►
From YouTube: 8-19-21 Plan & Zoning Commission
Description
Des Moines Plan & Zoning Commission meeting on Thursday, August 19, 2021.
A
I'm
not
on
sorry
welcome
to
the
plan
and
zoning
commission
meeting
I'll,
read
the
rules
and
procedures.
The
planning
zoning
commission
is
generally
an
advisory
body
to
the
city
council.
The
city
council
will
hold
a
public
hearing
and
make
the
final
decision
on
all
matters
before
the
commission
other
than
the
site
plans
and
subdivision
plats.
Unless
denials
or
conditional
approvals
thereof
are
appealed.
A
A
A
B
A
Excuse
me:
rezoned
property
from
mx3
mixed-use
district
to
cx
mixed
youth
district
to
bring
the
existing
large
format
retail
sales
use
into
a
zoning
district.
That
is
more
in
line
with
the
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance
for
the
use,
including,
but
not
limited,
to
accessory
outdoor
sales
with
kiosk
and
canopy
for
vehicular
pickup
of
online
purchases.
A
Item
number
two
is
request
from
deborah
dard
for
review
and
approval
or
type
2
design
alternative
for
property
located
at
2908
53rd
street
to
allow
construction
of
a
320
square
foot
detached
garage
in
the
rear
yard.
That
would
be
within
two
feet
of
the
south
side:
property
line
where
a
five
foot
minimum
setback
is
required.
A
Item
number
three
is
a
request
from
mckee
auto
center
for
review
and
approval
of
the
following
for
property
at
4131
and
4141
east
14th
street.
A
is
determination,
whether
it's
in
conformance
with
plan
dsm
b,
is
an
amendment
to
plan
dsm
to
revise
the
future
land
use
classification
for
the
property
from
community
mixed
use
to
industrial
and
c
is
rezoned
property
from
mx3
b
mixed
use
district
and
I
won
the
industrial
district
to.
A
A
A
Okay,
unanimous
so
before
we
continue
to
the
public
hearing
items
item
number
five
has
requested
a
continuance
to
the
september
second
meeting
I'll,
read
that
one
and
that's
a
request
from
best
foodmart
for
type
2
design,
alternative
and
denied
type
1
design,
alternatives
on
property
located
at
4028
east
14th
street
to
allow
expansion
of
a
commercial
cottage
building
type
for
retail
sales,
limited
use
and
fueling
station
there.
Anyone
here
that
wishes
to
have
this
item
heard
this
evening.
A
D
A
D
Gracias
on
her
birthday,
that's
kind
of
her
so
item
number
four
is
a
request
for
a
site
plan
at
3201
30th
street,
the
requesting
waiver
of
the
requirement
to
underground
utilities
located
at
the
northwest
corner
of
the
building
the
subject.
Property
is
an
apartment
complex,
located
on
the
east
side
of
30th
street
kind
of
in
between
douglas
avenue
to
the
north
and
hickman
road
to
the
south.
It's
on
a
steep
hill
if
you're
familiar
with
this
area
here
is
the
site
plan
they're
wanting
to
they've
requested
waiver
of
the
burial
of
utilities.
D
And
here's
a
photo
that
shows
that
line
right
here.
The
applicant
has
provided
estimates
from
mid-american
that
shows
the
new,
where
the
burial
of
this
would
cost
approximately
80
to
100
thousand
dollars.
So
staff
does
see
that
as
a
practical
difficulty
for
them.
So
we
have
our
support
of
the
request.
D
D
D
E
Good
evening,
doug
saltscaper
engineering
resource
group,
2413
grand
avenue
des
moines
civil
engineer
on
the
project.
All
those
costs
that
we're
just
talking
about
are
not
specifically
to
mid-american
energy,
only
a
small
part
of
it,
because
this
building
was
many
decades
old
and
for
mid-american
energy's
requirements.
We'd
have
to
set
a
new
transformer
which
they
and
they
classify
this
as
a
new
service.
E
E
E
So
and
because
some
of
the
tenants
currently
have
leases
that
last
well
into
the
future,
the
owner
would
have
to
buy
out
those
leases
and
relocate.
Those
tenants
and
construction
duration
is
estimated,
probably
three
to
four
months,
with
getting
every
all
the
different
trades
in
and
out
and
take
everything
taken
care
of.
So
that's
the
reason
for
why
all
this
is
so
expensive.
I
do
underground
that
what
appears
to
be
a
relatively
short
length
of
wire
from
the
pole
to
the
building.
F
E
E
I
think
it's
been
determined
to
be
arson
that
was
heavily
smoke
and
water
damage
that
entire
building
is
being
rehabbed
inside
and
because
of
that,
new
wiring
has
to
be
done,
so
that
one
is
being
is
compliant
with
undergrounding,
we're
putting
in
a
new
transformer
for
that
building,
and
then
we
were
here
a
month
or
so
ago
asking
for
waiver
of
not
the
services
into
that
building,
but
the
primary
lines
run
through
the
site
and
that
was
granted.
However,
I
misunderstood
staff's
write-up.
E
They
were
talking
about
one
building
and
that
needed
to
have
the
services
undergrounded,
and
I
was
thinking
that
was
the
fire
damaged
building
turned
out.
It
was
not.
They
were
wanting
the
subject
building
here
tonight,
the
one
that
no
improvements
are
being
done.
They
wanted
the
utilities
underground
into
that.
So
that's
why
we're
back
here
tonight.
E
G
G
I
was
wondering
if
you
might
consider
upping
that
up
to
have
a
bike
rack
at
each
building,
which
would
be
great
and
there's
really
bad
disrepair
on
the
driveway
that
goes
up
to
building
m
that
could
swallow
sort
of
a
mini
or
maybe
a
vw
bug,
might
consider
that
also
there's
a
serious
water
leak
in
the
parking
lot
in
front
of
building
n.
That's
got
to
be
either
costing
the
owner
money,
at
least
using
a
precious
resource
to
sort
of
water.
G
A
D
All
right,
I'm,
madam
chair
members
of
the
commission
for
dross
planning
staff
for
the
city
of
des
moines
item
number.
Six
is
a
request
for
a
site
plan
located
at
2266,
hubble
avenue.
It
would
allow
for
expansion
of
an
existing
tire
repair
business.
They
are
requesting
four
type,
two
design
alternatives
tonight.
D
So
here's
the
aerial
map
you
can
see
that
there's
an
existing,
auto
repair
business
on
the
property.
Here,
it's
a
unique
site
in
that
it's
kind
of
surrounded
on
three
sides
by
streets.
We
have
hubble
avenue
here
on
the
east
and
south
and
then
cyril
street
to
the
west
they're,
proposing
an
in
addition
to
the
north
side
of
the
building.
Here,
as
you'll
see
from
the
photos,
I'm
about
to
show
you
that
the
existing
building
fronts
hubble
avenue.
So
this
is
looking
at
that
corner
there
of
hubble
avenue
and
cereal
street.
D
You
can
see
the
existing
building
here.
This
is
the
back
side
of
the
building
from
cyril,
and
then
this
is
looking
head
on
from
hubble
avenue.
So
you
can
see
the
existing
building
here.
They
would
improve
that
building
and
then
put
in
addition
onto
the
north
side.
Here
you
can
also
see
this
existing
fence
here.
That
is
the
subject
of
one
of
their
appeals
or
one
of
their
design
alternatives.
D
So
here's
the
site
plan
that
they're
proposing
north
is
to
your,
I
guess,
to
the
upper
right
corner.
So
hubble
avenue
is
across
the
bottom
here,
so
you
can
see
the
existing
building
right
here
and
then
the
proposed
edition,
so
the
four
design
alternatives
that
they're
requesting
one
is
that
fence.
That's
within
the
front
yard
area,
the
new
ordinance
doesn't
allow
for
any
chain-link
fences
in
the
front
yards
of
commercial
properties.
D
The
second
design
alternative
is
to
allow
this
overhead
door
to
be
added
to
the
street
facing
facade
and
staff.
I'll
just
say
now:
staff
is
supportive
of
that
design
alternative
because
there
really
is
no
other
option
on
this
property,
since,
if
it
was
on
the,
if
they
put
the
overhead
door
on
the
back
side,
then
it
would
be
facing
residential
property.
So
we
do
feel
that
having
it
face,
hubble
avenue
is
the
better
alternative.
D
The
second
or
sorry,
the
third
design
alternative
is
they're.
Asking
for
waiver
of
the
transparency
requirement
along
the
front,
facade
they're
required
to
have
65
percent
of
the
facade,
measured
between
two
feet
and
10
feet
or
two
feet
and
eight
feet.
They
need
to
have
65
percent
of
that
open,
but
given
the
nature
of
their
business
with
overhead
doors
and
whatnot
they're
not
able
to
meet
that
and
staff
is
also
supportive
of
that
design
alternative.
D
But
then
their
last
design
alternative
is
to
have
be
able
to
use
vinyl
as
a
primary
material,
both
on
the
front
facade
and
on
the
facades
facing
south
and
to
the
west
and
staff
is
not
supportive
of
that
design
alternative
to
allow
the
vinyl.
But
this
elevation
right
here,
if
you
see
the
cursor,
this
is
the
best
design
or
the
best
elevation
of
the
front
that
would
face
hubble
avenue.
D
You
can
see
the
new
addition
is,
this
taller
portion
would
have
one
large
overhead
door
and
then
the
existing
building
would
have
a
new
door
put
on,
and
then
this
glass
storefront
so
you're
they're
not
meeting
that
65
percent
transparency.
But
we
do
feel
that
they're
making
a
good
attempt
by
adding
that
storefront
here.
So.
D
So
the
staff
recommendation
again
they've
asked
for
four
design
alternatives.
The
first
is
for
the
transparency
requirement.
We've
recommended
approval
of
that.
The
second
is
to
allow
vinyl
as
a
primary
material.
We've
recommended
denial
of
that
one,
and
the
third
is
to
allow
retention
of
the
fence
and
we've
recommended
denial
of
that
one
as
well,
and
then
the
fourth
is
to
have
that
overhead
door
facing
hubble
avenue
and
staff
has
recommended
approval
of
that
one.
D
D
H
D
I
My
name
is
john
collins,
I'm
the
owner
of
the
business.
I
live
on,
305
kenyan
avenue,
the
the
prince.
That's
the
only
thing,
the
siding's
no
big
deal
to
me.
I
can
put
the
hearty
plank
on
there
if
that's
what
they
want.
The
other
garage
is
vinyl
siding,
so
it
would
match
the
other
garage
and
then
the
main
building
is
brick.
I
The
fence
part.
You
know
that
fence
has
been
there.
It's
transparency,
it's
a
see-through
fence
anywhere.
You
stand,
you
can
have
any
view
of
anything
and
the
crime
rate
over
there
is
real
bad.
So,
even
when
I
I
had
a
fire,
I
had
another
garage
where
this
one's
going
and
it
burned
all
the
way
down.
So
I
was
going
to
make
it
bigger.
I
built
it
like
13
years
ago
or
something
so.
I
I
just
need
bigger
for
storage
and
stuff
the
when
the
fence
burnt
down
there's
a
wood
privacy
fence
there
that
came
in
broke
into
my
shop,
it's
just
a
deterrent
of
that
fence
being
there
and
it
don't.
There's
three
lots
there
and
it
only
goes
on
the
two
lots
and
then
that
third
lot
on
the
corner
there,
it
has
no
fence
there,
so
it
wouldn't
be
blocking
no
turning
or
nothing
on
that
that
road
and
besides
that,
that's
all
I
got
to
say
about
it.
I
Vinyl
siding
okay.
I
wouldn't
want
that
to
hang
it
up
if
they
need
the
other
siding,
that's
fine!
You
know.
I
would
really
like
to
keep
that
fence,
though
just
for
my
customers
purposes
and
people
stealing
stuff.
Anything.
That's
outside
that
fence
gets
ran
through
sat
the
fence.
Just
deters
people
from
messing
with
stuff.
I
The
way
I've
understood
they
just
didn't
want
no
fence
there.
They
want
me
to
tear
that
fence
down
that
fence.
Was
there
before
I
even
bought
the
place,
then
on
my
la
I've,
had
it
for
13
years
on
my
last
site
plan
they
approved
to
keep
it
then
now
on
this
with
the
site
plan,
I'm
gonna
have
them
draw
it
up,
they
don't
want
it.
J
D
Our
desires
have
no
offense
there
or
no
offense
over
three
feet
in
height,
at
least
like
we
would
support
like
an
ornamental
decorative
fence.
But
I
don't
think
that
would
do
him
what
wouldn't
serve
the
purposes
he's
wanting
a
fence
for,
but
our
ordinance
would
allow
a
three
foot
tall
fence
in
the
front
yard.
J
D
J
Of
the
other
properties
in
this
neighborhood,
it
seems-
and
I
I
apologize
for
not
being
familiar
as
much
about
this,
but
it
seems
like
there
are
similar
businesses
that
have
similar
security
measures.
How
different
is
this,
or
would
this
be
with
this?
Would
this
be
different
relative
to
their
businesses,
like,
especially
if
you're
going
east
down
garfield
or
if
you're
going
others
don't
we
have
other
businesses
in
there
with
fences.
D
D
D
I
mean
I,
I
think
staff's
recommendation
would
still
be
no
offense,
but
you
could
certainly
entertain
like
if
they
used
a
decorative
wrought
iron
fence.
It
was
something
a
little
more
durable
or
attractive
than
oops
than
the
existing
fence
or
if
it
had
better
posts-
or
I
mean
those
are
things
that
the
commission
could
recommend.
J
The
only
reason
I
push
this
and
I
apologize-
I
I'm
not
I'm
not
convinced
on
the
argument
that
there
is
unavoidable
crime
in
that
area.
At
the
same
time,
if,
if
that
is
a
verifiable
item,
it
does
seem,
you
have
access
to
compromising
his
ability
to
make
it
make
a
living.
If
we're
saying,
there's
no
offense
of
any
any
sort.
I
guess
that
would
be
the
one
thing
I
guess
I
would
hope
we
would
consider
more
that
there
may
be
a
business
impact
here
if
that
is
a
verifiable
right.
J
K
L
L
L
And
the
site,
as
it
sets
today
to
the
north
to
the
north
of
the
site,
is
an
existing
quiktrip
convenience
store.
North
east
of
the
site,
adjacent
to
the
property
is
an
existing
auto
zone
and
there
is
a
to
the
east
directly
as
a
motorcycle
repair
shop
and
then
to
the
south
directly
is,
I
believe,
that's
auto
repair
as
well
and
then
to
the
west
directly
is
a
locksmith
shop.
L
And
so,
as
you
can
see,
the
drive
drive-through
that's
being
presented
is
the
additional
lane
along
this
front,
and
then
they
are
looking
at
doing
the
landscape
improvements
associated
with
that
there
would
be
screening
fats.
They
are
proposing
pedestrian
walk
from
the
facility
out
to
martin
luther
king
parkway.
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
And
so
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
a
type
2
alternative
to
allow
the
the
very
pool
to
the
to
the
very
west
on
hickman
that
travel.
The
line
that
travels
north
towards
quick
trip
to
allow
that
to
be
retained
and
maintained
staff
is
recommending
denial
of
the
type
2
to
allow
the
overhead
line
that
feeds
the
eastern
street
light
from
that
pole
along
hickman
road.
L
L
Staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
request
for
type
2
to
allow
drive-through
on
the
front
facade
of
the
building
to
relocate.
That
would
be
impractical
it
would.
It
would
require
them
to
relocate
the
the
back
of
house
kitchen.
It
would
have
impacts
to
grades
to
the
parking
situation,
so
it
really
wasn't
feasible
in
our
minds.
L
L
Correct
that
that
estimate
was
for
all
of
the
undergrounding,
I
did
reach
back
out
to
mid-american
and
we
discussed
what
what
the
cost
would
be,
and
it's
it's
in
the
range
of
about
half
of
that
75
000
on
the
short
notice.
They
weren't
able
to
give
me
a
finite
estimate,
but
they
they
said
it
would
be
approximately
in
the
range
of
35
40
000.
M
M
E
M
M
We
think
that
adding
the
pedestrian
path
of
travel
from
mlk
is
in
alignment
with
the
city's
desire
to
make
this
pedestrian
corridor
right
now
there
is
no
real
pedestrian
access
to
the
site.
We
think
that
this
upgrade
again
while
an
expense
to
us
is,
is
a
good
improvement
to
the
site
and
to
the
community.
M
M
None
of
the
bus
stops
are
along
the
stretch
of
street,
where
we're
proposing
moving
the
sidewalk
leaving
the
sidewalk,
where
it
is,
is
very
consistent
with
the
sidewalk
on
the
other
side
of
the
street
and
the
other
side
of
the
driveway,
and
we
think
for
just
community
consistency.
It
makes
sense
to
leave
that
sidewalk
in
place.
N
N
J
Yes,
what's
the
breakdown
of
the
twenty
percent
of
understand,
the
numbers
are
identified,
you're
sitting
at
about
ten
percent
for
undergrounding
from
across
mlk.
My
understanding
is
it's
those
single
lines
going
from
one
side
of
mlk
to
those
lights?
Is
that
the
correct
undergrounding
and
is
that
a
10
percent
overrun
on
that?
That's.
N
N
J
Okay,
so
again,
sorry
for
clarification.
So
if
a
one
through
three
b
and
b
are
accepted
and
c
is
denied
with
respect
to
their
recommendations,
you're
saying
that
your
cost
overrun
is
only
10
percent
now,
so,
if
c,
which
is
the
land
which
is
the
sidewalk
stuff?
Yes,
if
that
is
actually
that
waiver
is
approved,
you're
saying
your
cost
overrun
is
only
10.
J
J
I'm
sorry
for
being
slow,
I'm
not
understanding
the
additional
landscaping
piece
here.
So
I'm
seeing
a1
says
they're
saying
recommending
approval
for
a1,
which
means
you
get
to
leave
the
pole
in
the
far
northwest
a2
a3.
As
I
understand
them,
are
two
light
poles
that
are
on
the
west
side
of
nlk
that
have
like
one
string
cross
mlk.
J
M
J
J
L
H
L
The
the
way
the
streetscape
requirement
would
work
is,
you
would
have
essentially
a
imagine
from
curb
to
12
foot
towards
private
property.
All
of
that
would
be
paved.
You
would
have
your
tree
planters
two
and
a
half
feet
from
that
curve,
which
they
would
be
adjusted
to
maintain
the
spacing
needed
you.
You
would
you'd
need
at
least
15
foot
separation
from
that
over
soy
tree
from
that
pole
from
that
plant,
and
so
the
planters
would
be
five
by
15
along
the
edges,
and
so
then
the
sidewalk
itself
would
be
then
six
feet
after
those
planters.
L
J
Has
traffic
weighed
in
on
impacts
of
having
more
tree?
I
mean,
I
guess
I
have
two
questions.
Sorry.
Is
there
an
expectation
that
a
bus
stop
would
be
moving
closer
to
this
intersection,
given
how
busy
it
is
like?
Is
there
any
chance
a
bus
stop
would
go
and
they're
number
one
number
two:
is
there
any
concern
with
the
intersection
with
having
more
trees
along
that
road?
There.
L
Streetscape
is
a
requirement
that
we
we
we
hold
throughout
the
city
when
we
have
instances
where
there
is
whether
it's
a
vision,
clearance
issue
or
whether
it's
a
dot,
clear
zone
or
a
traffic
clear
zone,
they
are
receiving
the
s
site
plan
submittals
for
review
of
that
criteria
and
will
provide
us
feedback.
This
is
one
of
those
instances
where
they
provide
us,
provided
us
with
the
feedback
along
mlk.
Hence
we
are
agreeing
that
the
existing,
concrete
walk
would
remain
and
then,
as
an
alternate
you
would,
we
would
still
get
the
street
trees.
G
D
G
I'm
hoping
that
when
you
do
the
investments
that
you
take
the
time
to
clean
up
some
of
the
and
that
the
commission
would
be
interested
in
talking
to
them
about
cleaning
up
the
old
light
footings
that
have
been
left
behind,
there's
at
least
three
on
the
site,
as
well
as
the
new
monument
sign.
That's
going
in.
G
I
hope
that
they,
when
they
take
down
the
existing
sign
they
consider
taking
down
the
footing
as
well,
so
that
doesn't
remain
like
the
three
light
footings
have
remained
and
also,
if
you
look
closely
at
the
pedestrian,
the
new
pedestrian
cut
through
there,
it
cuts
right
through
the
drive-through
and
while
there
are
truncated
domes
for
the
pedestrians
to
know
that
they're
going
down.
I
didn't
see
on
the
plan
anything
that
indicated
the
drivers
knew
that
pedestrians
were
coming
across
there.
G
It
doesn't
indicate
at
least
I
couldn't
see
how
tall
that
buffer
fence
was,
and
I
just
hope,
there's
enough
line
of
sight
that
the
guys
coming
off
mlk
running
to
get
their
whopper
don't
get
hit
by
the
cars
ordering
whoppers,
and
that's
all
that
I
wanted
to
say
for
you
guys
to
consider.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
M
Thank
you,
I'd
like
to
clarify
one
and
then
just
alleviate
concerns
on
the
others.
Four,
the
drivers
going
through
the
drive-through
we're
more
than
willing
and
happy
to
put
a
sign
in
front
of
the
crosswalk,
which
makes
sense,
alerting
them
watch
for
pedestrians.
That's
a
relatively
easy
and
appropriate
thing
to
do,
and
we'd
be
happy
to
consent
to
that.
Regarding
the
old
light
pole
bases
they
will
either
be
removed.
M
M
I
know
that
there
is
a
note
on
the
landscape
plan
that
notes
new
monument
sign,
that
is
in
error.
There
is
no
new
monument
sign
proposed,
given
the
remodel
that
we're
doing
the
fact
that
we're
not
changing
the
use
of
the
property,
the
fact
that
it
will
remain
in
operation
and
will
not
cease
operation
for
six
months
and
we're
not
changing
the
building
footprint
for
code.
We're
allowed
to
keep
the
existing
pile
on
side
and
we
plan
to
do
to
do
that.
A
A
L
L
K
L
D
D
D
O
Oh
there
we
go,
I'm
sympathetic
to
the
applicant's
request
for
the
not
allowing
them
to
bury
the
underground.
Excuse
me
the
power
wires,
especially
since
we've
already
approved
one
earlier
in
the
session,
taking
into
consideration,
and
I
think
we
need
to
have
flexibility
about
that
and
financial
cost,
and
I
understand
that,
although
it
is
a
franchise,
a
franchisor,
it's
not
burger
king
and
mid-american,
we
waived
the
requirement
for
them
earlier.
I
just
think
it'd
be
consistent
to
take
it
the
entire
financial
package.
We
do
want
to
encourage
development
in
that
neighborhood.
B
I
I
tend
to
agree,
I
think,
they're
doing
a
really
good
job
of
improving
the
property
for
pedestrians
and
car
drivers,
and
hopefully
bikers
so
I'm
I'm
with
you
on
that,
because
I
think
this
is.
This
is
an
improvement
from
what
it
is
right
now
and
I
don't
want
to
discourage
those
types
of
improvements
when
it's
going
to
be
financially
burdensome
to
do
things
like
this.
J
Well,
so
I
guess
that's
I'm
very
curious
on
the
financial
burdensome
piece,
because,
if
we're
looking
at
this
we're
looking
at
a
one
two
and
three,
a
one,
two
and
three
look
at
about
a
twelve
percent
cost
overrun.
One
that
we
approved
earlier
was
at
least
a
15
cost
overrun.
I
don't
know
where
those
boundaries
are,
but
we're
also
talking
about
a
wire
that's
across
mlk.
J
J
The
c
is
the
one
that
I
guess,
I'm
not
completely
convinced
is
one
that
I
guess,
I'm
not
entirely
sure
that
I
agree
with
the
denial
of
the
the
sea
item.
That's
one
where
that
sidewalk
is
working.
That
is
a
video
when
you
walk
through
there.
That
is
a
busy
intersection
with
things
going
quick
anyway,
I
don't
know
if
I'd
want
to
be
closer,
I
understand
we're
going
to
have
a
barrier.
That's
trees
there
for
theoretical
safety.
C
I
tend
to
agree
with
that
assessment
and
I
guess
the
reason
why
I'm
not
as
wild
about
going
with
staff
on
sea
is
because
it
seems
to
me
that
we
have
a
sidewalk
there
and
there,
if
I
understood
correctly,
is
an
option
to
put
trees
on
the
not
in
the
easement
between
the
sidewalk
and
the
street.
But
on
the
other
side
where
the
property
is-
and
I
don't
really
see
the
point
of
putting
more
pavement
in
if
it's
not
needed,
we
need
some
permeable
surfaces.
So.