Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Yes, sir. Absolutely.

You don't have to deal with Alex. Good to go.

Hello. Hello. Hello. I I don't know what I'm supposed to do. No, I should turn this on. I'm supposed to be testing it. I think the mic. I mean,

yeah. I got it too. One, two, three. ABC.

Hello. You okay with my message? Can you hear me? I can hear you. Okay. They're they're testing something in the AV room. So, can you hear me? Am I good?

I do not. I should. We should. Might be. Cool. Cool. Cool. Cool. I'm gonna turn this off now. Good to go. Okay. Good afternoon and happy new year's. Uh, calling to order the planning and zoning commission on January 8th, 2026 at Pure City Hall, room 400. It is now 101. Can we get a roll call, please? Commissioner Herd here. Commissioner Barry here. Commissioner Kohler here.

Commissioner Gibb here. Commissioner Wisahan. Commissioner Ununes here. Chairman Martin here. Chairman, we have a quorum.

Thank you. Before we get started with the meeting, I'd like to go over some ground rules just so in case everybody's never been here before. There is an agenda listing the cases that are up for the commission to consider today. The planning and zoning commission makes recommendations to city council. The date each case will be in front of the city council for a final decision will be stated at the conclusion of each case. This date is usually the fourth Tuesday of the month during the regular scheduled city council meeting. The commission follows the city and municipal code, specifically the unified development code within when making its recommendation to city council. The commission considers the testimony presented by city staff, the applicant or the representative and the public when making its recommendation to city council. Each case begins with city planner presenting the recommended recommendation of the city's development review board. After each case is presented by city staff, the petitioner or the representative will get an opportunity to present their case to the commission. After the petitioner or the representative presents the case, any member of the public can comment in favor or against the case. This is the portion of the hearing when the public can comment. The petitioner or the representative will get an opportunity to speak again after any member of the public speak. During the hearing, the commissioners may ask the petitioner or the representative, city staff, or a member of the public questions. The commissioners can motion to recommend approval or denial to the city council. Once a m motion passes, the case is concluded. I will entertain a motion to approve the minutes from last month's meeting.

So move. Second. Second. Any discussion? All in favor say I. I. I.

Any opposed. Okay. First case is PZ5000-2025. Oh, I apologize. We have to if anyone is giving uh public testimony, they need to stand and be sworn in. And also, if you could fill out a blue form and make sure someone from the city gets that. Thank you. First case up is PZ5000-2025 PZ uh 524 2025 request to hold a public hearing and forward a recommendation to city council. Wrong one. PZ 500 uh 2025 request to hold a public hearing and forward a recommendation to city council on the request of Doug Williams for Doug Williams Construction Incorporated to obtain a special use in a class R4 single family residential district for a short-term rental for the property located at 1637 West Main Street. Partial identification number 180530345. Um, the applicant is requesting to approve a special use for a short-term rental at 1637 West Main Street in an existing single family dwelling with three bedrooms. The intended use is to rent the whole house to guests for a period uh less than 30 consecutive days. Such use is considered a short-term

rental use and require specialist approval. Um the the uh the dwelling has three bedroom sizes each with a dimensions of 12 ft by 14 ft. Um up to six guests and are allowed in the short-term rental. Um parking is going to be allowed through an accessory garage. Um access is going to be through an existing alley in the rear of the of the site and then a driveway uh from Main Street. Um access from the alley is gravel and the access from Main Street is broken pavement with developing potholes. All driveways to legal off- streetet parking surfaces must be paved with impervious material pursuant to UDC 8.1.5 and the site does not identify legal off- streetet parking spaces other than the accessory garage. Um again the entire rear yard is gravel broken pavement. Off- streetet parking areas are allowed off the existing alley but must be paved with impurpose material pursuant to UDC 8.1.5. The remainder of the rear yard must be returned to a vegetative state except for driveways to legal off- streetet parking spaces. Um, the property is located in the Uplands Homeowners Association. If this request is approved, this would be the third uh special use in the neighborhood association. If the short-term rental at 1417 West Main Street from December's planning and zoning commission meeting is denied by city council at the January 13, 2026 meeting, the 1% cap for this area allows up to three special use short-term rentals. Um and the property

um uh is so in terms to the 1500 foot uh separation requirement for uh special uses for short-term rentals. Um this property uh does not meet the requirement for the the three uh nearest short-term rentals. Um it's approximately 1,361 ft from a previously approved short-term rental located on North Elmwood Avenue and that was approved in 2021. Um, it is approximately 1,116 feet from a previously approved special use short-term rental located on West Columbia Terrace. And that was also approved in 2021. And then the third is that it's approximately 466 feet from a previously approved short-term rental hole located on West Main, which was approved in 2025 during the December meeting. Um, a waiver is required uh for that separation requirement. And then um the special use for a short-term rental is only valid for the applicant does not transfer with the property and the owner must obtain a yearly short-term rental license and remit the room rental use or privilege tax to the city of Poria. Uh the background of the property, the property is on a 12 acre lot and is currently developed with a single family dwelling. Uh this property is in good standing with code enforcement. Uh this property is in a class R4 single family residential district and surrounding zoning is class R4. uh surrounding surrounding land uses uh for this uh building or for this property is residential with Bradley University to the south to the southeast which uh that Bradley

property is also zoned in one institutional um the history of the property uh it's this partial zoning class was downzone to low density resial 1981. You can see the progress of the history being zone C from 1931 to 1963. R3 from 1963 to 1981 and then down to R4 1981 to 1990 and then from 1990 to present it has been R4 for the development review board um analysis. Uh, no detriment to the public health, safety, or general welfare. Uh, yes. Uh, there's a condition to install fire extinguishers, smoke alarms, carbon monoxide detectors, and a condition to limit occupancy to six guests. No injury to other property nor diminishment to property values. No. Property does not meet the performance standard for separation between special use short-term rentals. Uh, no impediment to orderly development. Yes, there is none. Uh, provides adequate facilities. No. Condition to require off streetet parking areas to be paved with an imper uh impervious material pursuant to UDC 8.1.5. Um ingress eress measure designed to minimize traffic congestion. Yes, there is none. If a public use service then a public benefit not not applicable. Conforms to all district regulations. waiver required to reduce the separation between uh special use short-term rentals to 466 feet. The comprehensive plan critical success factors met. It is reinvesting in neighborhoods and the city council strategic plan goals met as quality of life. The development review board recommends denial of the request for a short-term rental as location does not meet the required separation performance standard for the use. The

performance standards are intended to limit the density and clustering of such uses. the subject location is less than the required one 1,500 ft from two other special use short-term rentals. With that, I will answer any questions from the from the commission. Thank you. Any questions for staff? Hearing none. Would the petitioner like to speak to the case? Okay. Anyone in the audience for or against it like to speak to the case? Okay. Hearing none. Findings and facts. Finding facts for special use. The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the special use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare will not. The special use will not be injur injurious to the uses and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood in which it is to be located. I say it it will because it does not meet separation standards. The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district will not adequate facilities access roads drainage at or necessary facilities have been or will be provided. Answer is no due to off street parking. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and eress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion of the public streets. Yes, the proposed special is not contrary to the objectives of the official comprehensive plan of the city of PU's

amended. It is contrary due to the separation standards not being met. If a public use or use providing public utility service that such use or service shall meet a demonstrable public need and provide a public benefit not applicable. The special use shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located except as such regulations may in each instance be modified pursuant to the recommendations of the planning and zoning commission. Answer is no through the waiver but the waiver is requested to reduce separation. Those are the findings. Mr. Chair, thank you. Question the city.

Yes. Well, that is if you is the petitioner comes in to to apply for one of these, do you really do you go through all the hoops and barriers and explain to them before they go through all this paperwork and all the headaches that they're going through and then all of a sudden it comes to us with a denial? I mean, is it really gone thoroughly explained to the petitioner? Uh, yes, we do take the time to thoroughly explain the process. But the uh applicant reserves the right to request a waiver as they did with this request. So they're aware that they're not

Yes. Yes. They're they're made aware of of uh the process and then and then staff's recommendation and then what will be presented to uh the commission during the meeting. Yes. Thank you. Any other discussions on findings and facts? Hearing none. Do we have a motion? Move to accept the uh staff recommendation to deny. Second.

Second. Any discussion? I'll just say, you know, I saw the before and after pictures and it is a benefit to the neighborhood that the work the petitioner did put into the property, but unfortunately doesn't meet separation standards. Uh but uh it is an improvement. So, I just want to at least acknowledge the work that has been done,

but unfortunately we just we had one about two blocks up the street last last month and you know in the separation and the what the city council has gone through several times. That's why I asked the question, do you really under go through it so that petitioner, you know, going through all these hoops? Any other discussion? All in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Okay, motion passes. It will go to city council on 122, January. Uh, January 27th. 7th. Okay.

January 27th, it'll go in front of city council. Thank you. Give us just a second to get our paperwork for the next Okay. Case number PZ524-2025.

Uh PZ 524 2025 request to hold a public hearing and forward a recommendation to city council on the request on the request of Trent Overview of affordable family storage to amend an existing special use ordinance number uh 14789 as amended in the class C2 large-scale commercial district for a shopping center to add outdoor selfservice mini storage for the property located at 2323 West Pioneer Parkway. This includes property located at 2311 West Pioneer Parkway, 2327 West Pioneer Parkway and 2401 West Pioneer Parkway. Partial identification numbers 1406451006. Uh 1 146451007 1 146451008 1 146451009 uh 1 146451012 1 146451016 1 146451020 Um the petitioner Trent Overview of Affordable Family Storage is requesting to amend an existing special use shopping center at outdoor self-service mini storage in the class C2 larges scale commercial district. The proposed outdoor self-service mini storage facility will be comprised of eight buildings totaling 27,000 square ft located in the existing parking lot of the shopping center as shown on the site plan above. Um, each building of the outdoor uh, storage facility will be 14 feet in height and screened on all sides with an 8ft tall fence constructed of 100% opaque materials. Access to the storage units is provided by an automatic gate in the northwest section of the developments which is going to be right along here.

The proposed outdoor self-service mini storage facility will be developed in two phases. In the first phase, a total of 72 storage units are proposed with buildings A, B, and C being constructed. In the second phase, a total of 109 storage units are proposed with buildings D, E, F, G, and H being constructed. The petitioner is requesting a waiver from UDC section 5.3. J.2. D. Self-service mini storage facilities are required to provide an eight foot tall opa 8 foot tall 100% opaque visual barrier or screen around the entire perimeter of the property. The current proposal partially encloses the self-service mini storage facility leaving the rear side of the storage buildings on the east side of the property unscreened which is uh these buildings running along here. Um uh the fence comes in at the end uh but the fence uh stops off at the edge leaving the entire back side of the building exposed not satisfying the screening requirements. So that is the waiver requested with this um uh the request is amending uh existing special use to add the storage and this type of use does require special use approval. Um for there's no proposed change to the existing signage on the shopping center. Um and existing signs within the special use boundary include freesting signs for the PIA community bank and the Verizon store and then wall signs for the amazing nails and spa store, Dollar Tree and affordable family storage and for any uh separate signage uh or a separate sign permit is required for any new signage as a result of this development. Um, parking and vehicle access is going to be using the existing vehicular

access from North Allen Road, West Pioneer Parkway and West Altter. So, there's an access point here to Pioneer Parkway, two access points here to Allen, and then one access point here to Altifer. And uh, these are these access points are in compliance. Uh, 248 parking spaces will remain in the existing parking lot. Um, nine handicap accessible parking spaces and two bike parking spaces are provided or are proposed. Um, five additional p bike parking spaces are required. Um, signs marking accessible parking spaces shall be posted, including a notice of a $350 fine. And then improvement to the parking surface to be free of weeds, potholes, and cracks and a restripe the parking stalls over the entire uh surface lot of this parcel. The proposal is set back 30 feet from the southern uh property boundary, 31 feet from the western property boundary, 194 feet from the eastern property boundary, and 72 feet from the existing building. This proposal exceeds the 20 foot setback requirement in the sideyard. And so this uh is in compliance. Um and again, the buildings will be 14 ft in height, which is also in compliance. Um 884 landscaping points are currently exist at the property. An additional 362 landscaping points are proposed. And then the uh an 8 foot tall 100% opaque screen is proposed to partially enclos the self-service mini storage. Um again with the requested waiver to not screen uh the backside of this building. Uh per the initial uh special use that established the shopping center at this property. Um the site is to maintain a total of 1,245 landscaping points. Um and this proposal satisfies that requirement. Um there are three existing dumpsters and mechanical utility units on site that are not screened. Um all dumpsters and rooftop and ground mounted mechanical util utility units are required to be screened. And then

exterior lighting plans have not been proposed with this uh development. Any changes or additions to exterior lighting must be compliant with UDC section 8.5. Um, this subject property is currently developed with a shopping center on a 12.52 acre lot of the total 19.93 acre existing special use boundary uh which can be seen here. So this is the particular parcel that we're um here for today. And then these are the outlets that are also tied to the existing special use. Um surrounding zoning is uh class C2 to the east and the south, class C1 to the east and the south, and class I1 to the north. The properties to the west are not within the city pura boundaries and are zoned class A2 with Poria County. Adjacent uses in the immediate vicinity are Dollar Tree, Affordable Family Storage, Amazing Elder Spa within the existing shopping center, Verizon Wireless Poria Community Bank and Sher Mazda to the south, Ford of Poria and Menard's LLC to the east, LNT technology services and leaf filter gutter protection to the north and a Massaleum Cemetery to the west. Uh, this property was approved for a special use to establish a shopping center in 1999 um with the following zoning history. from 1963 to 1990 was zoned I1 and then from 1990 to current day has been zoned C2. The development review board analysis uh for this property no detriment to public health safety morals comfort or general welfare. Uh yes condition to a condition for special use to adhere to all fire and building code requirements. Condition for a fire sprinkler system to be installed with a fire area greater than 12,000 square feet. and a condition for all existing fire hydrants to the property to not be enclosed by the screening of the facility. Fire hydrants

must remain accessible in case of emergency. Uh there's no injury to the uses and enjoyment of other properties in the immediate vicinity for purposes already permitted nor diminished to the property values. Uh there are no impediments to orderly development. Um provides adequate facilities. Yes. Uh the there is a condition to improve the parking surface to be free of weeds, potholes, cracks and then restriping the parking stalls. Um there is uh the ingress and eress measures designed to minimize traffic uh uh congestion are met and if uh public's use or service then provides a public benefit is not applicable. Um and then this request does not conform to all district regulations. There is the waiver to again eliminate the screening on the back side of the building along the east side of the developments. Um, there are conditions to screen all dumpsters and mechanical utility units. Conditions to add five bike parking spaces. Um, condition update the handicap accessible parking signs with a notice of $350 fine. Um, upon inspection of the property uh prior to today's meeting, there has been uh storage or parking of semi-trailers and or uh just the trailer unit without the truck. Uh so there's a condition to remove any existing or current semi-trailers uh truck included and then to uh uh cease that type of land use as that is not permitted with this uh proposal uh for the special use amendments. Um and then a condition uh for any uh new signage proposed to apply for assigned permits. Um and then again there's no uh plan submitted for updating the exterior lighting but if there are any additions or changes to the existing exterior lighting um there's a condition for them to uh comply with the zoning requirements into nagita halfoot foot candle as measured at the property line. The comprehensive plan critical success factors uh met with this request are reinvesting in

neighborhoods and the city council strategic goals uh met uh is uh business growth and prosperity. The development review board recommends approval of the request to amend the existing special use to add the outdoor self-service mini storage with the following waiverss and conditions. Um, this site shall adhere to all International Fire Code 2018 requirements for items such as fire department access, roads, fire hydrant locations. Um, per international fire code 2018, section 903.2, S1 storage areas with a fire greater than 12,000 square feet require sprinkler system. Condition to existing fire hydrants located along the north side of this proposed storage area appear to be enclosed with a gated storage facility. These hydrants cannot be gated off which would prevent them from being easily accessible to use for a fire in the existing affordable family storage building. The sh the sites shall adhere to all international building code 2018 requirements. The addition of five additional bike parking spaces to install handicap accessible signs with a notice of a $350 fine to improve the parking surface to be free of weeds, potholes, cracks, and grease parking stalls. Dumpsters must be screened on all sides with a minimum height of six feet and a maximum height of 7 feet in compliance with city code chapter 13 section 13-40. All rooftop and ground mounted mechanical units must be fully screened from view of any public rideways or residential zoning district in compliance with city code chapter 5 section 601.2. Remove the existing semi-truck trailer from the property. A separate sign permit is required for any new signage. any changes or additions to the exterior lighting must not exceed a half foot foot candle as measured at the property line in complian with all zoning regulations outlined in UC section 8.5 and then a waiver um from UD uh unified development code section 5.3J.2D to eliminate the screening requirement from the east side of the facility and then I I'm happy to answer any questions

for the commission. Thank you. You guys have any questions for staff? Quick question on his uh blueprint or on his layout, this future storage building, is this request covering those or does that have to come back to us for another issue?

Uh no, the applicant specifically included uh the second phase of development so that way he would not have to come back again uh to amend a special use. Um so uh what's shaded in in tan or brown here is what will be built first and then these uh uh transparent uh spaces are the second phase of development. Uh so if uh the applicant so chooses to develop uh then he would be uh developing per the submitted site plan. Thanks. So chairman so it looks like he has phase one and phase two. So phase one is what's shown now. Phase two is potentially that's what he wants to do eventually.

So what are the parking requirements when phase two comes into play? Uh the parking requirements requirements. Uh it's pretty much over the whole parking and then we'll have all that area as storage blocks,

right? Um so there's no uh uh parking minimum for this type of development. Uh so what's currently existing and what's currently shown on the site plan will be what's required if the second phase of the development is built. Okay. I hate to say that but now when you're introducing additional proposed buildings has there been any traffic study done or is there potential for a traffic study discussion because that changes the dynamics of the whole area now.

Um no there was Uh I don't believe there was a traffic study u made. Um if if the applicant has that information or or has done that information without my knowledge um then I I believe that would be a question to ask the applicant. Uh but to my knowledge no. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for staff hearing? None. Is a petitioner here like to come forward? Please state your name and address. tell us a little bit about the project.

Thanks for your time. Uh Trent Overview. Uh my address is 1851 Madison A Council Bless Iowa. Um tell you a little bit about ourselves. We're a a family and ran operation. It's my brother and I that are the uh the ownership of this building. Um we looked at the uh the Poria market for a little while and we were able to find this building. I don't know if you guys recall, but it was a a former shop co that had closed and then went through some issues with uh some of the environmental conditions that we went through and uh and cleaned up. And so we're a pretty hands-on ownership group. Um we uh we we touch base with our managers and inspect our properties regularly. Um this particular property um has been good. It performance has has done what we anticipated. Um we are now full with a lot of our small units and uh within our our big box conversions that we do generally they come with a lot of unusable asphalt. um naturally taking a high density retail use um you're looking at north of a thousand parking spots and and to answer your question George um we only need as far as uh this whole concept it's a uh a need of around 20 parking spots. So, at at future use, um if we elect to uh subject to approvals to uh to expand, um we'll have adequate parking. Um on the uh the west side, uh we have about 248 parking spots that we're leaving for the retail. Um it's a fairly small retail center, so we're very adequately parked there. And then we have about another hundred spots in the back of the facility that we're uh going to to keep as well. Um the nice thing,

at least for our business inside, we have a lot of small units. Generally, if we're able to expand in the uh the parking lot, we go with the larger footprint, which generally suits a critical need in communities. um there's generally a lack of space on the larger side with people moving houses um that we're able to address. And so it is a small amount of units even though it's a uh a moderate amount of square footage, but um with that um you'll due to the the the low unit count, you're going to have a a low impact as far as traffic. Um given this was a kind of a highdensity retail compared to what our use is the the traffic flow is going to be very very minimal. Um when we bought this facility in 2021 um there was issues as far as the declaration of the uh the shopping center as far as the the use restrictions. Um, I had worked with all the the neighboring owners and we uh got all use restrictions deleted subject to uh city zoning codes and the uh the allowable buildable area was also deleted um from the from the declaration with the anticipation that there would be a a future use which we're coming forward with. Uh the only exception is on the uh the south and west side with a uh um a drive lane that will uh suit some of the other property owners that we anticipate keeping open and there should be good circulation uh around the center from all sides. A couple and this is just talking more in the storage side with these parking lots. They're very difficult to maintain. Um maintaining

sometimes five, six, seven acres of asphalt that is not used is is definitely cumbersome and it becomes sometimes nearly impossible to uh to keep all the weeds and everything else and and all that out of there. And so further development definitely helps on the maintenance side. Um, the other negative, as you kind of alluded to, it's hard to keep folks from semi-trailers to whatnot from parking in your parking lots in the evening. Uh, a lot of times you don't know who they are. You leave notes as far as getting stuff moved or try to tow, but that would uh mitigate that problem if you're able to to further use that parking lot. A lot of times they get not good uses in big open parking lots from uh folks that practice their drifting and and and all that as well. And so I'm hopeful that we can move forward and uh and have a nice project for the community that continues to to further our business. Um a little bit about the buildings, they are a little bit higher than what you traditionally see, but it allows for more usable space inside. Um, we usually go with a a multicolor approach. Often they're like a dark gray, light gray with black doors. Um, so aesthetically they look good. And that was kind of part of the the request to remove the at least the back portion of the screening because we're essentially have a a a screened wall of sorts. um that the fence would would uh kind of be a double layer and would not necessarily be a uh an impact at least from the property owners on the uh the east side of the property. Um try to think anything else I can I can share. Um I know generally when we go into this planning phase we

have extension some conversations with uh fire um make sure there's adequate drive lanes suppression um the the hydrants and whatnot. So very used to working with that. Um and then back to the screening on the dumpsters. We actually have screening in place. I I did drive around the uh the center. It looks like our our dumpster guys are not using those. So, I'll make sure that we get those kind of back behind the uh the designated areas that we do have. And uh yeah, look forward to to hopefully working with you guys. Thank you. Commission, do you guys have any questions?

Yes, please. Uh, Commissioner, I I honestly commend you on on what you're doing and enhancing businesses, but I I do have maybe a little bit concern and not not with the special use itself, more maybe with the proposed design and compatibility with the surrounding area. Um, I see you have a fence there eventually. Is that fence going on now or later? Yeah, generally if we would go forward with something, we're going to have to build in compliance with future uses. So, we would look to make sure, at least from the city recommendations or requirements, that all those would be met.

So, I I don't know what type of fence you're planning on putting in. The the last thing that I really want to see is honestly just from a context sensitive design is bunch of storage building and a chain link fence. that surrounds the area looking over Pioneer and Alan Lro and you know reminds me like somebody is in prison with all these cells and and a chain link fence all around it. So I am I am not opposed to the to the proposed use. I am just a little bit skeptical and unsure what that will look like eventually if you move to phase two and you put a chain link fence around it.

I don't want to say it's ugly, but it's not going to look appealing and and promising. the the same uh thoughts as you as far as just a traditional chain link fence. So, this would be a a a fence that you would not be able to see through. So, there' be it either be 8 foot tall. A lot of times we go with the kind of decorative looking plastic style. There's metal that we can do. Um I don't think we have a a set fence picked out, but generally they are are decent looking. Um, one reason why I personally like I I think the buildings are attractive when we get them done and that's why our hope was to remove that exception on the backside. Um, because it is honestly better looking than a uh a standard fence.

Any other So exactly where would the fence go? A question for you or So generally you you fence the perimeter or in between buildings. In this case it'd be on all three sides besides the uh the east side of the building. U Commissioner Kohler. Um so following my cursor here uh there's a line marked with X's running along the perimeter. Gota

and then uh this line still continues along this edge of this building and then comes across here. Um this arrow denotes that there will be like an automatic gate for access for uh people who are leasing or renting the the the units and then it continues up again and then the the dotted line continues and it closes off. The only spot where the the fence is not located is along the entire length of this building. And uh in this little section where the fence comes into this edge and and then George to answer your question uh in terms of screening uh there's a a note here for 100% opaque screening of the fence. Um and that satisfies uh the uh the performance standard for this type of land use. Um, so the city would require a a a fence that would not be like a chain link. It would have to be panled or or or something.

Thank you. To satisfy. Yep. Anything else from the commission for the petitioner? Hearing none. Thank you very much. Thank you guys.

Um, I also want to add a comment to um to your regard to screening. Uh so the the original special use uh required uh over 1,200 landscaping points and uh some of the trees uh have since died since 1999. And so the petitioners added a screening along this uh boundary of unimproved land to the parking lots and then also added a line of uh trees and shrubbery along the backside to provide further screening. Um so and then with the existing screening or landscaping along this line uh and the existing landscaping here uh there should be um or it's it's it's our understanding that there should be adequate landscaping to also provide some added buffer and screening from uh the public right away along Pioneer and Elen Road.

Thank you. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to give testimony for or against this case? Seeing none, do we have anything that needs to be read in to

uh Yes. Uh the petitioner has provided a letter to us um since the agenda packet was published um dated December 20th, 2025 addressed to Mr. Trent Overview of 73 1736 East Sunshine Street, Springfield, Missouri. Um subject public hearing uh for your outdoor self-service mini storage project. Uh Trent, thank you for sending me your detailed plan for adding the mini storage as referenced above uh to your property at uh 2323 West Pioneer Parkway in Peoria. As an owner of the adjacent lot 5 of our commercial subdivision, I fully support your project as there is an obvious demand for additional storage opportunities in the area. The traffic generated for your project should enhance my ability to attract potential retail users to my Venet 1.5 acre lot 5. I'm sure the own uh the others the owners of the vacant lots three and six would agree. My schedule will not allow me to attend the public hearing on January January 8th, 2026 to voice my support, but please present this letter to indicate my full support. Sincerely, Jeffrey Graves, president of JBG uh real estate. Uh and this is uh this is the lot right here that he is the owner of, Jeffrey Graves. So, this is his lot that comes across. Thank you. Do we have findings and facts? We do. The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the special use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare. Yes. The special use will not be injurious to the uses and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood in which it is to be located.

Yes. The establishment of the special use would not imp the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. Yes. Adequate facilities, access roads, drainage, and necessary facilities have been or will be provided. Yes. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. Yes. The proposed special use is not contrary to the objectives of the official comprehensive plan of the city of Peoria as amended. Yes. If a public use or a use providing public utility service that such use or service shall meet a demonstrable public need and provide a public benefit not applicable. The special use shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located except as such regulations made in each instance be modified pursuant to the recommendations of the planning and zoning commission. Answer has no but the waiver has been submitted.

Mr. Chair, I have a question if you don't. Thank you. Any discussion for finding this?

Uh, Commissioner Herd, the the issue about ingress and egress and facilities. I don't know how we can say yes if there has been no parking study or no traffic study done to the area specifically. I'm maybe I'm not concerned now for phase one, but if if he moves on with phase two, that's lot of storage buildings. Well, as the petitioner stated and uh Nolan mentioned it also really I think the traffic study they may have deemed the city may have deemed they can speak to it may not have been necessary due to it being a shopping center before. And so the storage facility is going to have a much less impact on traffic than a retail operation, you know. So I you're not going to have a thousand cars going through a storage facility. There's there's an IT manual that they go by and decide what number of vehicles coming in and out. So, I don't know if the city has done any uh assessment on the parking or or entrance and exit and traffic study and anything of that nature.

Maybe No, the city has not done a traffic study for this or has has the petitioner did a traffic study for the city? Uh, not to my knowledge. No. And you feel that there's going to be more traffic than I'm not saying more or less. I'm saying that the dynamics of the of the facility has changed. So I don't know if it's going to be more or less that goes in with the study.

Yeah. Uh Commissioner, uh during this review, the the the DRB is what reviews it and and one of the entities is public works. And during that review process, uh, public works never, uh, requested or indicated that a traffic study would be required for this type of development. So, the city never, uh, pursued or or asked the petitioner to do that on our behalf. Um, okay. I'll take it up on the next phase when they come back in.

Any other discussion with the findings and effects? Hearing none, do we have a motion? I move to approve as requested with waiverss. Second. Second. Any discussion? All in favor by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion passes. Congratulations. It will go in front of city council on 127. Thank you for investing in Poria and doing business here. Give us just a minute to get the next one rolling.

Yeah, I know. I think seven last time I think

that doesn't work. I didn't Okay. Next case, PZ527-2025.

All right. Uh, case number PZ527-20225. It is a request to hold a public hearing and forward a recommendation to city council on the request of Chad Bailey of the Christian Center to reszone property from a class R1 single family residential district to a class C1 general commercial district and to obtain a special use in a class C1 general commercial district for outdoor recreation to expand an existing outdoor athletic field. repurpose an existing building for indoor recreation use and add existing off- streetet parking for the property located at 4100 North Brandywine Drive and part of 4020 North Brandy Wine Drive. The partial identification numbers are 1429004 and part of 1429105. Uh so this case has two parts. Um resoning and then a special use under with that new zoning classification. Um the the subject property is the Christian center which is found on Brandy Wine Drive at 4100. Um they are adjacent to um uh church use at 4020 North Brandy Wine Drive. And so, um, the Christian Center and the church, um, are interested in, um, in having the Christian Center acquire the back portion, um, approximately 2.4 acres of the property at 4020. Um, and then, um, the intent is for them to have ownership of these property of the property. There's already kind of a shared use, um, between, uh, both facilities. Um and so it's it's a little bit of an

ownership change. And so to go and have uh that accomplished um there is a reasonzoning and then this special use uh petitions. The Christian Center is um considered a legal non-conforming outdoor recreation use. It was established before it was um when it was outside the city limits. and um outdoor recreation. Uh they have baseball fields. They also have indoor recreational uses. Um but the that outdoor recreation component is um not permitted by right in the C1 district. So that's why there's a special use request. Um they would be essentially expanding their non-conforming use right now. Uh there there's a ball field back here. Um and then they're expanding their boundaries. And so that triggers um their existing non-conforming use uh would need to come into compliance and that um is an option in the C1 district through special use review. Uh okay. And so then just kind of looking generally at the properties on Brandy Wine Drive. They both front Brandy Wine. They also it's a through they're through three lots and they also back up to Lake Avenue and the residential neighborhood uh to the north but vehicle access is only through Brandy Wine Drive. Um we'll note the other adjacent uses being restaurant and hotel. Um and then there's a multif family apartments. Um, of note in our development review, um, there are sidewalks um, on adjacent property, the restaurant immediately uh, to the uh, north uh, west. Um, and then there is sidewalks along apartments as well. Um, the Christian center and the church property do not have sidewalks. Uh, but we do know that there are sidewalks there.

Um the neighborhood to the north doesn't have prevalent sidewalk um uh right now either. Um so they in their packet they submitted some photos to give uh you know uh showing the property they're planning to acquire as well as their existing facilities. Um the family life center is the name of this uh building. Um currently uh use of the building is a school. Um, again, this is the building on the church property. Um, it would not be used as a school anymore, but the Christian center would um renovate it and convert it and use it for indoor uh gym uses, some concessions of different recreational uses um permitted in the C1 district. Um, and then we have the photos of the uh church on the front part of uh 4020 North Brandy Wine Drive. No change to the use there. Um and then these are photos of the Christian cent's facilities um on their existing property that they own their main building uh as seen from Brandy Wine um the side of their building uh the same building that's on the top. This is the side of it. And then they have um in terms of building wise um a storage maintenance shed um where currently concessions uh does operate out of. Um all right and then here's the site plan to illustrate uh the uses and existing development items on the property. Um, so just to orient uh the Christian cent's existing properties kind of on the the left hand side, the church building here with their parking lot um and then the uh family life center uh which would be transferred over to

ownership. So we'd end up with a parcel that um kind of grabs the back part. Um, I will note the the plan if if this is approved is they would move concessions out of their storage maintenance shed and and operate out of the gym. Um, and and that would um uh help with compliant or you know having uh probably more more concession options I think would be uh available with a remodel um that incorporates concessions. Um so one thing that uh we were discussing with them is is the parking. Um how would that be accommodated with the two uses? Currently they share parking. Um this is going to be sort of commemorated as a recorded agreement between the two owners to um allow for shared ingress egress along the church's driveway. Um and then also shared use of the larger parking lot. Um according to the applicant uh the their experience and estimation is the parking on this uh site um exceeds what their largest events really need. Um and so um and then also noting that they share the parking now. And this kind of is just going to uh you know uh make that more so official comply with city standards for same zoning across properties. um for shared parking uh cleans that up. Um bicycle parking is provided also. Um staff's comment on parking um is you know we would ask for this uh agreement to get recorded um uh as a condition. And then we note uh the accessible parking spaces are are probably just or

need to be um designed and marked uh to comply with uh current ADA code requirements. Um I'm moving through the development items in your in your memo. I'm on the uh access and circulation. Um again, access is just from Brandy Wine Drive in terms of vehicles. Um and uh our um and then um what what is part of the application is um is a request to wave the requirement for sidewalk. So that comes as a recommendation with the special use part of our complete streets policy um is for sidewalk to be installed on both frontage. So Brandy Wine Drive uh sidewalk it would not we we cannot through this special use ask for it along the church frontage because the church property is not going to be part of the special use. But we are asking for it along Brandy Wine Drive. Um we identified bus stop um near the corner here of the property. We identify sidewalk um that is on adjacent parcels um and sidewalk that continues northwest along Brandy Wine as well um as some reasons in addition to our complete streets policy for the sidewalk. Um our recommendation is also uh given the use with recreation and youth um for sidewalk on Lake Avenue and to start that um incremental improvement and development um on both frontage. Um and I'll just reiterate uh the petitioner is asking to wave the sidewalk requirement. Um uh when we looked at landscaping um we at a staff level were looking for some improvement uh in in terms of compliance

with our full landscaping code, but we're noting um existing conditions or reasons to allow for a waiver of some of the landscaping. Um they're they're going to benefit from having these very mature trees here um where front yard landscaping um additional front yard it would not be needed. Um uh but they but there's not a lot of landscaping along, you know, the very imperous parking lot that's pretty much locked. Um uh no room in the back along uh West Lake to really add any front yard landscaping either. Um so we're um in agreement to uh wave those standards. We are asking for a parking lot perimeter hedge here. you will find other properties with kind of a a parking lot um uh perimeter landscaping um or or similar landscaping. So, we're asking for that along uh just the front parking here. Let me zoom in along there. Um there is also um normally a transitional buffer yard between a commercial and and even multif family apartment use. Um we kind of have um some different um landscaping elements here that might be some of their property, might be some of the apartments. Um, but our recommendation is noting since there is a fence there. Um, when it comes time to replace that fence, it will be either compliant with buffer yard or uh fence requirements, a solid fence requirement. Um, an additional waiver that uh staff recognizes there's reasons to allow a waiver of the fence standards is for the fences used specifically for their ball fields in the back for their height and then being chain link. Again, existing

conditions right there on the frontage um requires a waiver. Um going next through to signs on the site. Um they have an existing freestanding sign. It's it's slightly oversized from today's um ordinance. Um so our recommendation is uh to allow it to continue um until it needs to be replaced. Then it would comply with our code right now, which limits it to 70 square ft. Right now it's about 72 square feet and the height is um is uh within uh current code. Scoreboards are also an allowed use for outdoor recreation. Um uh one per ball field. Uh they are within that uh provision and they're not requesting a third for this um kind of newer ball field, but they could have a third one per ball field. um setbacks. Um with this proposal, they're not asking to make any changes to um elements that that um have setbacks. Um so we're just going to note there's an existing zero lot line setback um for the ball fields um with that existing condition. We're um supporting the waiver from that. Um with outdoor recreation, there's usually questions about lighting. These ball fields are not uh do not have exterior lighting. Um no lighting and they're not asking to add any um no change for that. Their mechanical and dumpster screenings are uh well within um the the requirements. So no comment there. Um yeah, so uh really this is um a non-conforming outdoor recreation right now for the Christian Center with their

zoning um having established being outside the city limits at that time. They're asking to expand it. So that is why we have some conditions uh approving some waiverss for existing conditions. Um but our our conditions are trying to get some things closer to compliance with the city code um with their request for special use for an otherwise non-conforming use. Um, and I think there's in your packet. Um, this kind of illustrates and they they did I included their terms of their agreement. um that you know they call out certain certain events where the church has priority um for for the use um uh and you know their agreements for how they to communicate over those uh shared times or changes in scheduling. Um this outlines the easement. So again it's the shared driveway for ingress egress and then the shared parking here. Um, and it does connect through. So, vehicles could also um, uh, go through the Christian Center property unless they, you know, cone it off otherwise. All right. Um, I'll pull up our um, review. Uh, so the the first thing I'll go over are the the factors we consider for the resoning requests. So this would allow for the church prop part of church property to be zoned the same as the Christian center is currently. Um so that's going from uh R1 to C1. Uh so the first factor we look at are existing uses of and zoning of nearby property. Um we find the standard can be met. The request matches the adjacency one and the proposed use is obviously compatible with the

adjacent recreation use. Uh number two, the extent to which property values are diminished by a particular zoning restriction. The current zoning classification would restrict options to repurpose that education facility um and to use shared parking. Those are restricted right now. Uh number three, um the extent to which the destruction of property values of the complaining party benefits the health, safety or general welfare of the public. uh we don't anticipate the public welfare to be diminished by the resoning. Number four, the relative gain to the public as compared to the hardship imposed on the individual property owner. Uh we find the the gain here is the reasoning will consolidate zoning districts for two parcels and they currently share parking. Um number five, suitability of the property for the zone purpose. Improvements there now um are suitable for a use in a commercial district. C1. Number six, uh length of time the property has been vacant. That one's not applicable. And then, uh public need for the proposed use. Um this would allow for that off streetet parking to um to be shared um in in com in a way that's compatible with uh the two adjacent uses. And our comprehensive land use plan um designates it as commercial. And then uh finally uh the standards for the special use uh we find all of these to uh also be met. Uh no detriment to public health, safety or general w general welfare. Um no injury to other property or diminishment to property values. No impediment to orderly development. Noting our recommendation for conditions regarding site improvements.

um provides adequate facilities with our recommendations for um uh some development improvements and then the ingress egress measures are designed to minimize traffic congestion. We believe so. Um if a public use of service then a public benefit um yes um also will be sharing that uh having a recorded agreement on the parking conforms to all district regulations um with the waiverss that staff supports and then um this is consistent with our comprehensive plan critical success factor for growing employers and jobs and the city council strategic plan goal on business growth and prosperity. ity as well as quality of life. Um so in your memo you'll find uh the conditions and waiverss. Um uh I believe most of them I mentioned previously. Um but with those we do recommend approval for both the resoning and the special use for the outdoor recreation that would encompass the church property plus the additional 2.4 for or excuse me, the special use would encompass the existing Christian Center property plus the additional 2.4 acres. Um, and just uh quickly here the conditions to construct an ADA ProAG compliant sidewalk along both frontage. The sidewalk along Brandywine Drive shall connect to the existing sidewalk on the adjacent property. Record the easement agreement for cross access and shared parking. All the accessible parking spaces uh shall include required access aisle markings and signage. Install a parking lot perimeter landscaping for the parking area with frontage on Brandy Wine Drive. Um if the freestanding sign is replaced, it shall not exceed 70 ft in area. Uh concessions in the storage building

uh would need to cease by 2027 or meet all plumbing requirements. uh a waiver uh staff supports the waiver to eliminate a transitional buffer yard along the easterly common lot line. Um but when the chain link fence uh is replaced a trai a transitional buffer yard or solid fence in lie of a traditional buffer yard would be required. We support the waiver to eliminate landscaping requirements for front yard along Lake Avenue. access the back uh part of the property and to eliminate the landscaping for interior parking lot landscaping. Um number nine is a waiver that we support to permit chain link fence with heights 4 to 18 ft in um height along the front yard along Lake Avenue for the purpose of the ball fields. and uh 10, a waiver to remove the front yard setback for the two existing athletic fields on Lake Avenue. Um so the the difference in the conditions, my understanding with the applicant is they're asking to uh wave condition one on the sidewalks. Um, but that is our uh summary and review and recommendation on this case.

Thank you very much. Commission, do you have any questions for city staff? Yeah, I'm sure this is going to raise some eyebrows for my commissioners across the way, but you know, I I think I'm in favor of the project. Sorry, Commissioner Ununice. Can you um talk into the microphone? I'm having trouble hearing you.

Okay. As I say, there's going to be some eyebrows raised across the aisle from my commissioners. I think it's a great project. I'm in favor of it. We're back to this sidewalk to nowhere again. If if any of you have looked at the elevation and how this road runs some curves, you know, I think it's it's not an impossibility, but it's an an expensive possibility to try to put this sidewalk in where it's going nowhere. That road runs about 50 or 55 miles an hour or 60 miles an hour. the flat side of the other side of that street would be the place for the sidewalk. Right now, as I say, you can put it in, but it's going to cost a fortune. And I'm not I'm not for trying to put a sidewalk there to nowhere. That's my point. Um, yes, we did. Um, but we, you know, recognized that designing sidewalks sometimes is more difficult in certain locations than others. Um but we also see where there is sidewalk next door. There is uh use of si you know sidewalk would be used. There's apartment use nearby bus stops uh nearby um where the sidewalk would have use.

Have you ever done a traffic count on that sidewalk? Have you ever put a monitor on that sidewalk to see how was ever used?

I have not. I'm saying you you've got a partial sidewalk. How often is it how often is that piece used? I'm done. Any other questions for city staff hearing? None. Is the petitioner here would like to come forward and thank you. Please state your name and address and tell us a little bit more about the project.

Great. Thank you. Justin Kaufman. My address is 107 Windridge Drive in Washington, Illinois. So, I get to serve as the chairman of the board for the Christian Center uh right now. So, I'll share a little bit more about the project. I'll mention some other uh folks here on behalf of the the center in support. Chad Bailey, the executive director is with us. Travis Kitten, a fellow board member, and then Dan Gavin, who is a consultant on this project and uh kind of the project manager should we move forward with that. Um and he'll speak actually to some more specifics here after I'm done. And then Pastor Jason Persinger from Pure First is here as well. Um and uh to to be able to speak to this project. So again, thank you Carolyn and the city for the the work and commission for hearing this. This is something we're excited about um at the the Christian Center. I know many of you are familiar with the Christian Center, but to give a little background, you we've been uh operating here in the city of Poria for over 75 years now at this Brandy Wine location since 1962. Uh this last year there were 2600 kids that participated in formal youth activities facilitated by the center. uh many additional families and kids participate in stuff like the the bowling center and the arcade and and other wreck activities. Uh for reference to about 40% of these kids are city of Poria residents uh which means about 60% are actually traveling into Poria from surrounding communities you know we see from Canton to Carlock uh folks coming in to participate in these uh the different uh activities at the the center. So the project uh before you is is something that is exciting for us. We've had a long-standing relationship with PIIA first and as as was spoken to there's been a lot of of shared use. Uh but this opportunity to purchase the the building the parking lot and that existing T-ball field and kind of formalize some stuff like the the uh parking easements uh is a great

opportunity. As you've heard it's it's largely kind of consistent with how the facility is being used today. We are using this parking lot today and and this facility. We do intend to do some substantial, you know, targeted investments and upgrades to the facility with new gym floor. Uh increasing its ability for some, uh indoor practice use, as was mentioned, official concession stand to be able to better serve throughout the year as well as to many parents to light uh a restroom up by the baseball fields. Um I speak on and with experience there. Um, so, so there's these these additional the benefits that that we can see uh as as we bring this together. So, um, I'm going to ask Dan Gavin to come up and speak to some more specifics just related to some of the the topics being discussed related to the project. But thank you again for considering this. We think it's a neat opportunity here for the PIA community.

Thank you. Please state your name and address. Dan Gavin, 13707 West Route 150 in Brenfield. Thank you.

Just thank you for commission. Honored to be part of this project and representing the Christian Center. I actually go to church next door there. So, I've been tied into the Christian Center for a long time. My kids have uh played ball there decades ago. My grandkids play there now and just really seen the the great benefits of the Christian Center that's brought to the community that Justin mentioned for decades. Uh this project is really a neat kind of it's a change of ownership really just to clarify the the wording and in some of it talks about increased use really not increasing use family life center will change use slightly from a school the gym is being used now for recreation for basketball that'll increase some but the ball fields are being used now just as they will uh if this goes through and as the change of ownership goes through the parking lot there's no increased parking it's just the same use it's change of ownership So instead of the church paying for the Christian cent's uh parking, the Christian center will pay for the church's parking basically to make that up for a few decades. Um but anyway, it's all worked together. Get that in writing is a great thing too for for the city just for future ownership too to have that agreement. Writing is a really really positive thing. Um but just so yes, so there is really no change in use at all on the Christian Center property that we're proposing. only all these requirements are being kicked in because we're required to go to the special use. So you obviously Chad's saying why am I having to do all this? I'm not changing anything there. And I understand that. I also understand zoning and how it all works together and has to all be zoned is the same. But just to clarify, there is no change at all on our part proposed on the Christian Center property. It's been there for decades and served well and um and we're we understand the process. We are good with everything. I We're required to put a hedge in front there. There is some hedges down the road. The pizza ranch next to us has no nothing in front of the parking much more parking

than Brandy Wine than we do and the Christian Center does. Um but the hedge isn't a isn't a big thing. Um so we appreciate working with the with the city on all this. Definitely understand the requirements there. Um so I want to really mainly address the sidewalk to nowhere was referenced. Appreciate that. Um and I did send some additional information that I get Carrie L. I think she forwarded on to you.

Yeah. So Dan, they have a copy in front of them and then it's up here on the side if you wanted to allude to anything there.

Thank you very much. So yeah, so sidewalk right now and I I understand the need to to combine a sidewalk too for sure. The city city's desire to do that. Um but to push this onto the Christian center to make them responsible for it to me doesn't make a lot of sense. It was one thing if it was a sidewalk and we could do it for a couple thousand dollars and just put a three-foot sidewalk in there. That's it that would be great and especially if it come up combined those two sidewalks. But as you can see there's is at the pizza ranch side on the northwest side. Um there's a manhole there. There's a reason why they they stopped it there. Um getting that across that small median would be very difficult to do. I'm not sure what the good good answer to that is. Across from that Christian Center, there is some ground there you could put a sidewalk to know we're in. But the the ditch there that Chad is representing there is taller taller than the than Chad is. Um and to keep that along the road, which to me is the only sensible spot to keep it. I mean, we could talking to engineering division and Julie, we could back it up and put it along the property, but to me that doesn't make sense. I don't think people are going to come onto the Christian Center property to use the sidewalk. Uh there's so much drainage going into this ditch right now. not from Christian not all at all from the Christian center property. And obviously you see the large curb cut here with all the drainage from the road. The only way to sensibly do that to me would be you'd have to put a catch basin in the road there. You'd have to redo all the culverts obviously redo curb. Um so yeah, you're talking a major major project for a sidewalk that still would stop at the church and still would stop at the adjacent property. What I'm suggesting on this, which I think was brought up already, is considering on the other side of Brandy Wine, which wouldn't obviously be a Christian center project, but there is much better ground there. I know there's crossing the road and other things that aren't ideal. There's a bus stop on the other side, and I think most people that probably go down that sidewalk are going to that bus stop or a large amount of them are, so they're crossing the road anyway. Just

something to consider. But you can just see how flat that is on the other side of the road as compared to what we'd be required to to ban this this drainage basin and pulver and everything that we're looking at there. So just uh really asked the commission to approve an additional waiver. Yeah, the Christian center is having to pay for waivers when they're not really changing anything on the site. Just as part of this process there an agreement they would pay for an additional waiver for the for the sidewalk here. But to do that, I mean, you're talking a major study of all the surrounding properties as far as drainage and everything that goes into that uh covert and into that ditch. And it does combine with the with the street there. So the only that be the only sensible to put it. Again, we could could back it up in the property. I don't think anybody's going to use it. It's going to be an awkward type sidewalk and it's still going to be a sidewalk sidewalk to nowhere as was referenced. We are requesting an additional waiver. Happy to take any questions.

Did you Did you get a chance to get any uh quotes? Uh we did not. I mean, I I looked at it. I mean, I think you're talking tens of thousands of dollars to get a you'd have to get it designed first. For one thing, that's pretty good size civil engineering project to figure out all the drainage that's going into that and what would be required. And again, it would be part of the city. You'd have to put a curb cut and change change the curb cut, take it away, put a new curb and and all that. So, yeah. No, no, we haven't. Commission, you have any other questions for the petitioner?

I had one question. There was a you know, uh, the city made a comment about the sign. If the sign were to be replaced, I know it's currently 72 ft. If it was going to be replaced, they wanted to restrict it just to 70 square feet. Are you all fine with that? Yeah, for sure. And honestly, Carolyn, it it probably matches 72. I mean, the sign company did that sign and I think they probably submitted it or whatever, too. So, I gave you some rough dimensions. Those probably aren't exact dimensions. It might be exactly 70, I guess. Yeah, for sure. Any other commissioners? Okay, thank you very much. Thank you very much.

Is anyone in the audience for would like to give testimony for or against this? Please come forward. Seeing none, do we have some reasonzoning? Yeah. So, we'll do that. We'll vote on this and then once that's complete, we'll go to the special use. Okay. So for resoning existing uses of property within the general area of the property in question, uh, no negative. The zoning classification of property within the general area of the property in question, there's no negative. The suitability of the property in question to the uses permitted under the existing zoning classification, no negative. the trend of development, if any, in the general area of the property in question, including changes to land use or prior amendments to the zoning district regulations, thereby altering conditions for use and development of property, no negative. The suitability of the property for the use or uses proposed by the proper amendment, no negative. The investigation of other suitable ways of accomplishing the proposed purpose of the amendatory petition, no negative. the health, safety, and general welfare of the city in the general and immediate area of the property subject to the amendment in particular. No negative. The enjoyment of property by neighbors for its intended use, no negative. That granting the amendment is consistent with the purpose and intent of this development code. No negative. That granting the amendment is consistent with the purpose and intent of the adopted plans. No negative. Those are the findings for resoning. Any discussions on the findings and facts for the reszoning only

hearing? None. Mr. Chairman, just for clarification, this resoning does not involve the sidewalk issue. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Do we have a motion? Do we have a second? We second that. Okay. Any discussion? All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Is that a motion to approve? Maybe I missed. Motion to approve. Ununice made the motion and seconded by Barry for approval. For approval. Okay. Thank you. For the reasonzoning. Yeah.

Okay. Okay. Motion passes for that. Do we have findings and facts for the special use? We do. The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the special use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public. Also, sorry.

Oh, no, no, no. I think they just did the resign just for You're f You're good. All right. Findings and facts. Special use.

The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the special use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare. Yes. Special use will not be injurious to the uses and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood in which it is to be located. Yes. The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for us is permitted in the district. Yes. Adequate facilities, access, roads, drainage, and or necessary facilities have been or will be provided. Yes. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. Yes. The proposed special use is not contrary to the objectives of the official comprehensive plan of the city of Pory as amended. Yes. If a public use or a use providing public utility service that such use or service shall meet a demonstrable public need and provide a public benefit not applicable. The special use shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located except as such regulations may in each instance be modified pursuant to the recommendations of the planning and zoning commission. Yes. And those are for special use. Any discussions on the findings and facts for the special use? Do we have a motion for the special use? Move to approve the special use um subject to the conditions of the development review review board.

Now for clarification, do you want that to include their recommendation for the sidewalks? I do not. So without the recommendation of a required sidewalk. So you're saying I'm saying no sidewalks. So, approve with staff recommendations and uh and approve their petitioner's waiver for the sidewalk. That sounds better. Thank you. Is that good enough, I guess? Yeah. So, to clarify, that is to approve with staff recommendations and the petitioner's waiver for not putting in the sidewalk. Correct. Correct. Okay. Do I hear a second?

I'll second. Any discussion, Mr. Chairman? Um just this one time I will agree with my beloved colleague across the aisle uh Commissioner Ununice and allow for no sidewalk but please do not consider this to be a precedent for me.

Comment to Mr. Commissioner. You know I think we need I think the city needs some flexibility. I agree that you know we've been on many sidewalk issues and I agree they should be there. This is a different condition, but I I do agree that this there should be some flexibility in some way that can be worked out. That's my comment to this thing. And I I agree. We you know, we've been through these sidewalk issues many times. Yeah, I agree. I mean, but due to the existing conditions already there, it seems almost cost prohibitive to to put the sidewalk in, or at least it would cost a whole lot of money to put the sidewalk in.

It's 2026. These two agreed. All right. All in favor? I said this is not setting a precedent, but it is. All in favor by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? All right. Motion passes. Congratulations. It'll go to city council on January 27th. Okay. Thanks again for coming. Give us just a second to get on to the next one here.

That was uh I did that. my steps. No, that's fine. Um, I thought about it, but then I was like, that's kind of awkward. Yeah. Yeah.

Oh my goodness. It works. Yes. How's that? Okay.

Case PZ528-2025.

Sure. PZ528-2025 hold a public hearing and forward a recommendation to city council on the request of Jason Peringer of Puria First Assembly of God to reszone property from a class R1 single family residential district to a class C1 general commercial district for a part of the property located at 4020 North Brandywine Drive which is part of partial identification number 142910. 1010005. Uh so this request is sort of a companion to the case uh we just heard. Um this is the ask by the um PIA first at 4020 Brandy Wine Drive to reszone uh their portion uh 1.6 acres that they would be keeping ownership of. Um whereas we just uh got a motion to recommend reszoning the back portion um which would be transferred to the Christian center. So uh this case um really is just is needed um to result in both parcels having the same C1 that would allow um and meet the city's requirements for lot access to have shared parking. So that's the reason to also reszone this uh 1.6 6 acres. Um the church still plans to continue their church operations. Um as mentioned in the previous case, this would, you know, have a uh shared access and shared parking agreement. Um the intent is really this would formalize that and meet city standards about vehicle access and shared parking. Um no change to to the uses proposed. Um well as a for this reasoner request I'll note the surrounding zoning. Um so be

zone C1 adjacent is C1 with a Christian center property. Um across Brandy Wine and uh War Memorial is C1. So we have consistency there. Um to the east is R7 apartment uh multif family residential. Um and then across Lake Avenue is um R3 single family residential for surrounding zonings. Um the uh the church um has existed um or was established uh through zoning um process as a special exception um in 1983. Um, in the C1 district, if this request is to be reszoned, a church is a permitted use, um, consistent with what they' be resoned to. Um and so our review here um well included in your packet again I have the the same easement uh shared access um survey to get an idea but uh we're talking about um keeping from here forward uh retained by the church to continue their operations and then um the back part portion being transferred to a different ownership. Um, and so I'll go over our LEAL factors for this case specific to the 1.6 acres uh, and reszoning that the existing uses of and zoning of nearby property. This request would match the adjacent C1 and the existing use of nearby property includes residential and commercial uses. So there's consistency there. Extent to which property values are diminished by the particular zoning restriction. Um the current zoning restriction actually uh restricts

options for shared parking. Um and um would be remedied by this. The extent to which the destruction of property values of the complaining party benefits the health, safety or general welfare of the public. Uh we don't think that uh there would be any diminishment to public welfare. The relative gain to the public as compared to the hardship imposed. Um the reszoning would consolidate our zoning districts here into just uh one from two to one and the parcels um would uh could share their parking. Uh suitability of the property for the zone purpose. A church is a permitted use um permitted by right in the C1 district. So that's uh met. Um factor six, length of time the property has been vacant is not applicable. And then regarding public uh need to for the resoning and the use here um the off- streetet parking um for the uses uh would be sh would be shared and our future land use designation for this particular whole parcel is low density residential. Uh but our recommendation is to approve um to reszone uh the 1.6 acres of 4020 Brandy Wine Drive. That's all I have for you on this companion case.

Thank you. Commissioner, have any questions for staff? Seeing start. Go ahead. So, what prompted the need for this resoning?

Uh, so, uh, kind of two things that that the city ordinance would want to see. Um, so the Christian Center because they want to acquire adjacent property, uh, we typically like to see consistent zoning across parcels for uniform development, right? Um, and and regulations. Um, so that's one. And then, um, the, uh, regulations regarding shared parking and our definition of lot access of, you know, what is lot access? um ask for the same zoning or um not to have, you know, a residential zoned use or a commercial use going through a residential residentially zoned lot to have shared parking or or access to a parcel. So, that's the reason for the reasonzoning the entire 4020 North Brandy Wine Drive.

Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you. the petitioners here would like to come forward and speak.

Okay. All right. Anyone in the audience like to speak for against this case? Seeing none. Findings and facts, please. Findings of fact reszoning. Existing uses of property within the general area of the property in question. There's no negative. The zoning classification of property within the general area of the property in question. No negative. The suitability of the property in question to the uses permitted under the existing zoning classification. No negative. The trend of development, if any, in the general area of the property in question, including changes to land use or prior amendments to the zoning district regulations, thereby altering conditions for use and development of property. No negative. The suitability of the property for the use or uses proposed by the proper amendment. No negative. The investigation of other suitable ways of accomplishing the proposed purpose of the mandatory petition. No negative. The health, safety, and general welfare of the city in general and immediate area of the property subject to the amendment in particular. No negative. The ajoyment of property by neighbors for its intended use. No negative. That granting the amendment is consistent with the purpose and intent of this development code. No negative. that granting the amendment is consistent with the purpose and intent of the adopted plans. No negative.

Thank you. Any discussion hearing? None. Do we have a motion? Move to approve to reszone per the legal description. Do we have a second? Second. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? All right. Congratulations. It passed. It'll be in front of city council on January 27th. Thank you guys for coming. All right, if you're ready. Case PZ529-2025.

Thank you. So, this is PZ case PZ529 2025. It's a request from the city of Poria to amend appendex A which is the unified development code relating to street walls. So just to give little bit of the the historical information, street walls are required in our form districts and our form districts only. They're required to um be placed along a building line frontage that is not occupied by the build the principal building structure. Okay. Their purpose is just to separate the public street space from the private street space. Um, street walls came to be in in 2006 with the heart of Poria plan. Um, so they've they've been with our regulations for some time. Currently, they're required, as I mentioned, along the building line frontage. They're required to be 6 to 8 feet in height. And they're currently required to be constructed with masonry columns, a base course, two-ft base course, and either solid masonry or metal uh interior. And it's illustrated here for you in this photo. Okay, so that's the current design requirements for street walls. So as redevelopment has occurred within the form districts, some projects have been granted variances from the zoning board of appeals allowing the removal of of some of the design elements. The masonry base course which is that kind of the the two foot kind of knee wall I guess for for another description. Other variances have uh approved increasing the column spacing. Currently, it's required to be

8 to 10 feet spacing. Those columns had variance where it's actually allowed a greater spacing or the complete elimination of the street wall requirement. So, these variances have resulted really in a wide range of street wall designs that you'll find now primarily in the warehouse form district is where the most of them have been have been uh applicable and constructed. So, we have we've had some feedback from developers and that's what brings this to you today is in response to the development community and really they're they're seeking more flexibility in the design of that street wall to ask for these changes to the current regulations and that's what I'll outline you outline for you. So, there's four changes that are being proposed with this text amendment for you to consider. The first is to remove the requirement for the masonry columns. So these columns here would become optional. Okay, not required. Remove the two foot tall brick base which is that kind of the linear twoft that would also become optional. So not required. And then in order to prevent a a solid metal wall, which is something I don't think we would want to have in place, we're introducing an openness requirement for the metal street wall. So if you're not building a solid brick wall, which you still can, if you're proposing a street wall that just has the metal, we want an openness component so that it doesn't become an undesirable or if that were a desirable attribute it would be approved through a variance process. Okay, so very you know sight specific.

So that would be uh the third proposed this again would eliminate that solid opaque metal wall. The last proposed is really kind of a um cleanup in in the regulation, modifying the definition definition of street wall to align with the proposed material combinations and that' be the brick or the metal and then moving current specifications into the architectural standards of our unified development code. That fourth one is more of a housekeeping but also aligning with the previous three recommended changes. So on in your your uh case packet you will find the ordinance which has language that's stricken language that's underlined that would be added the placement of the street wall along that frontage line the height six the eight six to 8 ft that's not proposed to change. What we're proposing to change is the design, the materials, and how it would look. So that if a if the recommended changes are approved, you would potentially end up with a street wall that's just a solid or just a a traditional metal. There may not be any brick component to it. Um but again to reiterate the development community is is giving us this kind of feedback that they want the flexibility. This could be an interim placement until of actual development with a building is proposed. So, I think that's why we're we're we've seen the variances being asked and that why we're, as we always do, we always look and see what maybe something's not working. What can we do to to help alleviate and that's why we're bringing this forward to you? There any questions that I can answer

for you? Think that um the reason they were asking for variances was because of the cost. That's possible. That is possible. But you don't know. Yeah. I mean, that definitely could contribute to the rationale. Mr. Chairman. Yes, Leah. Um, one of the purposes of street walls from my perspective in terms of new urbanism is to help define the street.

And something that becomes so transparent as that to me is going in the wrong direction from a strictly new urbanism standpoint. Why not eliminate street walls alto together? I mean, they've been a struggle since day one because a lot of developers, you know, I mean, to me, there's an an aesthetic or esoteric aspect to street walls. And if we're going to somewhat neuter them, pardon my inappropriate language,

why not just allow I mean, what would be so much better? Why would it be worse to have no fence there? because it's essentially a fence and you've still got the grass or whatever is behind that picture. Yep. Why not eliminate street the street wall requirement? If that's the direction that you as a commission feel is more appropriate, that is certainly a a consideration you can recommend. Absolutely. I understand your your comments completely.

I I don't necessarily want to do that like certainly not today, but it just seems like we're diluting it. And that is one of the principal reasons the form districts, you know, Prospect Avenue, uh, Sheran Triangle, etc. The whole point was to help, uh, provide urban definition to spaces and whatnot. And this is sort of diluting that. Anyway, thank you.

Any other commissioners have questions for the staff? Okay. We don't have findings and facts for this, right?

No. No. Any uh I'll make a motion to approve this because again, I'm not opposed to it. I just feel like what now we just have fences. I mean, it's the street. It's not so much of a street wall, but I'm not opposed to this, but why not make it even that much simpler? But I'll make a motion to to approve this change as as uh suggested by city staff. I'll second it. I get public comment. Oh, I guess is anyone in the audience for against this case?

Seeing none. Do I have a motion? Oh, do I have to make my I move to approve as submitted by city staff? I second. Any discussion on the motion? I'm just kind of torn here because I really like the look of that and I think at some point it had a purpose. Um, but I I also agree with Mr. Barry that we just don't want fences. Um, but given that the development community has made so many requests, I'll uh I'll vote to approve. Any other discussion? All in favor say I. I.

I. Anyone opposed? Motion passes. Thank you. It is right though. It'll be weed city growing up along that fence line.

Yeah. I think connect storefront to another storefront. the only question, but they didn't want to. those streets.

All right, last but not least, case PZ535-2025. Case number PZ535-2025. request to hold a public hearing and forward a recommendation to city council on the on the request of Betsy Hall of Bradley University to amend an existing official development plan ordinance number 13,361 as amended in a class N1 institutional district for local sign regulations for the property located at 1501 West Bradley Avenue commonly known as Bradley University and primarily bounded by Main Street, the alley east of Cooper Street, Bradley Avenue, Fredonia Avenue, Juria Place, St. James Street, University Street, Borland Avenue, Windham Street, and Garland and Garfield Avenue. Uh so, uh Bradley University is here asking to amend their official development plan. their official development plan um uh identifies uh the development regulations on campus and that includes their sign regulations. Uh so this afternoon they're asking to add three new sign types to their sign plan for their campus. Um their official development plan was um first adopted in 1992. Um, as recent as 2019, it was updated uh for local sign regulations. At that time, it added uh three sign types, a primary directional, a building ID, and a directional sign type. Uh, this afternoon, they're asking to add three more. And um, uh, this would apply campuswide. So, uh, including your packet is their zoning map. um their their properties are in the N1 institutional district and they

have their official development plan for the N1 regulations. Um and so the these sign types are specifically signs for three specific locations, but it would be a part of their sign their campuswide sign. Um so in your packet they are proposing um there are three different types. This map um is intended to tell you their location. So, we have Main Street up at the top. Um and then University Street comes down at the um main corner intersection there. So, they're looking for uh one new sign type here. It's an archway type of sign, a wall sign on uh Harper Hall. And then um at the next intersection with St. James Place there is a median and they're asking for a sign type to be approved there. Um yeah uh so uh these uh sign renderings would become part of their official development plan as they're signed uh as an as an amendment to their sign regulations. Uh this first sign is u at that median with St. James and and University Street. Um, so if you're on University Street, you would be passing by this way. Um, and then turn into St. James into their campus this way. Um, and the the B would be there. Currently, there's a like a wall with a wall sign stating Bradley University. Uh, this would replace that. Um, it's uh would be an internal illumination method uh for that sign. Um, the height of it is about 7 and 1/2 ft from grade. um with the the overall uh signed structure I guess being six feet tall um and then on a foot and a

half uh platform. So that would be the the general dimensions in ter uh for height. Um and so it' be located in the median out out of the sidewalk. Uh that that's part of the the crosswalk there. Uh the second sign type is uh they're calling it a gateway plaza and there would be a gateway plaza arch. So this is at the corner with uh West Main Street and University. So the the four-way intersection um Brad the intersection on Bradley campus side um has that uh like the Ali building is kind of here generally now. um this uh additional landscaping plaza area would would all be new and then have additional signage um as the amendment. Um there also is some fencing uh in here uh to kind of continue their existing fence style and fence line that they have on their perimeter um and throughout their campus. Uh but the gateway arch. So this Bradley University band kind of corresponds here with this arch here and then the pillars. Um so here's the elevation view. Um and a additional rendering for that elevation. Uh right now there's their directional sign um their primary directional sign style and that sign would be uh removed could potentially be relocated um but that's wouldn't be there anymore. And then their their third sign type um

you'll see in the background there um a wall uh um a wall type sign on the east facade of Harper Hall. So you can kind of see in the background there um some additional dimensions for that. Um so they don't currently have their wall signs that they have now in their sign package or sign plans or you know sign label uh building name type of signs. Uh so this would be a new component to their sign plan. Um and uh yeah, this particular feature is um you know being proposed in uh uh also with uh cooperation and partnership with big picture. Um and so um they have identified um a general subject type or or context that they are looking for artists to submit uh submissions for. um if that hasn't happened already. But that's the general concept of what the spirit of this sign would encompass. Uh but the local sign regulations would regulate obviously the placement, the height of it, um the overall dimensions and um compared to the facade here, um it's under 8% of the overall facade of uh the multi-story uh Harbor Hall. and then would sit in the background there um you know off the off the street. Um so that those are the three sign types it would get added to their official development plan. Um and the last thing to cover is the standards. Um uh the standards here that I'm using are

the special use standards and I find that um this request to add these three sign types would would be compatible. Um we do have conditions regarding verifying sight lines of the sign at the median uh to make sure there's no detriment to public um safety. Um no injury to other property or diminishment to property values. uh no impediment to early development and um provides adequate facilities and it doesn't really affect or with the sighteline information um it should meet uh ingress egress measures minimize traffic congestion um and it would conform to all the district regulations establishes the code essentially for them. The comprehensive plan critical success factor is um aligns with grow employers and jobs and reinvest in neighborhoods. And the city council strategic plan goal is business growth and prosperity. Our recommendation is to approve. We have a couple like uh context specific conditions. Um the first condition I have here is essentially met by uh what the site plan you saw, but it's that the hardscape circle under the gateway plaza arch and the fencing including the foundations shall be completely on private property. Their site plan does show that. And number two, verify sight lines to ensure the University Street Island entry sign does not affect visibility at the intersection. Um, three, elimination of the University Street Island entry sign shall be shielded and directed in such a manner that the light is not directed toward vehicles or streets. Any lighting cannot be distracting to drivers and the placement of lights shall not shine in the direction of vehicles. Four, the scant style accent lighting fixtures uh shall be located aimed or shielded to minimize glare and light

spill into the night sky. Five, a revocable a revocable rightway permit uh shall be obtained prior to installation of the University Street Island entry sign and signed permits uh would also be obtained prior to installing um any of the signs. Um but their petition, you know, essentially shows that they can they can or will be meeting all of the conditions. That's it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will recuse myself from this as my company is working on this job project. I got to ask, did you do a traffic study?

We're increasing. Any other questions for staff? Hearing none, is the petitioner here like to come forward? Please state your name and address and tell us a little bit more about the project.

Good afternoon. I'm Betsy Hall, vice president for finance and administration at Bradley University, um 1501 West Bradley Avenue.

I'm Kevin Graham with Terara Engineering, uh senior landscape architect, director of landscape architecture. So, a little bit about this project. Um, under President Shadet's leadership, um, his vision for the premier student experience is really coming to life and this project is one of the the first steps in and really really seeing that reality. Um, in this project, we're creating a welcoming gateway to our campus on Main University down through St. James. Um, so that you know you've arrived on Bradley's campus. Um, we believe that beautifying the campus entryway like this will draw positive attention to Bradley for our students, for our visitors, and also for the community. I do want to note that the mural project um is a collaborative effort with Big Picture and that it was funded by the Greater PIA Leadership Council. We're really excited to see that come to life um as part of this whole um entryway um beautifification project um gets underway. So, thank you for considering our proposal and uh we would be happy to take any questions.

Thank you. Any questions for the petitioner? Hearing none. Thank you. Anyone in the audience like to speak for against this case? Come forward. Seeing none. Findings and facts, please. These are the findings of fact for the official development plan. The adoption of the official development plan and maintenance of uses permitted or designated in the plan will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare. Will not. The uses, landscaping, parking, screening, and signage designated in the plan will not be injurious to the uses and enjoyment of other property in the media vicinity and will not substantially diminish property values in the neighborhoods adjacent to the area designated in the plan. Will not adequate facilities across access roads, drainage, and or other necessary facilities exist or will be provided? Yes. measures have been or will be taken to provide adequate ingress and egress to minimize traffic congestion of public streets.

Yes, that's it. Those four. Okay. Any discussions on the findings and facts? Motion to approve. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Okay. Any discussion, Mr. Chairman?

Yes. Um, I continue to struggle with the idea of filling a lot of our empty wall spaces with large vinyl murals. Um, as an architect, when an architect designs a building, they hopefully carefully consider all four facades and they design it to be attractive and and be complete and holistic and to not be changed uh by adding art on the outside uh by clipping it on. But that frustration or concern uh as we move forward uh is superseded by the faith that I do have in the institution behind this uh uh request uh to update their institutional plan. I'm uh confident that they have considered all the possibilities and certainly am very supportive of the institution and so I will uh go ahead and vote in favor of it. But I I remain concerned about um other use other locations for that type of artwork. Thank you very much.

Thank you. I think it's a great addition to that corner. It really is changes that whole corner. The the landscape pieces I totally agree with you Rich the But anyway, enough said. I I just reiterate that this the signs are very nice, which I never thought I'd say signs are nice, but they did a really nice job of um designing these, but we have no design for the mural yet. So, we can't comment on that. That's true. And we can't rule on that either. I'm always for a large B. So,

call the question. All in favor? Say I. I. Any discussion or excuse me, anyone opposed? Motion passes. We go in front of city council on the 27th. Thanks for continuing to uh improve the Bradley campus. So call a question. This time take moment for the citizens opportunity to address the commission. Right. Anyone in the audience like to speak? Seeing none. Make a motion to adjurnn. Second. Second. All in favor? I

see you guys next month. Sign a document. Don't leave yet.

Cross you out. I'll send regards to Okay. I didn't think so.

Yeah. Okay. Really? Okay. All right. Just making sure I I want you happy. I don't want you mad that I'm not there. I know. Yesterday I was just like, "Oh, the sun is shining for a little bit. Yeah, it did. It got warm. Ed, that's not true. I I won't take that as an answer. See you next month. No, Ed. Oh my gosh. Oh my god.

Not as long as you're around me. I'm not going to let it happen. So, you too. Usually she's yelling at me.

I try. You guys have a good holiday. What do you want to give us? We can't find