►
From YouTube: 04-06-23 Plan & Zoning Commission
Description
Des Moines Plan & Zoning Commission meeting on Thursday, April 6, 2023.
View the agenda: https://DSM.city/PZatHome
A
B
C
C
Welcome
to
the
April
6
2023
meeting
of
the
city
of
Des
Moines
plan
and
Zoning
Commission
I
will
start
out
by
reading
the
rules.
The
plan
and
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
site
plans
and
subdivision
plots
unless
denials
or
conditional
approvals
thereof
are
appealed.
C
Please
contact
the
city,
clerk
or
development
services
staff
for
details
on
Council
hearings.
Applicant
will
be
given
10
minutes
to
present
the
request
proponents,
and
then
opponents
from
the
public
are
then
allowed
to
speak
in
that
order
with
each
speaker
allowed
a
maximum
of
five
minutes
applicant
is
then
allowed
five
minutes
for
a
rebuttal.
C
The
hearing
will
then
be
closed
and
the
commission
will
discuss
and
vote
on
the
issue.
All
comments
are
featuring
Jermaine
to
the
item
under
consideration
and
speakers
are
to
maintain
a
courteous
manner.
Items
listed
on
the
consent
portion
of
the
agenda
will
not
be
individually
discussed
and
will
be
considered
for
approval,
in
accordance
with
the
recommendation
in
the
staff
report.
Unless
an
individual
present
or
member
of
the
commission
requests
that
the
item
be
removed
from
the
consent
agenda
and
considered
separately
under
the
public
hearing
agenda.
C
Thank
you
and
now
I
will
read
through
the
consent
items
on
the
agenda
number
one:
a
request
from
Erica
or
Eric
and
Jessica
nybeck
for
review
and
approval
of
the
major
preliminary
Platt
dear
Meadows,
formerly
known
as
nybec
acres,
to
create
six
Parcels
on
24.35
Acres
of
property
located
in
the
vicinity
of
3502
113th
Avenue
in
unincorporated
Warren
County,
which
is
within
the
two
mile
distance
for
review
of
subdivision
Flats
by
the
city
of
Des
Moines.
Is
there
anyone
in
the
audience
tonight
who
would
like
that
removed
from
consent
and
discussed
tonight?
C
Okay,
is
there
anyone
on
the
commission
who
would
like
that
discussed
tonight?
Okay,
seeing
none
that
will
remain
on
the
consent?
Agenda
item
number:
two:
a
request
from
Bridgestone
America's
Tire
operations
for
review
and
approval
of
the
preliminary
Firestone
plot
one
to
allow
for
the
development
of
a
utility
substation
on
a
portion
of
a
79.44
acre
parcel
in
the
vicinity
of
4600
Northwest,
2nd
Street.
Also
an
unincorporated
Polk
County,
also
within
the
two
mile
distance
for
review
of
subdivision
Flats
by
the
city
of
Des.
C
Seeing
none
item
two
will
remain
on
the
consent.
Agenda
item
number
three:
a
request
from
1321
Vermont
Street
LLC
for
review
and
approval
of
a
public
hearing
site
plan,
Copeland
Trucking
for
property
in
the
vicinity
of
1321
Vermont
Street
for
type
2
design,
Alternatives
allow
a
loading
doors
facing
a
primary
Street
and
allow
for
surface
parking
lot
in
a
front
yard.
Is
there
anyone
in
the
audience
tonight
who
would
like
to
discuss
that?
C
Seeing
none
that
item
will
remain
on
the
consent
agenda.
We
also
have
one
item
that
could
be
moved
to
the
consent.
Agenda
item
number
four:
a
request
from
Bradley
mechanic
and
Belinda
mechanic
mechanic
for
the
following
regarding
two
parts:
Parcels
located
in
the
vicinity
of
4700
Southeast,
14th
Street.
C
B
C
If
you
were
here
for
any
of
items,
one
through
four
from
the
consent
agenda,
you're
welcome
to
leave.
Now.
Thank
you
item
number
five
on
the
consent
agenda:
request
from
University
Avenue
storage
for
review
and
approval
of
a
public
hearing,
site
plan,
East,
University
storage
for
property
in
the
vicinity
of
1901
East
University
Avenue
for
a
denied
type
1
design,
alternative
and
Nick
is
here
from
staff
to
percent
cool.
D
Thanks
Madam
chair
members
of
the
commission,
Nick
tarpey
planning
staff,
just
as
Abby
just
said,
we're
just
talking
about
a
fence
tonight.
So
we're
going
to
talk
about
you.
Look
at
a
site
plan.
Look
at
some
site
improvements
that
have
proposed
the
specific
design
alternative
for
debate
tonight
is
offense
height,
so
just
want
to
keep
that
in
mind.
D
D
So
the
site
here
is
highlighted
in
Orange
and
it's
cross
hatched
and
you're
just
adjacently
east
of
the
235
East
University
Avenue
interchange,
we're
really
close
proximity
to
the
East
University
and
Hubble
Avenue
mixed-use
corridors
and
we're
just
adjacent
to
a
residential
neighborhood
just
to
the
South
and
there's
some
like
Legacy
scattered
industrial
uses
in
the
vicinity
too,
so
kind
of
a
unique
edge
condition
and
we'll
ask
or
we'll
talk
about
that.
A
little
bit
later
as
well
just
want
to
show
us
a
few
site
photos.
These
were
taken.
D
D
This
is
just
on
that
same
sidewalk,
just
looking
the
other
way,
a
little
bit
further
east
there's
the
existing
fence
facing
north.
This
is
on
Walker,
Street,
so
I'm
on
the
south
side
of
the
existing
building.
We
got
the
residential
uses
on
on
the
right
hand,
side
here,
and
then
we
got
the
the
site
on
the
left
and
then
here's
Claypool
street.
So
this
is
from
the
corner
of
Claypool
and
Hubble
Avenue,
so
looking
inward
towards
the
site.
So
this
is
part
of
the
side
area.
You
can
see
the
existing
building.
D
In
the
background
there,
here's
within
the
site,
looking
South
so
next
to
the
railroad
tracks
Claypool
street
is
down
here,
got
the
the
residential
uses,
with
my
cursor
highlighted
there
and
just
another
pretty
similar
view
of
that,
so
digging
into
the
site
plan.
Just
so
you
can
visualize
what's
proposed
here,
just
a
quick
backup
refresh
for
people.
There
was
a
site
plan
that
actually
came
up
to
review
back
over
the
summer
so
summer,
months
of
last
year.
D
It's
one
of
those
that
there's
been
a
few
recent
middle
since
that
time,
I
was
actually
approved
by
staff
about
a
month
month
and
a
half
ago,
and
so
they
were
working
to
get
approval.
Basically
in
the
fall
and
the
winter
months
they
did
show
offense
at
that
time.
So
there
was
a
fence
that
was
surrounding
these
Self
Storage
outbuildings.
Here
as
staff,
we
approved
a
five
foot
fence,
so
that
actually
was.
We
did
Grant
some
relief
in
that
way.
The
maximum
is
three
feet,
but
we
did
Grant
up
to
five
feet
at
that
time.
D
The
applicant
has
since
returned
to
us
and
said:
hey.
We
want
to
do
an
eight-foot
fence
as
staff.
We
thought
about
it
and
we
said
we
could
give
you
six,
but
that
would
be
the
highest
that
we'd
be
willing
to
go.
The
applicant
came
back
and
said
we
would
really
like
to
try
for
eight.
So
that's
really!
D
Why
we're
here
tonight,
but
we
have
the
existing
building
here,
which
is
an
existing
self
storage
facility
and
then
the
site,
developments
or
site
improvements
would
be
some
Paving
work
and
then
eight
individual
self-storage
outbuildings
that
would
be
placed
throughout
the
site.
So
these
are
drive
up
type
Self,
Storage
outbuildings,
where
you
would
pull
in
pull
to
your
garage,
get
your
stuff
out,
put
your
stuff
in
and
then
leave,
and
so
as
part
of
our
design
guidelines
as
a
self-storage
facility.
D
That
is
required
to
be
a
fenced
compound,
not
necessarily
like
a
chain
link
fence,
it's
more
of
a
I
guess
more
of
an
Arts
defense
where
you
have
steel
black
tubes
and
then
it's
supported
by
masonry
pillars.
So
not
chain
link
but
it'd
be
a
little
bit
more
artisanal
than
maybe
a
traditional
fence
that
you
might
see
other
places
around
town.
D
D
So
digging
into
the
staff
report
and
recommendation
as
staff,
we
thought
about
it,
but
we
do
not
support
the
request
for
the
eight
foot
tall
fence
going
back
to
the
context
that
I
was
talking
about
earlier,
that
Unique
Edge
condition
Eastern
University
Avenue.
As
you
know,
it's
a
it's
a
major
Crosstown
thoroughfare
to
the
city.
It's
a
multimodal
corridor
as
staff.
D
Actually,
when
we
review
site
plans
that
a
butt
or
that
are
adjacent
to
Eastern,
University,
there's
specific
Street
skate
guidelines
and
those
are
really
designed
to
try
to
promote
a
little
bit
more
of
a
pedestrian-oriented
environment.
Reduce
visual
clutter.
Make
that
make
that
experience
on
the
street
a
little
bit
more
pleasant
if
you're,
walking
or
or
even
driving,
and
so
as
staff,
we
felt
an
eight-foot
fence.
Is
it's
just
a
little
bit
too
tall?
D
G
D
G
D
D
Correct
good
question
that
would
go
away
yes,
so
they
would
remove
that
and
then
they
would
replace
it
with
their
I
think
now
the
existing
fence
is
I.
Think
it's
about
six
feet.
Okay,
I
was
standing
next
to
it
the
other
day,
I'm,
five,
nine
and
it
you
know
it
was
just
a
little
bit
taller
than
me.
Okay,
so
it's
about
six
feet
that
would
go
away
and
they
would
put
that
this
new
steel
masonry
pillars
eight
feet
in
its
place
and.
I
I
J
Hello,
my
name
is
Morgan
Bullen
1901
East
University
Avenue
in
Des,
Moines
yeah,
we're
back
to
ask
for
increased
fence
height
we
to
back
up
on
this
for
a
second
we
own
and
operate
over
65
facilities
across
the
U.S
and
just
recently
underwent
a
bit
of
a
project
and
hired
a
third
party
security
company
to
come
in
and
look
at
everything
that
we're
doing
and
sort
of
pull
together
more
of
a
standard.
You
know
property
crime
and
theft,
unwanted
activity,
it's
it's
up
Nationwide
and
we're
trying
to
mitigate
that
and
prevent
that.
J
We're
aware
that
there's
issues
that
have
been
happening
at
this
site,
partly
because
the
fence
right
now
is
so
easy
to
break
into
it's
just
chain
link.
People
can
show
up
and
cut
right
through.
So
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
continue
to
improve
the
property,
continue
to
improve
the
area,
keep
unwanted
activity
out
and
just
overall
increase
the
security.
So
we
we
did
propose
eight
feet.
That's
what
came
back
with
our
security
company?
J
J
C
K
Hi
my
name's
Rita
and
I
live
right
across
the
street.
From
this
building,
we've
always
had
a
real
nice
neighborhood.
Calm
am
I
understanding
that
they're
wanting
to
put
up
the
six
foot
fence,
plus
a
razor.
No
none
of
that
stuff,
no
barbed
wire
raise
your
stuff.
Okay
and
I
mean
it's
gonna.
Look
real
nice
we've
had
trouble
with
this
storage
place.
C
C
A
Let's
make
sure
I'm
understanding
so
right
now,
staff
is
recommending
denial
of
an
eight
foot
and
if
we
accept
denial
of
this,
the
intentions
that
staff
will
administratively
approve
a
six
foot
fence.
Or
is
there
any
clarification
we
should
put
in
here
to
ensure
that
the
intent
to
approve
a
six
foot
is.
E
You
can
note
in
your
motion
that
you
encourage
staff
to
you,
know,
issue
a
type
one
for
six
foot,
but
that
that's
our
intention
to
you
know
we
I
apologize.
If
it
wasn't
clear,
we'd
helped
pass
that
on
to
the
applicant,
but
we
were
comfortable
with
six
feet.
We
just
thought
eight
was
too
much
given
how
close
it
is
to
the
residential
I.
Think
Nick
did
a
good
job,
laying
it
up.
C
C
E
Yes,
so
the
first
thing
in
your
packet,
you
got
updated,
bylaws
yeah.
This
is
really
a
continuation
of
discussion.
We've
been
having
about
just
how
best
to
record
our
votes
and
what
and
using
the
right
terminology
for
what
our
intent
is.
I
think
there's
been
some
a
little
confusion
on
what
what
a
person's
intent
is,
and
it
really
is
it's.
E
You
know
when
we
abstain
versus
when
we
are
really
wanting
to
pass
and
what
we've
tried
to
do
is
update
the
bylaws
to
clarify
that,
and
so,
for
instance,
you
know
like
moving
forward
when
we
would
do
the
minutes.
You
know
when
you
abstain
for
something
you
really
need
to
leave.
You
know
you
need
to
leave
the
table
and
be
in
the
audience.
You
count
as
Quorum,
but
you
you
can't
participate
because
you
have
a
conflict.
I.
E
Think
you
see
our
friends
that
are
from
architecture
firms
do
a
great
job
of
leading
when
there's
a
project
that
their
firm
is
working
on.
So
that's
a
conflict,
but
if
it's
something
where
you
are,
let's
say
you
you
weren't
at
the
last
meeting
you
you
don't
feel
like
you
can
vote
on
the
minutes.
That's
that's
probably
something
where
you
just
really
are
passing.
If
you
feel
conflicted
on
how
you
want
to
vote,
you
don't
know
how
to
vote
on
an
item,
but
you've
participated
in
the
discussion.
E
That'd
be
a
time
to
pass
and
that's
the
intent
of
what
these
amendments
are.
If
anybody
has
any
my
time's
up,
I
should
be
there.
That's
okay!
If
anybody
has
any
questions
about
how
it's
written
or
what
we're
going
to
do
moving
forward,
please
let
us
know
otherwise.
I
would
ask
for
somebody
to
make
a
motion
of
approval
on
these
and
they
will
go
on
to
the
city
council.
A
I
think
sorry
on
I
am
26
fully
agree,
love
the
intention,
obviously,
since
I'm
a
heavy
user
of
this
anyway.
That's
you
know,
appreciate
it.
I
guess:
I'm
curious
on
number
13.,
the
definition
of
leaving
I
guess
number
one.
What's
the
intention?
What
do
we
actually
mean
by
that?
Because
it
seems
like
if
we
make
it
too
tight,
we
end
up
with
access
to
be
challenged.
I
mean
is,
is
leaving
you're
just
outside
of
the
public
frame
of
you
you're,
outside
of
the
ability
to
visually
influence.
E
Think
our
Jazz
I
mean
interrupt
if
you
want,
but
I
mean
I
think
our
intent
was
to
is
you're
you're,
leaving
this
the
realm
of
where
the
discussion's
happening.
I
mean
you're
an
observer
back
there
you're
not
engaging
so
you're,
not
you're,
not
Podium
up.
You
know
you
put
you're
back
with
Podium
but
I.
Don't
that's
my
Layman's
description.
I,
don't
know
if
you
have
a
better
more
legal.
F
Obviously
you
can't
discuss
and
no
there's
no
been
expressed,
need
to
leave
the
actual
meeting
venue
or
anything
like
that
for
one
item
and
as
long
as
no
discussion
is
heard
or
no
vote
has
heard
from
that
member
we'd
be
avoiding
any
conflict.
We
can
further
Define
that,
if
you
so
requests
and
that-
and
we
can
do
that-
if
need
be
so
I'm.
A
Just
kidding
me,
we
had
one
time
where
we
had
an
individual
who
wasn't
a
small
individual
who's
may
have
left
the
podium,
but
then
remained
the
menacing.
You
know,
I'm
not
saying
a
commissioner
is
going
to
do
that.
Would
we
consider
that
person
have
left
did
that
person
leave
at
the
time
or
they
remain
there
and
still
remain
glaring
and
intending
influence?
I'm
just
curious?
It
just
seems
in
here
whether
or
not
it's
a
you
know
aggressive
or
abusive
motion
or
whether
or
not
someone
who
is
you
know.
A
We
have
reasonably
influential
people
here
on
this.
You
know
on
this
board.
If
they're
sitting
in
the
room
are
they
still
influential
with
their
presence?
I'm
not
saying
I
have
an
opinion
either
way.
I
would
probably
pass
on
this.
However,
I'm
just
thinking
that
something
that
we
would
probably
be
right
to
be
thoughtful
on.
What
do
we
really
mean
by
leaving.
E
I
think
we
could
have
been
the
commission's
motion
you'd
like
us
to
look
at
that
I
think
we
could
come
up
with
something
a
little
more
definitive
that
you
said
get
you
know,
use
kind
of
the
terminology
of
the
commission's
gallery.
You
know
I
think
we
could
come
up
with
something
some
terminology,
that
kind
of
describes
what
I
said
in
more
layman's
term
yeah
the
audience
versus
the.
C
E
E
C
A
Okay,
so
I
would
urge
we
look
at
it
being
performance.
You
know
more
performance
focused
identifying
that
there
is
no
access
to
perception
of
undue
influence
when
a
conflict
exists,
something
along
that
lines,
because
whether
or
not
we're
talking
about
the
boundary
of
the
wall
or
we've
left
another
room.
As
long
as
we're
saying,
hey,
there's
no
perception
of
you
know
perception
of
influence.
That's
really
seems
like
what
we're
going
for.
Isn't
it.
F
Guess
would
you
Pro?
Would
the
commission
prefer
I
mean
that
commissioner
leave
the
room
and
that
can
be
written
into
you
know
the
the
rules
but
yeah
I,
guess
in
other
commissions
and
boards,
from
my
understanding,
the
treatment
of
that
is
the
member
get
moves,
leaves
the
gallery
or
simply
does
not
involve
themselves
in
the
discussion
or
voting.
F
A
My
point
is
just
when
we
start
defining,
you
must
be
in
this
little
box.
You
must
be
in
this
location,
we
can
act,
we
have
access
to
missing
the
point,
which
is
we
don't
want
someone
who
has
a
conflict
from
having
any
perception
of
undue
influence
in
the
discussions
where
they're
physically
located
to
me
doesn't
seem
as
important
as
you
know,
the
effectiveness
of
their
removing
themselves
from
the
conflict.
C
A
Because
I
would
think
if
someone
is
up
here,
there's
access
to
perception
of
conflict
if
someone's
sitting
in
the
room
is
still
standing
in
the
corner
and
watching
in
a
very
intent
way.
That
seems
like
there's
still
perception
of
access
to
conflict,
but
I
don't
really
know.
If
we
want
to
say:
oh,
you
must
be
behind
X
wall.
You
must
be
behind
20
feet
away
or
you
must
be
behind
such
and
such
a
door.
A
That
seems
like
we're
gonna
end
up
splitting
hairs
again
in
trouble
where,
if
the
intent
is
very
clear
of
we
want
them
to
be
physically
or
we
want
them
to
be
in
a
location
where
there's
no
perception
access
to
conflict.
That
seems
it
leaves
up
the
better
judgments
of
Jason
and
those
are
running
this
better
to
give
guidance
without
Heming
us
into
you
know
what.
If
we
move
this
into
an
open
plan
area,
where
do
you
go
now?
Do
you
leave
the
building?
What's
that
that's
my
concern?
I
I
conflict
of
interest
seems
to
happen
more
regularly
on
this
commission
than
say
at
city
council
and
the
one
time
I've
seen
it
at
city
council.
It
was
with
council
member
mandelbaum
and
he
announced
his
his
conflict
and
he
got
up
and
left
the
room.
It
was
very
clear
and
he
happened
to
be
mayor,
Pro
tem
at
that
point,
and
had
to
turn
that
over
to
another
council
member
to
run
the
meeting
while
he
was
gone,
that
made
it
very
clear
that
he
he
couldn't
influence.
B
B
In
it
feels
like
to
your
point,
it
only
happened
once
at
city
council.
It
does
happen
frequently
here
we
have
14
people
first
of
all,
and
we
have
a
lot
of
Architects
who
work
on
these
projects.
So
it
seems
like
a
lot
to
ask
someone
to
actually
physically
leave
the
room
and
I.
Don't
think
this
is
getting
brought
up,
because
people
were
physically
in
the
audience.
I
think
it
was
because
there
was
discussion
happening
on
the
bench,
and
then
people
were
abstaining,
so
I,
don't
think
I
feel
like
we're
getting
off
track
from.