
we're
proposing
is
connecting
to
that
sidewalk,
but
following
exactly
where
Erica's
cursor
stopping
right
there
on
the
dropping
where
it
came
through
14
on
that
boosting
up
right,
where's,
Kirsten,
okay
and
then
kind
of
putting
in
a
crossing
or
pedestrian
crossing
right
exactly
they
would
connect
to
the
existing
sidewalk
flashback
bike
path
on
the
south
side
of
them.
A
A
A
The
the
walk
would
then
also
continue.
East
I,
don't
even
know
if
the
design
detail
for
that
is
that
detailed.
This
is
really
coming
from
the
move.
Dsm,
Complete
Streets
initiative
to
get
all
died,
walk
on
all
sides
of
the
site
along
public
street.
Certainly,
there's
adequate
Ryan
away
to
make
that
happen.
A
G
A
F
A
A
To
bring
your
pride
to
the
east,
there
is
no
sidewalk.
Is
that
what
I'm
hearing
was
that
your
question?
Will
yes,
yeah
so
yeah
that
what
they
did
not
build
it
along
the
two-lane
section
going
east
again,
Greg
asked
the
question
whether
there
was
intention
to
have
it
on
the
north
side
of
the
when
they
build
the
full
build
of
the
four-lane,
divided
and
I.
Don't
believe
that
detail
is
is:
is
that
it's
not
that
detailed?
Yes,
the
build-out
of
the
four-lane
divided
is
in
the
long
term
program,
but
again,
I.
C
A
Approval
subject
to
that
condition
of
that
landscaping,
south
of
the
main
entrance
Mike.
My
concerns
to
to
the
Commission
my
concerns
would
see
is
that
if
we
pay
something
that's
running
along
those
railroad
tracks,
it's
going
to
promote
the
public
who
shouldn't
be
on
there
on
there
and
the
gravel
would
so
much
be
a
deterrent
from
people
talking
next
to
train
tracks,
the
supporter
of
sidewalks,
except
when
they,
you
know,
create
challenges
like
bringing
people
into
construction
areas
in
industrial
areas,
and
then
we've
had
a
lot
of
that.
A
Come
in
front
of
us
and
I've
never
been
supportive
of
that,
and-
and
he
also
I
just
don't
see,
bringing
people
into
heavy
equipment
area.
So
that's
kind
of
my
thoughts
on
everything.
Are
you
wanting
me
to
respond
that
I?
Could
one
thing
that
could
be
a
interim
solution
is
rather
than
full,
paving
with
asphalt
or
concrete
just
maintaining
it
with
the
dustless
material
like
wrap,
recycled
asphalt
product
instead
of
white
rock
gravel
that
gets
dusty?
A
We
do
we
do
ask
for
that
in
storage,
outside
storage
areas,
where
they're
not
maneuvering
vehicles
all
the
time
but
they're.
But
if
you
don't
want
to
have
a
non
durable
surface,
so
the
recycled
asphalt
product
works.
So
that
would
be
an
interim
possibility.
Given
your
concern.
So
in
fact,
is
it
a
durable
product
as
if
the
applicant
pretty
much
explained
that
it's
going
to
be
having
equipment
going
down
that?
Do
it
down
that
path?
A
Yeah,
it
would
be
more
pliable
in
that
you
know
when
break
up
like
a
hardened
asphalt,
pavement
or
PCC
Portland
cement
pavement.
So
it
would
just
go
on
top
of
what
they're
already
they're
having
to
build
the
strength
underneath
with
the
gravel
material
just
to
support
vehicle
using
the
road.
But
this
would
be
on
top
of
that
to
keep
the
dust
down
I'd
like
to
ask
the
applicant,
if
they'd
be
open
to
that.
E
A
Yeah,
you
guys
just
amusement
thanks
Rocky
my
kind
of
comments,
flash
answers
that
is,
our
goal
is
to
stay
within
industry
standards
with
the
railroads
and
industry
standards
are
gravel
for
a
number
of
different
reasons.
We
had
number
two
there's
going
to
be
very
infrequent
use
of
this,
so
this
isn't
going
to
be
trucks
up
and
down
it
all
day,
every
day
of
creating
dust
and
problems,
for
you
know,
essentially
an
area
it's
surrounded
by
storm
water
detention
pond.
A
So
even
if
this
was
a
dusty
area,
it's
not
impacting
anything
in
my
our
minds,
other
than
storm
water
detention
ponds,
for
which
this
entire
area
of
our
facility
is
surrounded
thanks,
Paul,
I
you
know-
and
I
think
the
other
thing
I
go
back
to
aragon-
that
is
right.
It
deter
people
from
driving
I.
Don't
think
people
necessarily
want
to
take
the
cars
on
gravel.
A
There
I
wouldn't
think
this
would
be
used
by
anything
other
than
railroad
maintenance
service
vehicles.
So
yeah
I
agree
with
you
on
that,
but
I
don't
think
that
that's
that
intended
users
of
that
service
road.
So
I
guess
you
know
I'll
let
I'll!
Let
you
the
Commission
I
was
just
throwing
that
as
one
of
the
solutions
that
we
suggest
in
the
cases
where
we
don't
end
up
with
bulking
high
preciate
it
thank.
A
Yeah
I'm,
okay,
with
be
leaving
it
gravel,
just
an
opinion
railroads
do
that
though
I
tend
and
on
D,
because
I
don't
know
what
proposed
the
city
didn't
put
in
on
a
sidewalk.
There
isn't
a
sidewalk
to
the
east
I,
don't
think
we
should
make
them
do
that
at
this
point,
so
I'm,
okay
with
them,
leaving
that
off.
However,
on
funny
I,
you
know,
I
I,
just
think
that
we
need
to
connect
up
our
office
spaces
public
talks
and
there
might
be
somebody
in
there
who
wants,
take
a
walk
and
so
I
I.
A
D
A
A
To
approve
staff
recommendations
for
items
a
and
B
inclusive
of
conditions,
one
two
and
three
for
items:
C,
recommend
approval
of
item
C,
I,
think
that's
the
gravel
one
item
B
that
the
applicant
provides
the
sidewalk,
as
was
explained,
I,
think
it's
between
12th
and
15th
and
then
crossing
over
the
street.
A
sidewalk
and
signaled
solution.
A
In
either
actually
withdrawing
there,
okay,
thank
you
and
then
item
G
I,
think
it's
just
them
showing
III,
don't
know
if
there's
a
denial
or
approval,
it's
just
that
they
need
to
provide
dimensions
and
get
approval
from
staff
and/or.
The
planning
administrator
and
they've
agreed
to
that.
So
that's
where
I
could
probably
consider
that
withdraw
okay,
so.
C
C
E
E
C
D
C
Determination
as
to
whether
the
request
is
second
amendment
for
the
Brooklyn
D
puz
conceptual
plans,
informant
with
the
plan
DSM
creating
our
twelve
Prince's
plan,
our
B
second
amendment
to
the
Brooke
plan.
These
use
the
conceptual
plan
to
define
the
property
at
55
Kenworth,
you
Avenue
with
standards
for
development.
C
D
Yes,
madam
chair
members
of
the
Commission
for
garage
planner
for
this
to
be
at
the
point-
and
this
item
is
really
a
two-part
appeal
or
a
good
part
request.
They
are
wanting
to
amend
the
PUD
conceptual
plan
for
this
property
and
then
also
have
the
site
plan
approval
so
back
in
2016,
the
Commission
in
the
City
Council
rezone,
the
Brooke
landing
PUD
and
it
established
a
single-family
development,
but
also
designated
7.5
acre
parcel
beef
for
our
160
uses,
including
churches
school,
so
really
established
four
years
ago.
D
D
Really
up
for
debate
this
here
is
this
beauty
conceptual
plan
and
now
on
your
screen.
This
is
proposing
really
they're
not
proposing
to
radical
of
changes.
They're
just
trying
to
establish
the
architectural
character
for
the
church,
and
here
is
what
they're
proposing
for
the
dirt
I
know.
The
labels
are
probably
kind
of
small,
but
it's
predominantly
brick
and
horizontal
metal
siding,
and
we
have,
when
I,
get
to
a
recommendation.
D
D
Now
the
views
looking
east
and
then
this
is
looking
north
and
northeast
from
the
intersection
of
East
54th
Street
and
Brooke
Landing.
As
a
40th
Avenue,
our
staff
recommendation,
which
was
provided
to
you,
we
do
recommend
approval
a
for
a.
We
find
that
the
proposed
second
and
M
into
the
brook
landing
beauty's
informative
plan,
DSM
Part
B.
D
Yeah
yeah
yeah.
They
agree
with
our
recommendation,
but,
as
you
can
see
on
this
map,
we
had
several
cards:
oh
okay,
come
back
in
opposition
and
I'll
leave
these
up
here
or
I'll
scroll
through
slowly.
So
if
you
guys
have
any
questions-
and
that
would
be
a
good
time
to
ask,
while
I
flip
through
these
commenters.
G
D
The
missing
PUD
conceptual
plan
established
the
uses,
but
instead
that
any
future
development
on
parcel
B
shall
be
subject
to
an
amendment
to
the
PUD
conceptual
plans,
so
that
site,
layouts
and
building
architecture
can
be
reviewed,
got
it.
So
really,
it
was
just
to
review
this
building
architecture.
C
D
C
A
Good
evening
honorable
chair
members
of
Commission,
my
name
is
Wally
pail
with
help
design
services,
23
23
Dickson
Street
des
Moines,
Iowa
503,
one
six
I
appreciate
you
guys
taking
the
time
as
as
Burke
mentioned
before
we
were,
we
were
anticipating
being
on
the
consent
agenda,
because
there,
the
use
of
hardship
and
approved
I
understand
that
there's
the
traffic
concerns
that
were
brought
up
on
the
cards
which
we
are
sensitive
to.
However,
as
we
go
through
that
site
planning
process,
I
believe
we
can
address
all
the
traffic
turns,
because
what
we
do
have
to
do.
A
A
full
full
site
plan
application
and
in
traffic
has
looked
at
it.
We've
done
our
pre-op
meeting,
mostly
I,
think
it
was
more
informative.
I
know
we
mailed
out
the
list
that
we
got
was
254
mailings
that
went
out
to
the
neighbors.
We
can't
have
that
neighborhood
meeting
and
I
personally
did
in
any
responses
to
only
the
cards
were
the
ones
that
came
back.
A
A
You
to
do
I'm
sorry
of
traffic
Travis
been
require
you
to
do
an
actual
traffic
study.
I,
don't
believe
that
that
has
been
requested
as
of
yet
due
to
the
fact
that
we're
just
doing
the
phase
one,
the
I
believe
we
discussed
somewhere
along
the
way
we
every
Church
likes
to
grow,
and
we
like
to
plan
for
growth
and
I.
Don't
know
if
you
can
go
back
to
that
site
plan
bird
you
can
see.
We
do
have
a
conceptual
phase
to
kind
of
light
it
up
in
there.
A
We
would
have
a
second
entrance
coming
off
of
East
54th
court,
so
that
would
give
us
more
circulation.
But
at
this
point
we
are
not
a
large
parking
lot
which
which
that
would
that
would
trigger
a
traffic
impact
study,
I'm
happy
to
address
it
with
a
technical
bulletin
or
whatnot.
We
we
can
definitely
take
a
look
at
it,
but
in
our
in
our
opinion,
it
did
assess
it
ate
it
and
I.
Don't
think
that
your
traffic
engineers
believe
that
it
cities.
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
Commission.
A
E
C
C
E
B
C
G
B
E
E
E
C
C
D
Yes,
madam
chair
members
of
the
Commission
Berg
garage
planner
for
the
Des
Moines.
Hopefully
my
microphone
doesn't
cut
out
this
time.
Like
I'm
the
last
item.
The
request
really
is
to
allow
the
single-family
house
to
be
converted
back
to
a
two
family
house.
This
is
a
unique
situation
and
that
this
is
actually
built
as
a
duplex
that
was
later
converted
to
a
single-family
dwelling.
D
So
the
subject
property
is
located
along
the
south
side
of
Victoria
Drive,
just
to
the
west
of
30th
Street
and
30th
streets,
the
streets,
a
comes
north
out
of
the
great
university
campus.
There
is
an
existing
duplex
on
the
property
immediately
to
the
west
and
not
the
driveway
before
they
duplex
cut
across
the
subject
property,
as
you
can
see
from
the
aerial
here's
a
photo
of
the
house
as
it
appears
today,
and
it
was
built
as
a
duplex
with
side
by
side
units.
D
So
there
was
a
wall
down
the
middle
and
they
are
intending
to
reestablish
that
wall.
Here's
another
view
of
the
properties,
and
then
this
is
just
looking
down
the
driveway
that
winds
back
to
the
other
duplex
in
the
area
and
then
the
subject
or
this
guest
shows
how
the
house
would
be
divided
back
up
is
the
two
falling
units.
D
And
our
staff
recommendation,
we
found
that
the
two
family
dwelling
would
be
compatible
with
the
low
density
residential
designation,
applied
to
the
property
by
plan
dsm.
We
did
feel
that
it
was
in
keeping
with
the
density
that
is
appropriate
for
the
area.
It's
a
fairly
large
parcel,
so
we
felt
that
it
could
easily
handle
two
dwelling
units,
so
we
have
recommended
approval
already.
We
find
that
the
rezoning
to
add
the
to
be
found
in
conformance
of
plan
DSM
and
then
Part
B.
D
We
recommend
approval
of
the
rezoning
so
long
as
any
two
household
uses,
in
conformance
with
the
provisions
applicable
for
either
house
type,
C
or
house
type.
C
and
again
the
applicant
does
agree
with
our
conditions
really
only
not
on
the
consent
agenda,
because
we
have
some
neighbors
in
opposition
I
believe
there
might
be
one
or
two
on
this
teleconference
today.
That
was
what
to
speak
in
opposition.
D
D
D
E
G
We
in
regards
to
speaking
to
the
babydoll
neighborhood.
We
did
reach
out
a
couple
months
ago
to
speak
with
them.
I
I
do
have
a
card
from
them.
If
you
guys
would
like
me
to
read
it.
Basically,
they
are
in
support
of
the
project.
If
the
surrounding
neighbors
aren't
supporting
the
project
as
well,
I
didn't
get
a
support.
A
call
couple
calls
from
various
neighbors,
one
of
which
was
in
support,
Tracy
Smith
living
at
three
one,
one,
seven
Victoria
like
Bert,
said
earlier.
This
was
originally
difficult
to
as
a
duplex.
G
Our
intent
is
just
to
take
it
back
to
its
formal
former
duplex
to
send
the
duplex.
We
did
do
a
minor
renovation,
we
put
it
up
for
sale
as
a
single
family,
it
did
not
sell,
and
so
we've
decided
that
really
the
highest
and
best
use
or
our
investment
company
in
the
neighborhood
is
to
turn
it
back
into
a
duplex.
G
E
E
C
A
Neighborhood
of
people
who
owned
the
homes
in
which
they
live,
and
at
that
time
there
were
only
three
structures
in
the
one
black
square
area
that
were
rental,
including
the
3116
property
currently
of
the
29
structures.
In
that
same
one
block
area,
beam
of
them
our
rental,
which
is
over
50%
in
which
the
owner
lived
elsewhere.
A
Many
of
the
rentals
are
owned
by
investment
firms
or
LLC's
like
anchor
investment
group,
which
is
the
firm
proposing
this
rezoning,
the
house
at
3116,
as
has
been
stated,
was
originally
a
duplex,
the
owner,
converted
it
into
a
single-family
home
at
least
20
years
ago,
and
lived
in
it
until
one
evening
when
he
died
in
the
home.
It
was
sold
to
anchor
at
that
time
by
his
estate
when
it
was
a
single-family
home.
A
It
was
the
nicest
house
in
the
neighborhood
and
still
would
be
if
it
was
the
single-family
home
just
west
of
3116
across
that
driveway
is
a
house
at
31:22
victoria,
which
historically
was
also
a
wonderful
home
until
it
became
a
riddle
in
2007.
That
house
was
assessed
at
152
thousand
dollars
that
year
it
was
sold
to
an
investment
firm
and
became
a
rental
by
2013.
A
A
A
It
became
vacant
about
eight
months
ago
and
piles
of
old
carpet
and
discarded
household
goods
were
added
to
the
back
of
garbage
to
the
left
there
for
a
month
until
I
called
neighborhood
inspectors,
and
it
got
cleared
up
currently
that
house
is
still
sitting
empty
yard.
Son
mowed
the
retaining
wall
has
collapsed
and
the
house
was
sold
at
a
sheriff's
sale
in
February
of
2020.
F
A
Property
management
firms
such
as
acre
the
neighborhood,
does
not
need
more
rental.
It
means
more
stable
family
owner-occupied
home
I
realized
that
the
question
before
the
Commission
is
not
whether
the
house
becomes
the
rental,
but
whether
how
many
rental
units
can
become,
and
although
one
more
unit
may
not
sound
like
much,
it
is
one
more
than
this
neighborhood
me.
Thank
you
for
your
attention
and
consideration.
E
G
Yes,
please
I
would
just
urge
the
board
that
there
are
some
unique
considerations
with
this
particular
property.
I
was
originally
built
a
duplex.
It
is
somewhat
of
an
awkward
layout,
it's
in
the
sense
that
they
just
removed
the
center
wall.
That
is
one
of
the
reasons
why
this
didn't
so
when
it
was
on
the
marketplace
most
of
our
investments.
We
do
in
fact
sell
to
single-family
home
owners.
We
do
keep
a
minority
share
of
our
of
our
development
projects
and
in
the
nor
Holding
Company,
and
so
with
the
awkward
layout
and
the
shared
driveway.
G
We
just
believe
that
both
for
our
company
and
for
the
neighborhood
that
it's
better
off
being
a
duplex
than
a
single
family
in
particular.
If
we
can't
sell
this
property,
we
would
have
an
intention
of
keeping
it
a
single
family
rental
and
we
just
think
the
higher
and
better
use
for
the
property
is
it
turned
it
into
a
duplex
in
this
situation?
That's
all
I
have
okay.
A
G
A
G
Did
it's
a
fully
brick
exterior,
so
we
wouldn't
be
doing
a
whole
lot
with
the
exterior
of
the
house.
We
would
have
to
do
some
mechanical
work
in
the
interior
and
that
separation
wall,
as
I
mentioned
previously,
we
would
like
to
add
some
parking
in
the
rear
of
the
house,
because
there
will
be
additional
parking
as
a
duplex.
A
Noticed
in
this
photo
that
the
six-foot
fence
comes
up
in
Toronto
part
of
the
court
up
to
the
front
of
the
building
and
I
think
on
the
plan.
You
show
that
that
original
entrance
was
on
that
side,
I
believe
it
is
or
whatever.
So
is
it
your
intention
to
remove
that
six-foot
fence,
so
you
can
actually
see
what
a
third
door
is
for
unit
2,
but.
G
We
would
actually
be
keeping
that
fence,
it
does
have
the
gate
on
it.
Actually,
we
have
a
tenant
that
would
like
to
move
in
and
they
would
actually
like
to
do
raised
garden
beds
there,
and
so
they
they
would
actually
prefer
that
we
depends
so
that
they
don't
have.
You
know
rabbits
and
raccoons
eating
through
their
garden.