Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

That's okay. That's okay. I can um Come on. I'll move Rachel to my right. Okay. You make Rachel there. Yeah. Oh, she has no so much.

I have two cuz I always Thank you. Look at you. You said you have two named tags. No, no, no, no. I only have one. I said I was going to move it over to here. I don't think they No, no. I have two uh agendas. I print one and then they print one.

We have Commissioner Blackwell online already. Commissioner O'Neal is here, but she is refusing the briefing items, so she'll be in here for hearing and action. And I believe that Peter is going to either be here or online. I'm not sure. I didn't uh see an email from I thought I did see from Peter. Hold on. We're about 3 minutes to start time in person is what I understand.

Oh yeah. Was 133.

Um what? I think she has it because I I don't usually bring anything. Hello. Is she case? Okay. How you doing? Good. responded and gave me my cell number. So, I'm hoping to get back. He had something in Dubai, but he Oh, here you go. We're about three minutes out.

Oh, she's beautiful. I'm so plain, Jane. roughly 2 minutes out and and apologies for those that are wondering if we're stacked up here. Why aren't we starting? We've got a 1:30 start. We can't start until then. Uh so we'll just enjoy each other for two more minutes. Hello, Commissioner Kinttonia. It's good to have you.

Hello, Commissioner. How are you? Well, excellent. Thank you. We've got a room full. Fantastic.

Way to start off 2026. got the equation point.

Oh, gotcha. Looks like we are at 1:30. So, welcome and good afternoon, good and beautiful people. Happy new year. Uh, it's 2026. This is the briefing portion for the planning commission. Briefing means that cases will be heard preliminarily. The public does not have input at this time, but the presentations will uh take place. commission will ask questions or comment. I'm going to read through uh today's very brief briefing agenda which is as follows. Briefing agenda item A is BDA-2024-08149 at 1206 Forbes Avenue. This is construction of a fivestory academic building for Dukane University in the Bluff neighborhood. Presenting this afternoon is Mr. Frager. It's on the video now. Right. Uh, good afternoon, commissioners.

I will read in the case and then turn it over to our applicant team to provide the presentation.

Thank you. Project development plan application BDA 202408149 was filed by AE Works on behalf of Dane University for new construction of a five-story 80,000 square ft building at the corner of Forbes Avenue and McGee Street in the Bluff neighborhood. The proposed use is for the building to house the Rango School of Health Sciences which falls under education and classrooms based general in the zoning code. The use will include classrooms, labs, and offices as well as a clinic at the ground floor level. Per the use standards in the zoning code, education classroom general usage shall be in compliance with an institutional master plan. The use shall also be subject to the project development plan review criteria in section 922.10. An existing institutional master plan is on file for Dane University last amended in July 2025. That amendment relocated the pro proposed Rango School of Public Health from the north side of Forbes Avenue to its present location at the southwest corner of Forbes and McGee. City staff have reviewed the proposal against the standards outlined in the IMP. The project is compliant with the use and dimensional requirements as outlined in the IMP. The dimensional requirements include a 30-foot setback along Forbes Avenue and 20ft setback on McGee Street. There's also an open space requirement that will be met with publicly accessible open space with publicly accessible open space plaza on Forbes Avenue. 10-ft sidewalks are also being proposed along both frontages. The proposal includes open space on Forbes Avenue that will include an active plaza space with trees, planters, and benches

intended to provide areas of respit for individuals individuals and small gatherings. This open space is consistent with the open space guidelines on pages 56 and 58 of the IMP. Those guidelines include, but are not limited to, recommendations for creating active campus spaces, increasing connectivity, and enhancing streetscapes. The proposal includes street trees within 20 ft of the right of way in compliance with section 918 of the zoning code. Utilities along the street edge preclude planting between the street and the and the sidewalk. The proposal will be removing 93 total inches of trees from the site which will need to be replaced on a one for one for one in basis. The applicant will be providing six 3-in caliber trees to account for the 18 in of replacement trees replacement inches. That is the applicant is working with forestry on the remaining 75 uh inches as designated at designated campus locations. The project will be achieving certain sustainability measures but will not be lead or passive house certified. The IMP while not explicitly requiring certification does say certification should be obtained where feasible. Prior buildings on the Dukane University campus have achieved certifications including the DEPLA and the power center buildings. The applicant has been asked to outline the sustainability features of the building as part of this presentation. The project will have a ground floor transparency of 53% along the Forbes Avenue frontage, just under the 60% recommended in the institutional master

plan. The applicant indicated this reduction is necessary for the ground floor healthcare and educational functions which require privacy, additional privacy. The proposal is being reviewed against the Uptown Eco Innovation District plan. A plan compliance report will be provided prior to the hearing commission uh for review. The project was reviewed by the contextual design advisory panel on October 14th, 2025. The panel appreciated the strong street edge this building will help create at the corner of Forbes Avenue and the front public space for gathering and circulation. The panel had recommendations for materials and orientation of the clinic entrance. The full contextual design advisory panel comments are attached to your report. A development activities meeting was held with the Bluff Neighborhoods registered community organizations on October 20th, 2025. The community organizations were largely supportive of the proposal. Uh with that, I'll turn it over to the applicant team for the presentation. Here is the uh clip.

Good afternoon. My name is Gabriel Hohag. I'm an architect with the SLAM collaborative architect of record. I'm joined by our uh broader consultant team AE Works, the the other applicant and our Dukane University partners. Uh thank you for the opportunity to present with you. We're going to touch today on the university's vision and project overview. We'll share a little bit about the building design summary. We'll touch on site features, transportation, storm water management, landscape features. I'll include a little bit about the energy use and sustainability features. And we'll wrap up talking about our community engagement. Dukane University has organized a vision aligned with their institutional master plan to create a new 80,000 square foot home for the school of health sciences. spaces within this facility will allow students, faculty, and staff. Uh spaces for instruction and learning through a variety of immersive simulation spaces across a continuum of care. These include a clinic with pediatric speech language pathology programs, simulated hospital rooms, physical therapy, high low table labs, and simulated homebased care environments for training caregivers. for example, for stroke recovery patients. To support these programs, the project's big ideas include interdisciplinary instruction, strengthening engagement, leveraging the technology used in these classrooms, and creating a sightspecific strategy for this urban condition. All in support of the university's commitment to improve public health and well-being. We are within the design phase. We're in construction. documents heading towards

bidding and permitting midyear targeting a uh fall semester of 2028 occupancy. The project is located along Forbes Avenue at the intersection with McGee Street adjacent to the existing Forbes Avenue garage and the existing Locust Garage. The proposed project will transform an existing surface lot uh along a sloped site into a five-story facility which has instructional administrative and simulation environments. The functiondriven planning has also prioritized spaces with access to natural daylight to connect to a broader Forbes Avenue experience. The exterior materials are durable and have been designed to continue a common language part of university campus and that are contextual to Forbes Avenue. The facades are organized to articulate depth, rhythm, and visual interests and fold in transparency at that ground floor in alignment with the urban design targets. Here the design team has highlighted uh some of how we've addressed those urban design targets established for the project. The project aligns with the institutional master plan amended in 2025. On this slide, you can see the project location highlighted in red. Viewing the proposed project from the corner of Forbes Avenue and McGee Street. The entrance is animated with a vertical zone of glass and student life spaces above it sit between two warmed toned brick volumes of instructional spaces.

A series of uh bay windows and relief in the brick and the metal panel allow for a variety of textures to improve the pedestrian experience at multiple scales. Looking at the site plan, the project aligns with the setback and height criteria established in the IMP, including setbacks which are contextually appropriate for adjacent buildings and to maintain a strong urban edge. Universal design is layered into the project through accessible access from public sidewalks through to the main entrances and within the program mission itself and the programs housed within it. Special attention has been applied to the size, layout, and the sensory perception of those spaces to facilitate the widest spectrum of users with disabilities. looking at the site and talking about receiving an service vehicle movement. This uh existing service vehicle movement from McGee Street to Gibbon Street will be leveraged to serve this project uh with those vehicles accessing a receiving uh area and door to the south of the building. Service vehicles will exit proceeding under Forb's garage as vehicles currently maneuver. Looking at the site plan, the site features include the street trees as uh along Forbes Avenue with a pedestrian plaza that leads to the main entrance. A separate dedicated entrance is provided with to the clinic at the northwest corner top left of this image and the building service entrance to the south along Gibbon Street. The team has highlighted and illustrated the accessible pathways for pedestrians serving the building in this diagram

that include access to the main entrance and to the clinic entrance. Accessible parking is provided within the Forbes Avenue garage to the left of the image with an accessible pedestrian pathway connecting back to the building. And in addition, an accessible space can be accommodated at the Gibbon McGee intersection. In the bottom right of this image, transportation related goals were developed with the city and domei initiatives in mind and in conjunction with the goals of the uptown ecoinnovation district project report. Multimmodal transportation is supported with bike racks. the upcoming installation of the community ebike station and through the PRTUP pass program for students and staff. The project storm water management concept was approved and is currently in technical review. The project BMPs include the three highlighted here, two of which are underground storage tanks, one of which is an above ground bio retention area. The health of the proposed plantings are enhanced with resiliency features appropriate for an urban site. The landscape design integrates appropriately scaled pedestrian spaces with a tree layout contextually appropriate for Forbes Avenue. for this dense urban condition. The trees associated with this project uh site are being carefully coordinated between the project team and P uh DPW to align with the IMP. The project's mechanical equipment located at grade along Gibbons Street is

screened to meet the screening criteria through plantings and through a louver style fence. The project incorporates uh excuse me, the university's master plan IMP shows the potential zones where the project's tree caliper replacement act action is currently being coordinated. The project incorporates active users along the ground floor to support uh spaces facing Forbes Avenue. The design seeks to balance the transparency goals with the requirements of the clinic which is located on the first floor and requires slightly less transparency. A consideration has been given to shifting as many spaces as reasonable towards that Forbes Avenue to support this transparency goal. The design also augments the facade transparency goal with an activated student life spaces stacked vertically above the main entrance as a collaborative and animated zone. The design leverages several sustainability strategies. One of the passive strategies is careful configuration of windows that support and introduce appropriate natural daylight for instructional spaces and to balance a window to wall ratio. A wide range of system design features enhance the sustainable and wellness attributes of the building. These include designs to reduce HVAC fan energy use, fixtures which reduce water use, lightning design which reduces light pollution in alignment with dark sky criteria. A sightsp specific uh strategy uh includes obtaining energy from a nearby district utility plant providing heating and cooling significantly more efficiently than a localized building equipment.

This project dovetales with the focus areas from the ecoinnovation district and Dukane University continues to be part of that engagement. The project has progressed through a series of regulatory steps, some of which are shown here. I'll highlight several of the letters of support on the right hand side that followed our RCO engagement meetings and on behalf of our design team along with our partners at Dukane University, thank you for the opportunity to present these materials.

Thank you very much for a very concise uh presentation. At this time, we don't take any public testimony, but commissioners, now is your time for comments or questions as it relates. It looks like Commissioner Blackwell has something she'd like to say. Commissioner Blackwell,

I just wanted to um say what a beautiful project and I appreciate the highlight on community input and partnership as well as showing that support up front in the beginning showing um the importance you know to the university that that has. I'm really excited about the sustainability, the tree canopy. So many highlights and I look forward to um when you come back. Thank you.

Additional commissioner comments, Commissioner Woo. Yeah, I uh I like how um um the glazing has kind of been focused more toward Forbes Avenue. I think that's a really good touch. uh especially um even if it's you know not 60% I um it uh definitely will I think help eliminate that canyon feel from Forbes Avenue that you kind of get when you're going through there. Um and uh I like how you kind of uh also push like the student um wellness area toward toward the front where it's visible. Um, and uh, yeah, I think uh, it'll definitely look better than the parking lot there, too.

Okay. I'll just I mean, the lighting is great. I think it it's easy on the eyes. It matches the buildings around it. I like what's going to happen in there. That's something that in this area we need a lot more folks that are focused on on uh on those careers. So, thank you for that. I think it's great. Commissioner Cantonia. Yes. Hi, good afternoon. So, thank you so much for your presentation. I do have a question. Actually, this is a really great rendering. Um the the the side I guess that would be the east side which has a D on it on that wall. That whole area there that's that's more of a bike parking, right? So then and you also have a door that comes out from the fire fire stairs. Is that correct?

Yes, that's correct. Okay. Um, are you guys going to consider is there a consideration for better lighting there? Because it feels like that's going to be like a little area that is almost like hidden from everything because the sidewalk is going on a slope. You don't have anything from the building facing that area. So sometimes it those tend to be kind of like the you know the the dark areas. That's a great comment and I think we can take it in consideration and part of the imagery we're seeing here is an artistic rendering.

Okay. Right. Okay. Yeah, that's what I figured. And that's also my other comment was I know that I see that to the left of the building uh there's there seems to be like a light and missing between the two in the middle. So I guess you guys going to do obviously do a light study so make sure that the the right amount of lighting is actually being spread around the whole sidewalk. Right. Correct.

Okay. Yeah. Well, that was that was it. It's just those areas that sometimes I'm concerned about that end up being kind of like dark. If you could make sure that um there's enough light there so that it feels safe. Thank you. So in final comment, I will say that um it is definitely uh welcome and appreciated the programming that will be going on inside the building. I I think that's primary, right? That would be the the primary. And I'll say in terms of exterior, I appreciate seeing the building set back to allow this corridor to to really be inviting and warm and not so much asphalt, right? So, that'll really play a part in sort of, you know, cooling the climate and and warming the heart, you know, if that's what we're looking at. I love the blend of the brick uh and the black. It's like Pittsburgh grit, right? You know, it's it's what you It's kind of what you want to see. I think you did a great job at putting all the jewels at the front of the building and because the back of the building is is facing a garage, um you gave it what it needed, but you know, you you did your big one on the front. So, I appreciate that. Um, overall I I it's impressive and it and it looks really good and so we look forward to seeing you come back in two weeks cuz I guess my comments are the final ones, right? Uh, so thank you very much and you have a great rest of your day. See you in two. You're welcome and have a great rest of your day. Okay, so it looks like we are about 8 minutes from uh the hearing and action portion of today. So, we will go on pause for those of you that are in the room and may be waiting uh for the

hearing and action agenda because we have to wait formally until 2 p.m. We can't start until then. So, if you want to use the restroom or get a snack or something like that, uh please feel free to do so. For items that are hearing in action, yes, that is correct. there will be an opportunity for the public to speak as it relates to the item that's on the agenda. Uh well, did you get a um Okay, so for today uh there would be an item for plan of lots and there would be one item for hearing and action which would be the specially planned district in Bakery Square. Those are the two things that would be presented that public could speak. It would allow for public comment. That is correct.

Are you here to speak on it?

I'm here to speak about something involved. interest.

Okay. Um, so if you were looking for an open comment opportunity, um, if it's not specific to these items, uh, then you certainly can say them, you know, when it comes up. But but the item that I think that you might want to comment on is not on the agenda. Uh okay.

Associate. Understood. those things.

So that's not on today's agenda. That's not on this agenda. And there wouldn't there in this agenda items that are on there are the items that you you could comment on, but if you're not looking to comment on those that particular item, there's not just an open comment period on just anything. But I'm not

correct. I understand.

Yeah, please. Because it's also a little harder for me to hear everything. Would you um like to speak with Mr. Dash in the interim while I we've Very good.

less for the meeting to go ahead and start. It looks like less actually. Uh so here we are. Um commissioners, can you turn on your cameras? At least acknowledge you're there. Uh item number one. Item number two. Is the court reporter in? No, just the Oh, there we go. I want to acknowledge the court reporter just to make sure that you are with us and ready. Yes, I'm here.

Oh, fantastic. Thank you so much and welcome. All right. So, given the court reporter is here and ready, uh, good afternoon. Welcome back. Welcome to 2026. Today is the planning commission meeting for January 13, 2026. I am going to read through the agenda after doing roll call for commissioners. Uh, Commissioner Blackwell present. Thank you. Commissioner Burton Faulk present. Commissioner Ruiz present. Should have been O'Neal first. Commissioner O'Neal

present. Thank you. Uh, Commissioner Kenttonia, present. Thank you. And Commissioner Woo, present.

All right. Fantastic. All commissioners present. Uh, we'll move forward and I will read through today's agenda. The agenda for January 13, 2026 is as follows. Agenda item A, approval of minutes. Agenda item B, correspondence. Agenda item C, plan of lots. We have one item under plan of lots. Agenda item D, hearing and action. We have one item under hearing and action. And agenda item E, which is the director's report. We will move to agenda item A, which is approval of minutes. We are in receipt of no minutes to repro approve for today. Agenda item B, correspondence. We have no correspondence for today. Agenda item C, plan of lots. And it looks like Miss Kryki is going to do plan of lots. So we have one item under plan of lots and it is as follows. DCP- lot 2026-00003 at 5429 Dunmo Street. This is a major subdivision in the Squirrel Hill neighborhood. Miss Kryki,

right? Uh good afternoon, commissioners. Um uh so this is a uh subdivision for 24 or 5429 uh Dunmo Street. Um it's a proposed subdivision of one parcel into two parcels. Uh the proposed lot one would have frontage on Dunmo Street and would be uh 122,174 ft in area. Uh and the proposed lot two would have frontage on Dunmo Street and would be 7,482 square feet in area. A house is located on the subject property. Uh and the recommended motion by staff um is to preliminarily approve uh the subdivision uh with final review scheduled on January 27th.

Okay. Thank you so much. All right. At this time, we open the floor for any testimony as it relates. There's no one here in the room. Is there anyone on no one online? Thank you very much. So, commissioners, uh, do I have a motion for a preliminary pre approval with a final on January 27, 2026. A motion from the floor. So moved. A motion from Woo. Do I have a second? Second. All right. A second from Commissioner Blackwell. I'll do roll call. Uh, Commissioner Blackwell, I. Thank you, Commissioner Burton Faulk. I, Commissioner O'Neal, abstain. Thank you, Commissioner Ruiz.

Hi. Thank you, Commissioner Kinttonia. I, thank you. And Commissioner Woo. I.

All right. Thank you. Moving on to agenda item D, which is hearing and action. There is one item under uh hearing and action and it is as follows. DCP- MPZC-2025-0319. This is Bakery Square specially planned district 9. Remove planning commission condition of approval for the Bakery Square expansion regarding the traffic study for the amended preliminary land development plan. This is in the East Liberty neighborhood and being presented by Ms. Reikus.

Thank you. Good afternoon, commission members. My name is Kate Rakeus. I am a senior planning manager in zoning and development review. The expansion of the Bakery Square specially plan district received a positive recommendation on the council bills and an approval of the master plan back in September of 2024. Since then, the zoning text and map amendments were approved by council and signed by the mayor. uh and since then the applicant has submitted an application for the first phase of development in an apartment building as a final land development plan or FLDP. However, the preliminary land development plan so the overall master plan was never finalized because there was an outstanding condition related to the traffic study. The outstanding condition in summary said that um the applicant should work with DOI to resolve all outstanding TIS comments prior to making a final land development application. So basically uh the the condition on that on the on the master plan was that the applicant had to work with DOI on the final traffic study for the entire master plan before coming forward for their first actual development project. Uh so what you are hearing today is a request to have that condition removed. So, the applicant has recently submitted a memo stating in part, "Walnut Capital has decided to completely change the development plan for the district vision plan site. The entire contents of the May 8th, 2024 report detailing the development components and analysis are now withdrawn and are no longer valid. The site plan, access points, roadways, driveways included in the May 2024 report are also now withdrawn. These changes were determined by Walnut Capital based on market trends and other business related reasons. Uh so it's the end of me reading from the memo. So DOI has accepted this memo as sufficient uh and again the applicant is before you today to request the condition be removed related to the study of that um

uh original master plan. Uh so staff is recommending conditions uh staff is making a positive recommendation with the conditions. Uh I'm going to read through these and then I'm just going to sort of summarize them because this is a confusing one. Um and then you can ask me any questions. Also we have uh Angie Martinez here from DOI if there are any specific transportation related questions. Uh so the first condition is concurrent with the next building and development application final land development plan. The next one after BDA 2025 111988 the applicant shall provide an updated preliminary land development plan to match the master plan at that point. And then the second condition, concurrent with the future updated PLLDP as per condition one, the applicant shall update the overall TIS for the preliminary land development at that time. Okay. So what does this mean? Condition one means that they can proceed with the application for the first phase apartment building. We will scope the first phase of this apartment building and we're aiming for next week. We're going to get them sometimes today. Uh but staff won't make a positive recommendation on this first phase FLDP the apartment building until DOI approves the transportation impact study just for the apartment building. So we will make sure that we're capturing any impacts of that apartment building in that transportation impact study. And then the second condition says that after they come for the uh this that apartment building, they cannot file for any more applications, no more development projects without updating the overall master plan, the overall PLLDP, including the traffic study uh for the revised master plan layout as it is at that time. Um is that uh as confusing as possibly can get?

But I I think we've we wrapped our arms. Do we wrap our arms around that? Very good. Okay. So, uh the applicant today doesn't have a presentation, but they are here today to speak to this. Uh I will turn it over to them. And then again, let me know if you have any questions. And we also have Angie Martinez here. Thank you.

Good afternoon, members of the commission. Happy New Year to you. My name is John Cayman and I'm council for Walnut Capital. Um, as Kate said during her presentation, um, we we've run into a brick wall in terms of the way that the, um, doi was interpreting that commit, that condition. And, and I want to give just a little bit of history to explain to you sort of how we got here, and I think it will make more sense. I would say we are in agreement with Kate's first condition. We're not in agreement with Kate's second condition. Um so when we originally started this process, we started with a uh year and a half to two-year negotiation with various community groups that surround the Bakery Square neighborhood. So that was comprised of five community groups and we ended up reaching a uh CBA or community benefits agreement with excuse me with with those groups. Uh from that process, we move forward with the PLDP and uh expansion of the SP district to be able to basically move the district as I know this commission remembers from the existing bakery square and to expand the boundaries and to create a couple of other subd districts. Uh one of which was to the right of us, but the two that are in play here were where the existing um shopping center is is located. Um, at the time that we had started this process a couple years ago, we had strong belief that there was going to be significant office development and mixeduse development associated with this this parcel. In fact, we thought there would be over a million and a half new square feet of office in addition to um mixeduse residential and some retail that would be associated with it. And that was the basis of which the PLDP uh was moving forward at the time. Um as we worked through the process, our

office prospects became more bleak. Uh and a couple of our anchor tenants who we have been speaking to uh say that they're not interested in investing in office at this point. that caused us to essentially pivot um right after the approval of the PLDP to explore what in fact was feasible. Where we were bumping heads with DOI was DOI was looking for us to do an overall traffic study on something that we have at this point no belief that we will be able to build in the next decade. Um there the office demand market and mixeduse demand market for the office component just doesn't exist. So, we've begun exploring different types of uses for the overall tract um and that includes everything from new mixed use as a combination of retail and residential um to redoing the existing shopping center um to going ahead and doing more resi uh as a standalone. So, we really don't know at this point exactly what that's going to entail. We have a number of feelers out nationally with tenants to see what their receptivity is going to be. Um, and we've had good feedback on the retail side and we've had some good feedback on the resi side. Um, what we've proposing is what we were proposing by the amendment of this condition is we feel very comfortable right now of two things. Number one, the road network that we sought to create that would connect uh from Penn Shady all the way through Dalum to East Liberty.

Can we put that up just so that for context we're we're No, we can't. Oh, sure.

We we feel very confident that we we will complete the road between East Liberty Boulevard and uh Fifth Avenue/W Washington Boulevard at that point. Okay. We feel based on rightway issues that exist between port authority, federal transportation association, busway, uh, you know, things that we've heard back from doi and our traffic engineer that that connection through to Penn Shady from East Liberty Boulevard to Pen Shady is is going to be much more in doubt. Um so what we were looking to do is to essentially amend the condition to allow us to do a traffic study phase by phase as we know what we're doing. So, for example, Penn Shady right now, we know that that's going to be a mixeduse uh component that has some office that has may have some first floor retail, but that is going to have a lot of residential, and we're prepared to submit that phase one of our FLDP within the next two weeks. We've done our engineering, we've done our scoping, we've done our planning, and we're ready to come forward with that FLDP, and we're totally happy to study the impacts that that development will have from a transportation standpoint. So, this is not about skirting any of those obligations. What we're really asking to do is to proceed on a phasebyphase basis once we know what in fact we are doing. and this uh you know hard stop that they're putting in saying that I have to figure out the whole master plan before I can submit my next one doesn't work for us because we probably are going to be developing and by the way it's still you know 100 plus million dollar project we'll probably be developing this next piece in a series of two or three or maybe four phases depending on who the tenants are what market demand is etc so

what we would like to be able to do is to just go phase by phase with a traffic study as we come in on each phase. And that will take into account what we are actually in fact building. And that will take into account the background traffic that's created and that will take into account everything as we go phase by phase so that we can proceed in an orderly fashion as opposed to wasting, you know, six figures with a traffic engineer to study something that we don't know if we'll ever build. So essentially what we're asking for, it's a long way to answer to just be able to proceed to amend this condition and to be able to proceed on a phaseby-phase basis with the traffic study as we actually know what we're doing. And as I said, the good news is we know what phase one is. We we have it designed. We have uh a a um very good uh understanding of of what the residential's going to be. We have a very good understanding of you know what the first floor activation's going to be. We are working with partners for work who's going to be our anchor office tenant there so they can have job training near AI Avenue. So we have a pretty good idea what this phase one's going to be and we just want to be able to proceed phase by phase. So happy to answer any questions on that that u the commission may have. So, um, for clarity, I had just wanted to be able to, um, have the commission look at and and break down exactly, you know, from a visual perspective. Um, this con I I don't want to say this concludes. I mean, if there's somebody here from the general public that would like to comment, I'd like them to go ahead and be able to uh comment and then I think at that point then commission I think we'll go we'll have dialogue back and forth.

Sure. One one thing I would add, Madam Chair, is that it is our intention as we come forward with this new FLDP to update the PLDP at the same time. So, um, we would we would be bringing forward an amendment to the PLDP and an FLDP for phase one so that the documents that are on file with the city are are, you know, current. Um, so that we have no problem with that and I' I've actually already seen what Strada has prepared for that and and we will file for this phase one both an amendment to the PLDP updating the plans and then an FLDP just for phase one if that makes sense.

Okay. Um, I think that that's fair and reasonable. Just looking at this and based on what you've shared. Um, are there any quick questions from commission, you're understanding what Mr. Cayman is? If I could just add, the Trader Joe's is staying. Nobody's touching the Trader Joe's. Um what we're talking about now is essentially building one and instead of that road sort of coming all the way through um it's just going to be a a site drive that's just going to handle building one. That's all that's happening in our phase one as proposed. Okay. And that would look like um

it looks almost identical to what you see there.

Okay. All right. Very good. Um, if there are no questions in terms of clarity for commission, I'm going to fair close this for public comment and then open it for commission. So, there's no one here in the room. There's anyone online? No one online. Um, let me note, not one of five CDC's, zero of five. And then um commission are there questions or comments as it relates to the request? We we'll go over the fact that Mr. Cayman is saying there is comfortability with condition number one. What condition number two is

is there's a request for a um removal of that condition and to say you're you're asking that that com condition be viewed as a um phase byphase condition. Correct. And I would just note that that be prior to being here, we did speak with representatives of both the LMAR consensus group and we did attend a a virtually a a board meeting of V Village village collaborative and and shared this with both of them and both of them are supportive. So okay, this is not news to to them. They're supportive of what we're asking to do

and we don't see them here either. So that's that that they must be fine. Um are there questions? Have a clarifying question. How many phases are in anticipated in this? So originally as we had proposed it, we thought it would be five. Okay. Um depending on what we do with uh the retail component of the existing shopping center, it may be three. Okay. Okay. Will that be identified in the upcoming FLDP?

We're going to update in the PLDP. We're going Yeah. In the We'll be showing this coming forward as phase one and in the uh current PLDP I think we'll be showing the next phase of the the development being broken into two phases. Um we do anticipate the ability to um take down one of the existing buildings that's the uh McDonald's um and to be replacing that with a new type of use. So that may be phase two or phase two may be a little bit larger, Rachel um than than what that is, but I would say at least two more phases for it.

Okay. I was just trying to understand how many traffic study I think just I think just two more. Okay. Okay. Thank you. All right. Go ahead. That makes sense. Commissioner Woo.

Yeah. Um I guess uh I don't know if you have an estimate um at the moment but um in terms of uh this uh I guess these next couple phases versus what uh you had presented earlier um do you kind of have a a read on how much less commercial uh there will be overall even if there's uh you know there's not going to be office but there might more retail uh versus residential. Is it going to be more residential? um in these next couple phases um versus earlier. Um so I I think we the the answer is we don't know yet. Um I think you'll see probably a reduction in retail and a growth in resi uh would be the way that we would expect it to to lay out. Though we are having some conversations um with tenants who you know have their own specific requests as to what they'd like to see or not like to see. So we're working through that. But I would say that you're not going to see office but you'll probably see a reduction in retail and an increase in Rosie. Oh yeah.

I just want to be really clear. So as of right now, phase one would be that building one and going back, right? So if if you drew an imaginary line between the existing Trader Joe's, uh Penn Avenue to the busway, that's phase one. It was a long time ago. Yes. And what are we saying is going into phase one?

So right now we know exactly what that's going to be. So that's that's a a real small uh I think retail or ground floor activation. That's office uh with office for uh you know right now we're anticipating partners for work and a a couple of other users and then the rest is all resi and Mr. Cayman is that um smaller than what was originally proposed in terms Okay. So the impact is

so so so the I think originally the the height that we had allowed us to go I don't remember if it was 10 or 12 stories it was and I think we're we're coming in we priced it out it's just completely not feasible to do with with steel and construction cost and everything else. So we're going to be coming in with a I think a traditional podium and stick build above it. So you're probably, you know, five, six stores. So 50% reduction in the height at that point. And then assuming probably a little bit less on the footprint. Yeah. The the footprint is kind of the kind of the same that we've adjusted with the smaller size. We've been able to adjust our parking requirements down. Okay.

Um to so it may be a little bit smaller, but uh a lot of that is how we're managing it on on site to make it work. Okay. Well, that also

and that goes to to um Madame Chair's point, you know, to to go ahead and study something we're not going to build. You know, that would be that's an extra 225 units that aren't going to be there. It just makes sense for us to say, let's study what we're actually going to build, take it all into account, and then manage it that way. I I definitely will say that I agree from that perspective. I think probably the biggest challenge is kind of and you've kind of got two things going on, right? The side of both coins. The heads is you you things are changing and they're very nimble and you've got to be able to be nimble with them. Uh the second piece of that is uh I but you've got to also weigh out the fact that there are much fewer phases. Uh so I think we have to take that into consideration. Less density um at least for now in phase one and that's at least 50% less density. Uh so that's the that's the coin that we're weighing right now. And then what we're saying is hey we're good with number one. It's just the number two commissioners that we've got to think through is um instead of a phase by instead of a an overall that it would be a phase by phase and that's what we'd have to be comfortable with in terms of condition any additional clarity or comment as it relates. I just have a few comments um and some questions. Uh so the benefit of doing the SP district is that there's flexibility in zoning and that you know Bakery Square was able to set its own zoning parameters. Um for those not familiar it has to be over 15 acres. Um you know that flexibility comes with some sort of predictability for the city

and the people around it about what will be included in that PLLDP. Had you come before us before with an incomplete PLLDP, I don't know that there would have been the SP district. Um, but we understand that certain market conditions require some flexibility. um here I just want to understand you know why this precedent should be set allowing future SPS to kind of forgo that condition of looking at the SP district holistically and allow this kind of phase basis because that's what we're going to see is somebody else coming in with an SP district and ask not to include a district-wide traffic study So from a from a first of all, I think the district-wide traffic study requirement when you don't know what you're going to build is a completely ridiculous waste of time. um be because what what you end up doing that doesn't mean you shouldn't forecast and a good at traffic engineer certainly does that and you identify areas of mitigation that needed to be dealt with but for example if if we were studying a 12story building versus a six-story building you can't tell me it's not a waste of time to study a 12story building that way the incremental approach even though I know this is the way it's been done in some other districts but we've we've struggled with that in other districts that we've represented too, this artificial cap on what can be built on a property without taking into account what is actually going to be built. So I think strategic planning requires yes looking at overall mitigations from a holistic view, but I think strategic planning also requires thinking through what's actually getting

done and and dealing with it that way. And one of the things that you know this was an existing SP district that we extended it to that allows us to do resi that allows us to do office that also allows us to go ahead and put open space in versus what was highway commercial which is you know with the worst district. The other thing that it allows us to do uh is to have the flexibility to have campuswide parking which is a very I think significant and sort of thoughtful way to approach the new urbanism. you have structure garages that aren't being used, you know, for to their full capacity, why go ahead and build more structure? So, I think there's a lot of benefits to having the SP extension. And I do think this holistic fictional traffic study thing is not good planning. I I guess it's a little bit paradoxical because, you know, you get the SP district because there should be an overall plan. It's not a phase by phase approach, but I understand what you're saying regarding the kind of planning and I I know uh Miss Martinez is here and I understand there's supposed to be some updated scoping regulations related to kind of districts and, you know, versus a project. Can you speak to that a little bit and how that would be, you know, anticipated to move forward?

Good afternoon. My name is Angie Martinez. and I'm the assistant director with the city's department of mobility and infrastructure. Um, so to the question about what the purpose is of a district level transportation study, um, I would say that in its application, it's definitely been imperfect. I wouldn't use as strong of, you know, words as, uh, Mr. Cayman did. Um so through you know DOI's work to you know continually adjust and improve our process um we are in 2026 this year um going to look at making an update to our transportation impact study guidelines. One of the things we hope to achieve with that is to set maybe a different standard for what a transportation study as a part of a SP district master plan area or an institutional master plan might look like. So how do we give a higher level maybe less detailed requirement for what is involved in the transportation study at that level so that we have the benefit of looking at the comprehensive impact of the project as well as the opportunity for improvements. So, taking maybe just a step back to what was originally proposed as a part of this SP district, we were talking about an internal roadway that would have connected uh Penn and Shady to East Liberty Boulevard. And that internal road would provide an opportunity for traffic to divert off of Penn, potentially for us to rethink the way um we might uh fill the gap in our existing uh bicycle network. So good planning I think at a high level, a district, an SP, an institutional master plan can give everybody involved the flexibility to talk about what is, you know, the right functional classification of this potential roadway. Um, how does it fit within our existing network without

there having to be a full commitment because then we can say the project's going to happen on multiple phases. these might be triggers for when improvements um would need to be installed. But we also know that, you know, at the district or the master plan level, we're looking at the sort of maximum um development potential, the maximum impact, worst case scenario, and that as things change, as development proposals actually, you know, become known and come online, those things get re-evaluated. And you're not committed to something in the master plan study if your plans change. and that change is no longer warranted. Um I think in this case um you know we've been at this for uh over a year now and a lot of things have changed in you know what the developer is planning on the site from when it was initially proposed to the city. Um you know when we learned that that internal road is not going to be a part of the likely vision and that you know subsequent um proposals to the commission are going to remove that. We agreed that you know the work that was being done on that uh master plan transportation study should be paused because we needed to re-evaluate um what from the transportation perspective right now um you know we're comfortable with uh looking at the phase one uh just as a transportation study um I do believe that study should be complete before you know approvals would be given. I think the decision about you know what is the future or the use of um a transportation study as a part of a master plan or SP district is you know a different conversation um to have but I I certainly you know see value in that process understanding that the process as it exists today is probably not set up for anybody involved in it to get what they could potentially be getting out of it.

Yeah. And when do you anticipate those regulations to be promagated or So we do have um uh we've hired a consultant to help us with this and given the um mayor's executive order on permit streamlining um we're waiting to have conversations with them so that we can make sure that we're folding you know this existing uh plan for improvement into um whatever the vision um and other uh you know other things that we'll be trying to achieve through you know that 60-day um spread. in the executive order.

So what I'm hearing are these more flexible or adaptable provisions would be in place, you know, when these conditions would apply so to the entire campus. So as currently written, the campuswide review wouldn't occur until the second project in this SP and so proposed by them.

Yes. Okay. I well I might offer one suggestion which is uh if the second condition is the hangup can that condition be reconsidered when the FL the first FLD that's what comes in and we would have a better we would have a better understanding of our timelines

I think that that's um considerably thank you for going there because that was going to be next step uh for me personally because there's so many things that are nimble right here. Um I I think what really sort of did it for me and Mr. Cayman, you may or may not be able to answer this and you don't have to jump to the mic, but um maybe the roadway isn't there right now, but you probably aren't sure if that roadway might not go back there yet again. I mean, you've reduced density at least in this, you know, building number one. You do know that uh Trader Joe's will be there, but the future of the site is um we we just don't know what that looks like, right? It's a little uncertain and part of the the frustration that we've had too and and just you know candid and cards on the table is that you with all the requirements that were being put on us for to try and make that road work and then you have again the bus way that's there you the federal highway transportation association you have to deal with because federal funds were used to build the busway and there pieces that have to be conveyed or not conveyed. you've got port authority issues on the other side like and then you overlay on top of that everything that do was wanting on it. It it was enough to to

make the project in its entirety unfeasible because of the basically mandates to to meet all the requirements that had to be met. So, and in addition to that, you don't have an intersection that squares up exactly right with with Shady Avenue, and there's nothing you can really do about that because the Mer Meridians were right on the corner. So, I think when when you look at the the level of brain damage, for lack of a better way to describe it associated with trying to bring that through, that's why this master concept no longer worked for us because it just became unfeasible

and fair and reasonable. Yes. I I I think though given sort of what's happening within DOI and and the consultant and all those things, I think we might have to be more reasonable and fair collectively and be able to look at number two a little bit through a bit of a different lens. And I want to um I want to be able to say we revisit that but it that it needs to look different for today. So where can we land that looks different for today?

I I just have a question. Um so when the um PLLDP uh was um uh submitted and approved last I guess in 2024 um was there a um a TIS done for that PLP. So the so the PL PLLDP was actually I believe submitted in 2022.

It it was tied up in city planning. That's a whole another story for for a while before it it came through to you guys. Um the we did not do and remember this is an expansion of an existing district. So it's a little bit different in that more than half of the district was already built out fully, right? Um, so, um, I think there was some debate at the time as to what a traffic study should look like and we wanted to go ahead and to get the PLDP through because we had a number of things that were waiting on that, you know, could I build residential, could I build mixeduse, could I do all these things. So, we agreed at the time that we would be looking at this and that was a condition that was put on by by city planning and we agreed to it. It's just been the implementation of that condition and the changes in market factors that have made it no longer feasible for us to keep.

Yeah. I mean, I um I guess I'm kind of of the opinion that if if there was, you know, a a traffic impact study that was completed on on a a plan that was more intensive than what might be um going in there now. Um I you know we're talking about the worst case scenario. Um, you know, I think it it would be um, you know, it it would probably be fair not, you know, not to require that uh um, again, but um, it really, you know, just depends on how how um, you know, what what that uh, ultimate development looks like.

And that that's why I asked a question earlier about um, you know, is is there going to be overall reduction of commercial versus retail, right? Can I just ask a clarifying question more for perspective purposes? You were saying that this first phase is going to be how tall approximately? I think we're I think we're six stories. Six stories. Do you know about the height? I don't. 50%.

Yeah. See, I I do want to put this in perspective because it it is a significant reduction from what we saw which was up to 150 ft. And while this is an elective zoning um you know prior to this it was HC and in HC just for more for the record purposes um you know five stories 75 ft are permitted so we're kind of you know only slightly above what we you know would be applied not permitted in HC.

Yes, but more density focused. Um, and while residential isn't permitted in HC, I'm not suggesting you go back to HC, just to be clear. Um, you wouldn't have to go through this public process either. Um, in HC, it's mostly site plan review. Um, so I do think we are, you know, seeing less density and also allowing for public process here to for the commission and for the community to weigh in in the future. M um so I I think I'm just echoing that I think some flexibility is appropriate.

Agreed. So um given that Angie, what was going to be your um suggestion with number two? I I think that if I understand condition one correctly, um same these folks will be back to update the preliminary land development plan. Correct.

At that time, everyone will have an updated understanding of the uses and a site plan. before the planning commission sees that DOI staff should work with the applicant and DCP to identify if a transportation study is needed or if there's some other way we can present what the district-wide transportation considerations should be. And that doesn't need to that potentially is more appropriate to have that discussion when they're updating the full district as opposed to needing to sort that now when really we're just and we're agreeing that given the changes to the overall plan, we can remove the condition from June or sorry whenever the planning commission put it on. Um, so we're removing number two and we're agreeing that as they bring forth uh number one that we'll see what that looks like with all the potential proposed changes with the consultant and all those things. So right now we're only putting on condition number one. Is that accurate? Um what I hear um Miss Martinez say is that you would like the opportunity to determine at the time that they update the PLLDP what um traffic study or TIS would be appropriate at that time. So I that would I think replace the draft um motion or the draft condition in the report with something like at the time of the amended PLLDP applicant shall meet with DOI uh to determine what uh transportation analysis is required for the um updated PLP.

And that feels good Mr. Cayman. Okay. So then it looks like we have a first condition and the second whatever all that was that you said. Okay. All right. So then I'm I'd like to ask for a motion from the floor based on condition number one. Condition number two per M. Reikus. Uh do I have a motion from the floor? So move. I'll take a move from uh Vice Chair O'Neal. I'll take a second from Blackwell. I'm going to do roll call. Commissioner Blackwell. I. Thank you. Commissioner Burton Faulk. I Commissioner O'Neal. I. Thank you. Commissioner Ruiz. Hi. Thank you. and Commissioner Continia. I All right. And Commissioner Woo,

I thank you. Okay, there you go. Have a great rest of your afternoon. Thank you, Miss Martinez, for coming. Uh, this is good work. Good work, folks. All right, so we are moving on to the next agenda item, which is agenda item E, and that is the director's report. Uh, I will kick it over to Mr. Dash. Um, Andrew Dash, uh, for the director's report.

Thank you, commissioners. uh just as you know just wanted to you know as we've moved into exc moved into 2026 and you know transitioned administrations um you know I wanted to uh be able to you know have the new director of city planning uh be able to introduce themselves um you know obviously you know the you know with the change in administration comes a change in leadership and so um you know um you know happy to introduce uh you know the director and have her kind you know, to speak to you all. Um, you know, I think in our discussions, you know, she'll be much more um, you know, directly involved and engaged uh, with the commission, which is a role that I've primarily had in the in the past, uh, you know, along with the zoning administrator. So, uh, with that, I'll turn it over to the director.

Thank you so very much, Mr. Dash. Thank you. Hello and welcome. Hi. I was going to say good morning, but I don't know what time.

Um, hello commissioners. Uh, thank you for having me today. Evat Mongalo Winston. I know many of you from um working across neighborhoods in Pittsburgh, but um it's nice to meet uh those of you that I don't know. Um just to share a little bit about myself, um I am uh trained as an architect and an urban designer. And so I come from a you know a little bit of a different space. And um I've been working in the private sector as a consultant for 25 years um both locally and nationally and internationally on improving cities. And I am just here to um serve the city of Pittsburgh and hopefully you know develop the best city that we can for all of our residents. I've worked in most of um you know your neighborhoods and have a lot of good existing relationships and I'm I'm looking forward to um working with the planning commission and council and others to um make progress in our city. So happy to answer any questions or

welcome. Congratulations. Hello. Thank you. So happy for you. Thank you. looking forward to doing great things for my time here. Definitely. Definitely. Well, we've got a beautiful city and uh we all want it to uh continue to be beautiful and and shine as bright as it can. So, welcome aboard. Uh and and you know, thank you for the service. Thank you. I know you guys do tough work, but it's going to be it's going to be a good couple years. So, thank you. Far for the course. Yes.

Welcome. Welcome. Okay. Um, commissioners, any any other comments? Um, commissioners at this time? All right. So, that looks like we are moving on to the next agenda item, which feels good. This is, uh, a motion to adjurnn. So moved. All right. Second. I. All in favor? I. Very good. Have a great rest of your day. to stay warm.