Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, getting super close. And good afternoon, good and beautiful people. Welcome to the planning commission for March 24th, 2026. I'd like to do a warm welcome to our new commissioners. Please note that this is the briefing session for the planning commission. Briefing means that cases are heard as preliminary public presentation. Initial questions will only come from commission. Public testimony won't be taken at that time. For today's session for March 24, 2026, we have two items up for briefing and they are as follows. Briefing item A BDA-2025-12749 at 4612 Lidle Street. This is the construction of five-story apartment building. Briefing item B, Council Bill 2025-2250. This is a zoning text amendment regarding restricted personal goods retail. Moving to briefing agenda item A again BDA-2025-12749 4612 Lidle Street. This is construction of a five-story apartment building in the Hazlewood neighborhood. And Ms. Tanden will be presenting.

Thank you, commissioners. And before you start, I'm so sorry I have to step out. Okay. Thank you. I also need to step out. Okay. And then before we've got a couple that are doing a couple different things here. And uh before we begin, I just want to state on the record uh that the Scholar House is a um tenant in uh building that I personally operate. There's no uh bias here. We're uh more than okay for me to proceed sitting. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Good afternoon. An application for final land development plan BDA-2025-12749 was filed by PWWG Architects on behalf of the property owner Almono LP for the construction of a new fivestory multi-unit residential building containing 46 dwelling units and 2600 square ft of groundf flooror commercial space. The application proposes 46 dwelling units with a surface parking and loading area to the rear of the building. The ground floor of the building contains commercial space and various amenity spaces along the street frontage with Blair Street. The garage and surface parking are accessed via private shared way that has a curb cut along Lidle and Blair Street. Bicycle parking is provided in compliance with the SP10 district requirements. The site is located within the Hazlewood Green Specially Plan District or SP10. Projects within the SP10 district must comply with the requirements of the zoning code section 909.01.q and the Hazlewood Green Preliminary Land Development Plan or PLLDP. The project is located on the corner of Blair and Eliza Street and is the third phase of a multi-phase development that contain additional buildings with frontages along Eliza and Litel Street. Those projects were approved by the planning commission as FLDPS in 2025. There were no requests to the zoning board of adjustment for this case. The proposed structure and site design were reviewed by design staff and then by CADP on January 20, 2026. The design of the proposed building was generally wellreceived by SEAP as it related to the phase 1 building in color and overall design. CADP comments were generally focused on refining and detailing materials and creating more intentional public spaces at the corners. A summary of the report of the meeting was attached to the report submitted to the commission. The conceptual storm water management plan for the whole Hazelwood green

development was approved by the department of city planning. The applicant is in the process of receiving storm water management approval for the specific site within the master plan area. The applicant is also in the process of receiving curbcut approval from the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure for the entrance to the shared way of off Blair Street. The transportation impact study for the project has been approved by DOI. The project is in compliance with the development standards of the SP10 district including building height, upper story setback, and build to zone requirements. A development activities meeting was held on February 20, 2026 with the Hazlewood Initiative, the registered community organization for the area. A summary of the DAM report was attached to the report submitted to the commission. The site is in the Greater Hazlewood neighborhood plan area. Planning staff determined that the project complies with the neighborhood's adopted plan prior to this briefing. A copy of the plan compliance letter was also attached to the briefing report submitted to the commission. Under section 922.11 C.2, Two, the planning commission shall review a final land development plan according to the listed criteria. The applicant has also provided a memo indicating how the proposed development meets the criteria. That memo was also attached to the report submitted to the commission. The applicants are online, so I will hand it over to the applicants.

Thank you.

Hello, commissioners. This is Janelle Kemer, uh project manager with Trek Development Group. Um we are the residential developers that were invited by Tishman Spire, um master planning developer for all of Hazelwood Green, um the 178 acres. Uh so we became involved in the project uh several years ago as there was reference to phase one which uh broke ground last September and is underway. So this next phase is a complement to um continuing that development and working towards completing the block of lot 36. Um as mentioned this will be um a mixed income residential development. Uh there will be two market rate units and the rest will be set aside for households earning 60% of the area median income or less. Um and as the commissioner alluded to, we'll be continuing our partnership with um Pittsburgh Scholar House in this development as well. Um so that's a unique partnership um working with the group that's dedicated to supporting single family households um pursuing, excuse me, single parent households pursuing higher education. Um so we thought that was a great um synergy with all of the institutional educational development that's happening here at the site. um but also working to support um working working families. Um of the 46 units, we'll also have about 24 units set aside to have uh project-based section 8 vouchers that are being pres provided by the housing authority of the city of Pittsburgh. Um and about half of those will be dedicated for set aides for the scholar house participants. Um, and with that, I think I will hand things over to Brent, um, with our

architecture team to walk you through the development of the building itself.

Sure. All right. So, uh, as Janelle noted, uh, this is a is a five-story building. U elevation here on the cover is, uh, from Blair Street. Um, we want to flip to the next slide. We can kind of talk about, uh, the site plan and where this is located. So, this is located in the SP10 um Hazlewood Green uh zoning district. The uh project there is on uh it's lot 36 um which is across from the uh the plaza um space. This is the second project that will be built on this um this parcel. Now, the parcel's actually been subdivided into three lots. Uh the first project is under construction right now facing uh Lidle Street. this project uh will face Blair Street kind of cap uh the other side of it and then there are um a uh another residential project that is occurring kind of between them that stitches them together. They all share in the back um a shared uh parking access. So for for context, uh obviously a lot of stuff is being built up here, you know, kind of as we speak. Um existing Mill19 project, Carnegie Melon's uh Rick project uh recently completed is across the park from us. Uh Pit Bio Forge is a little bit further down. Uh so that's kind of what's in and around the area that we're working in. Uh next slide. All right. So this is the this is the parcel here that we're looking at in front of us. The uh the big grassy lot there. This is at the corner of Blair Street and Eliza Street. Uh this doesn't yet have our building in the background, but that would be occurring in the kind of back left there. Um is where that Lidal Street project is. So, next slide. So, here we see the site plan. Uh again on the right hand side, you're seeing the Lidal Street building there. Uh you can see the project that'll face Eliza Street that kind of stitches these two together. And then in pink on the left side of the plan here is the uh is the

HG Blair project that we're presenting today. Um so this sits on a a total site area. It's about 21,000 square feet. Uh there are 15 parking spaces uh towards the rear of the lot. Those are accessed off of the shared way. Um then that shared way runs between Blair and Lidle Street. Uh the parking lot is a kind of a a shared parking lot in a way that um uh that has circulation shared between all three of the parcels there. Um the zoning here does require us to have, you know, limited surface parking. So we're staying under the uh threshold limits for square footage of coverage on the site. Um we do have bike parking. We are required to provide uh one bike parking space per apartment here and we have 48 apartments. So, uh, we're providing the 50, uh, 50 total, uh, parking space or bike parking spaces that are internal to the building, uh, and a few unprotected spaces that are on the sidewalk, uh, as well. The project is a four-story woodframed, uh, building over a podium, um, and is about a total of 57,000 square feet. So, next slide. All right, so this is just a ground floor plan. Um the this portion of the or the zoning for this uh location does require us to have um transparency at the ground floor level though there are no specific active use requirements here. Uh that said though we have oriented our more active uses towards the street face uh on the ground floor. So we have a commercial space about 2700 square feet on the corner of Eliza and Blair. Um, moving back on Blair Street there, our, uh, our primary entrance, uh, comes in about a third of the way down the building. Uh, and then we've got a community room, fitness room, reading area, um, and a play area. The the latter of those two serving the

Scholar House program, um, all facing, uh, Blair Street. Uh, towards the back of the building, we have a few units uh, on that elevation and our bike room accessed from the rear. Um, trash and recycling is also uh, accessed from the rear of the building. and utilities are uh off of the private way at the end building. Next slide. All right. So, uh upper floors of the building. Pretty standard residential uh building. A mix of ones, twos, uh and three bedrooms on this project. Um it's a pretty standard corridor building on that level. we can kind of keep moving, but one of the things that zoning does require here um are various stepbacks above certain elevations, particularly relevant to the Eliza Street property, but we've carried the concept on to Blair as well, uh where the building starts to taper back above the 45 foot um height limit. So, if we keep uh moving through the slides there, we see the building start to kind of pancake back on those upper levels. So, uh this is the um Blair Street elevation here. very similar material palette to the Lidle Street project that's under construction. Uh a mixture of gray brick um and a a kind of slight two-tone uh but both in the gray range of corrugated aluminum siding kind of playing on the industrial heritage of the site. uh upper floors meet the 30% um glazing requirement of the SP10 district and again the lower floors meet the glazing requirement there which I believe is 60% uh on Blair Street here. Uh and you can start to see those stepbacks that occur um above primarily for zoning purposes above the uh the fourth floor. Of course, that fifth floor steps back uh above that 45 ft height, though we do have a step back kind of just to modulate the variation in the facade that occurs at the fourth floor as well. The entrance there uh is kind of

signified by the the accent cedar siding which is tucked under the overhang there. Um and so signifying the primary residential entrance for that accent. Next slide. Uh this is the elevation that it faces the shared way. Uh so largely brick on this face at the end of the building with some of the utilities there as well. Um and then hopefully you know this will be filled in across the uh shared way one day as well. Next slide. Uh the rear of the building then uh this is facing the parking lot side. Um similar material pallet to what we have on the front with the metal siding, similar glazing as well. uh towards the right hand side of the building we see a little bit more solid that will largely be uh adjacent to the um the Eliza Street project which is currently in design. There will be a small kind of access way about 5 ft between the two buildings but uh less windows on that frontage uh just due to the the nature of those buildings being quite close to each other. Next slide. Uh and then this is the Eliza Street face. Um again that that 60% glazing on the ground floor, similar material pallets above and the uh and the 30% glazing there as well. All right. Um these are the material pallets for the project. So uh again a a mix of gray brick uh for the masonry portions and then an aluminum siding uh with just a a slight two-tone uh color uh concept there. and then accenting the entryway with the uh with the cedar siding. Windows are a fiberglass uh window product uh that'll have black frames uh throughout. Next slide. All right. So, these are the uh images from from various points on the site. So, this is the corner of Eliza and Blair. We're seeing that

commercial space at the lower level there with the cedar. You see the the signifier for the residential entry beyond. Uh and we can see how the building kind of steps back on the upper floors. Next slide. Um just kind of uh working our way down the Blair Street elevation here. Um just one note here. There is on the commercial space there is a little bit of outdoor area that's kind of tucked under the roof and along the sidewalk there's some uh we're we're setting the building back there uh six feet. So, there is a little bit of zone for some potential sidewalk seating depending on what the use in that commercial space uh ends up being. Just continuing to work around the building. Uh keep going. Just a more detailed entry uh or detailed view of the entry there. Um again, a lot of the sidewalk infrastructure, tree pits uh plantings are in place um in this zone. Uh so our building kind of happens at the back of the sidewalk with that six foot setback. Uh some planting in that six foot setback and the detail the recess entry there. Um here's an image that kind of looks down. We start to see the shared way there. Uh this is so this is the shared way end of the building uh with the brickmasonry there. We see a little bit of the Lidle Street building beyond and the kind of semblance of that parking court uh courtyard in the back which will have parking but also some shared uh utility spaces there including transformers, generators. So those are all tucked to the rear of the building. All right. So uh for the project accessibility wise we have uh six total ADA units in the building. Um, in addition to that, we have one unit for uh the hearing and visually impaired. Um, all of the other units are designed to the ANC typeB standards. Um, all of

our entrances are accessible. We have elevator service uh to the upper floors as well. Um, I think Janelle mentioned this. This is a PHFA low-income housing tax credit project. So, this also meets uh ADA standards um and the various PHFA uh accessibility standards that come with that funding source. Next slide. Uh the project is um targeting lead uh lead gold. That is part of the zoning requirements for this district. We are currently targeting 63 and a half points uh which gets us over the over the threshold into the gold category. Um and we have an integrated uh um we're integrating with the existing storm water management systems that are part of the larger master plan uh of the SP10 district here. Next slide. All right. Uh and then um let's see Janelle, do you want to touch base on the uh community engagement portion?

Sure. I can just highlight um I had mentioned Tishmanspire or the um the group who brought us to the table here for this development. They started engaging the community many years ago um back in 2022 um to talk about bringing mixed income residential development um making that um making affordability an important part of of the first residential development um here at Hazlewood Green. um understanding the community's commitment to developing without displacement. Um so there were several conversations around um this lot 36 development. Um so those have proceeded over the last several years and then when um truck became involved in 2023 um we continued those those conversations um primarily with with Hazlewood initiative.

All right. And then at the back I'm not going to get into too much detail on this but uh we do have the construction management plan included. There is, you know, in this area there's a good bit of lay down space on uh on the parcel itself currently, but then on the adjacent parcels as well that can be uh utilized for uh for layown space during the uh construction phase. So simpler construction project in some others. All right. And I think that's the end of our presentation.

Okay. Thank you. If that concludes your presentation, just a brief reminder that at this time there is no public testimony. Uh commissioners, this is the time where we ask questions or make comments. Just as a reminder, as some of us are uh new and this may be the first application that we're reviewing, I want to make sure that we are looking at section 922.11. C.2. uh that's what we'll use to ensure that the application uh before you meets that criteria. So at this time I will open the floor for commissioners for comments or questions. No comments, no questions. All right, fair enough. Uh well, we appreciate you. Good and very thorough presentation. Um I think that's why we had no questions because you checked every box. Okay, thank you so much. We'll see you back in two. Have a great rest of your day.

Thank you. You too.

You're very welcome. Okay, so moving on to the second agenda item under uh briefing for today, which is agenda item B, which is council bill 2025 dash 2250. And I'm going to do this slow so the other uh commissioners can get back in the room. And this is a zoning text amendment regarding restricted personal goods retail. This is citywide. And presenting this is Ms. Rikus. Thank you. Good afternoon, commission members. Uh my name is Kate Rikus. I'm a senior planning manager in zoning and development review. Uh for this council bill, I'm going to do the introduction and then walk through the presentation. Uh but we do have a representative uh from Councilman Wilson's office here uh who who may have some comments to add at the end and if there's any questions on intent or process that that uh she is here as well. All right. Uh so council bill 2025 2250 was sent to planning commission for report and recommendation on October 15th of last year. The legislation amends section 911 primary uses to add restricted personal goods retails and specific standards related to that new use. As per se zoning code section 92205, planning commission has 90 days to make a recommendation to city council. However, there's been already a resolution to extend that date uh for the final action of planning commission by June 5th, 2026. Uh so just as a reminder for our new commission members, uh when c when legislation comes to us from council, we have that deadline to uh take action and then the action that planning commission takes will be a recommendation back to city council. So if it's a positive recommendation or recommendation with conditions when it's at council then uh that just needs a regular majority to pass and ultimately it's the discretion of the mayor. If for whatever reason that would be a negative recommendation then council would need a

super majority uh to enact that legislation. Again that would still go to the uh to the mayor's desk. Uh so then planning commission has some criteria uh that's uh zoning code criteria for uh zoning code text amendments combine both text amendments and map amendments. So, I'm going to sort of cut out the ones that are not related to me, uh not related to text amendments, but uh in your staff report, you do have uh the entire list of uh criteria. So, uh planning commission must review zoning code text amendments based on the following criteria. the consistency of the proposal with adopted plans and policies of the city, the convenience and welfare of the public, the intent and purpose of the zoning code, the compatibility of the proposal with the zoning uses and character of the neighborhood, uh, and then the recommendation of staff. However, not all of the criteria must be given equal consideration by planning commission or city council in reaching a decision. All right, I'm going to go to the presentation. We can go to the next slide here. Thank you. All right. Uh so we're just going to talk about process uh changes to the legislation and then staff recommendation and next steps. All right. Uh so the start of the uh of the bill has some intent st intent statements. Uh this is around health concerns especially as it uh relates to young people. Um the Centers for Disease Control uh lists that vape and uh cigarette products contain harmful substances including nicotine that is addictive and impairs adolescent brain development according yeah sorry CDC. Uh and again we do have a representative from Councilman Wilson's office here if there's any uh other questions about sort of the legislative intent and that is at the beginning of the legislation as well. Uh so right now the zoning code doesn't have a separate use category for tobacco and vape shops. Uh and as part of the recommendation you'll see here today, we are recommending that the buffer from primary and secondary schools to reduce the likeliness

likeness of youth exposure and uh possible initiation to vaping. Uh and we do see that as a best practice, many other cities have adopted regulations around vape shops. All right. Uh so back in the fall, this legislation was uh referred to the planning commission. Again, as I said before, it added a new use definition to the primary use table for restricted personal goods retail. uh we took a look at the bill and had some conversations with council just to make sure that the language as it was written uh we could enforce uh and would be workable moving forward. So then together we met with council staff, the Pittsburgh downtown partnership to review and revise the proposal. Uh so we collaborated on a simplified definition and the use table and also in the districts that it would be permitted. Uh and then here we are today to talk about it and uh when you see it back in two weeks there'll be a positive recommendation from staff uh that the legislation be um amended by substitute at council to the current version uh that we have proposed. All right. Uh so we have changed uh the title from restricted personal goods retail to retail tobacco inhalent and cannabonoids. Again we just feel like this gets to the intent of what this actually is. Uh and then we just sort of we uh expanded yeah expanded the definition. Uh we removed some of the ways to uh determine what a retail tobacco and hill and cannabid is. Uh remove the shelf space test, signage branding test and functional character test. You'll see a little bit more of that on the next uh slide. Uh we also simplified the approval framework. Uh I'm not going to go ahead and read all of these. Um but basically there in the original version there was one use where it was permitted by right. It was a special exception in the other districts and then a conditional use in in the last group of districts and the conditional use is something that would have to go both to planning commission and city council. Uh and we certainly realize that there are impacts of these type of uses but really didn't think that that was the right sort of venue uh

to hear this um this in. So uh our recommendation is that in the districts where it would be allowed that would be a special exception. So just to remind folks that would go to the zoning board of adjustment. All right. And then we revise the design and operational standards. So we can go to the next slide. All right. So just generally the definition uh so this is not a licensed medical marijuana dispensary. Uh but their principal retail activity based on inventory display and marketing is the sale of and again I'm not going to read all these but tobacco products, electron electronic cigarettes, vape pens, uh smoking papers, pipes, that sort of thing. hemp derived or synthetic cannabonoids. Uh other ingestable or inhalable supplements. Uh and then as the last one sort of that they identify themselves in the business name or licensing as vape shop, smoke shop, CDB tobacco. Um this is something that I'm sure that folks have seen these these signs around town. All right. Uh and then going to the use table. So again, it's a little bit small here. I apologize. Um but our current proposal would make this a special exception. So it would have to go to the zoning board. Uh and it would be permitted in NDI the neighborhood industrial, UNC urban neighborhood commercial, HC highway commercial, GI general industrial, UI urban industrial, UCMU urban center mixed use. Uh and then uh Rivs or riverfront zoning and those four districts that are listed which is the mixed use, uh Northshore, uh general industrial and IMU. Uh and you can note also that it is not allowed in the current use table in the GT in the Golden Triangle which is uh primarily downtown. All right. And then uh the operational standards uh so they shall not be located within 1,000 ft of an elementary or secondary school. Uh it can't operate between 11 p.m. and 9:00 a.m. And then the last criteria is that self-service sales are not permitted. And I and then we have a map. Apologize

it's a little bit small. that is on the website though. Uh so the darker gray uh brown is where it's not permitted. Uh the purple is where it is permitted except where there's sort of the red magenta circles. So those are schools. Uh the uh elementary secondary so that where um the purple or the yeah the purple is but the magenta is over it. Then it would not be permitted there because that would be within a thousand feet of the schools. And I think that's my last slide. Oh yeah. Okay. Sorry. Next steps. Uh so again this will come back to the commission. Uh we've done notice on this already uh 21 days in advance as required by the zoning code. Uh so we will staff will make a recommendation uh next in two weeks uh that that c that planning commission make a positive recommendation on the new version to be amended by substitute at council. Uh at once council hears that it will go to a public hearing again like we'll have in two weeks here. Uh and then they can choose to amend it by substitute. All right. Morgan, did you have anything you wanted to say?

Great.

Hello. My name is Morgan Martin and I am the legislative aid for Pittsburgh City Council District 1, which is represented by Councilman Bobby Wilson. I am here today to briefly outline the intent behind the legislation before you. This bill seeks to establish standards for the location and concentration of vape shops within the city, including separation requirements and restrictions near child center uses such as primary and secondary schools. Over the past several months, our office has worked closely with the department of city planning to refine this bill and based on their feedback, we have made changes to better align the legislation with exist existing zoning principles while still addressing these concerns. Councilman Wilson introduced this bill to take a proactive step towards reducing youth exposure, managing retail density, and promoting healthier neighborhood environments. And while this is only one piece of a broader public health and land use conversation, we believe it's a meaningful step in the right direction. And so we want to thank uh senior planning manager Kate Rikus and her entire team at city planning as well as all the stakeholders and co-sponsors of this bill for their guidance. And thank you all to the planning commission for your time and consideration.

Thank you so much. Uh okay, that concludes the presentation. Um at this time there is no public testimony. Uh commissioners, as we did with the first briefing item, uh we have before us the criteria for review under section 922.05.f. Uh at this time, we'll open the floor for questions or comments. I I have a quick question. So it this version that we have in front of us, this does not have those substitutions that you made, right? At least it doesn't unless I'm looking at the maybe I have to look further in the packet here. If you look at the last page of the packet, I'm sorry, the last two.

Does it have a kind of the definition? Okay. Includes all those six and then the you sort of It took me a second to I see that. Okay. I had the same. Thank you. Excellent. So now that question is cleared up. Are there additional commissioner rep

question for the staff? Um I appreciate the this the separation requirements for schools and preschools and such. And maybe this a question more for the council member for the introduction of it. Was separation from other existing similar facilities also condition considered? And if it because it's not in there obviously and if if it was considered why is it not in there any longer? No. So, it was considered and was originally um introduced in part of the legislation, but we had a lot of talks with, of course, city planning and we were fearful that there would be an overall city-wide ban by including that separation because of course there's such a large concentration of vape shops and so we had mapped it out and it there wouldn't be any more potential vape shops and so we wanted to make sure that there wasn't a overall ban citywide so we had to remove that separation requirement.

Got it. Maybe as a follow-up, would that be useful uh for the discussion in two weeks? Is is it be possible to map uh where ex Well, you're mapping existing potential locations where there are do we know where existing facilities are? Yeah, we have that mapped out. We have a few to kind of overlay on that map to kind of see. Right. Absolutely. Thank you. Um and the one other challenge because this isn't in the zoning code currently. Right now we treat them at retail sales and service. Those retail sales and service can continue to exist even when this gets enacted. But yeah, that is, you know, we have data, but it's not the same as if we had had it as an existing use category.

Thanks. I do I do have to add on to that. I know I'm a little bit ignorant on the subject, but does that include we're talking geckos and gas stations and supermarkets that carry they all carry these products, right? No, it would have to be primarily their uh product that they sell. Is there a percentage by is it based on percentage of sales or how is it? I can't see you from the bolt. Do you want to answer that? You want to answer that? That's okay. Sorry. That's that's how we have situations with people. Yeah. No, very good question. Yep.

Good afternoon, commissioners. Carolyn Rristto, zoning administrator. That question falls to me as the zoning administrator to interpret this section. Um we um we are still kind of working out the finer points of this um since it uses the word uh the word principally principal use. Um I'm defining that as 50%. However, your question is that floor area or sales is something that we're still trying to figure out the logistics of how to enforce that. Um and so hopefully in two weeks we might have slightly more clarity on that that we can share with you at that point. Thank you.

As a follow-up question to that and again apologize being new I if it is vague to say principally why would we not specify the percentage that you just outlined in the recommendation?

That that is another great question. Um, personally, my preference would have been to be slightly more um, direct in the language. Um, however, this amendment had been negotiated with the prior zoning administrator and the council office and, um, overall, I thought the changes that had been made in this new draft were um, really excellent. Um, and so I didn't feel like it was worth kind of reopening the conversation and trying to start all over again. Um, because I do have the ability as zoning administrator to uh determine a policy and I can set a policy document that would guide how we would interpret this moving forward.

We could you could set a policy that defines that principally in this context means 50% or more. Yes. Got it. Yeah. Any additional questions? Maybe as a followup to um commission members question on that. Is that something that that staff would be considering that we could put as a condition as a recommendation to council then? I think that's I think what I hear from other C commission members there's some some concern about that.

Sure. I mean that it's within the uh planning commission's perview to make any recommendations to council. this is, you know, staff brings our recommendation and then you can um accept it, reject it, modify it. Uh really in your court, obviously the thing to remember is that if there was for whatever reason there was concern at council that they didn't like that amendment, then um you know, and they didn't accept it, then it would be a negative recommendation and then um they would have to have a super majority or come back to us. So, but certainly it is completely in your wheelhouse uh to make, you know, to clarify the language to add additional conditions. Um,

and I just want to follow up on that. Um, I did speak to the zoning administrator about kind of written regulations or policy which I think helps to, you know, ensure uniform compliance and enforcement. Uh but that because this is new to the city and because we have kind of so many different variations on vape shops, it may need to be adjusted without having to come back to planning commission, which is why um you know that is an appropriate suggestion.

If I can ask one follow-up question, you said that you could do this because of your role right now as administrator. Is that fair to assume that a future administrator could change the policy to define principally different and all of a sudden encompass more businesses under this change than maybe what you would interpret? That is certainly a possibility. Okay. And just to follow up on that from a kind of legal perspective, it would still have to be in line with the lang plain language that we adopt. So principally, you know, they couldn't say principally is now 10%.

Sure. reasonably um and they would have to uniformly enforce that. So they couldn't decide that principally in one neighborhood means something different than principally in another neighborhood. But they could define principally meaning one thing under a certain restriction and under a different restriction the word as long as it's consistent across the board and not uh inconsistent with the plain language. Is there a typical legal definition for principally? Oh, that I don't know. I I wasn't prepared for that question. I just figured I'd ask the lawyer. Yeah. Yeah. I I I will have to look up before they come back.

And also to add just legally, I mean, if anybody disputed the zoning uh administrator's termination on anything, whether you know, a neighbor said, "Oh, you know, you're you're this is only 10% and you're your owner said you're it's only 10%, you're restricting it." Or, you know, a business owner said, "Oh, you're restricting me because I have to have 95% or whatever." they can always appeal that to the zoning board of adjustment which then is the legal body that would hear that appeal. They take testimony from both sides and then would make a make a decision. So there is also a venue for hearing um challenges if there are um concerns about the way a zoning administrator is interpreting a they can decide how to define principally

but but I I do think that I and and maybe this is what some of the other commissioners were getting at here. I I do think in general I think the hope would be that the zoning code defines clearly and concretely what you can and cannot do. And so if we're using the word principally and in this context we believe that means greater than 50% of either revenue or floor area whatever you know uh the zoning administrator is is saying would be the policy. Is it better if that is in the code specifically as opposed to a separate policy? So, I think um uh Commissioner O'Neal did um kind of touch on that a little bit. The one of the one benefit of doing it as a policy as opposed to putting it in code is um because of the newness of this particular approach to this use. Um, one of the reasons why I'm I don't have a definitive answer for you today whether we are going to do 50% of floor area or 50% of sales is because I want to confer with the inspectors who are responsible for enforcing this and find out what is feasible um and and so since we have some of these open questions if it is a policy and we set an initial policy and we realize you know 6 months from now a year from now this isn't an effective way to enforce this a policy I can we can change internally, you know, in the course of a a day if we were potentially in theory we could change it, you know, from one day to the next. Whereas if if we stated in code that it was, you know, 50% of gross floor area and 6 months from now, a year from now, we realize that's that's not an efficient um way of accomplishing the goals. We'd have to go through the whole amendment process. It would have to come back to us planning commission. It would have to go back to city council. And it would take um it would take months to have that change um implemented.

Well, but so would the intent then be at some point in the future to add more specificity to it once you feel like you know what the policy should be? Because I guess my concern comes from now if somebody is reading through our our code, they can't actually tell you what can and cannot be done through the plain language of the code. I mean aside from the the judgment of you know the word principally. So really they have to then go to you to find out what can and cannot be built in a certain place. Um so I think like my preference would be at at some point at least it is incorporated within the code if even if not you know right away.

I I think that is an excellent suggestion. Um and as you know we have amendments that will be coming down the pike in the next few years. Um so that would certainly be something that we can add to our list to um keep in mind as we are going through the amendments. Any additional comments or questions? I have just a quick clarification. Um in the and maybe you touched on this um in the prior version there was also a separation from daycarees that is not included in the current version. Was that purposeful? Um or is it something that should be considered?

Um for a similar reason of why we removed the separation from the vape shops and I can also map that out because we do have that mapped out as well for daycarees. Uh there was fear of an overall citywide ban by including that separation of vape shops from daycarees. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. And I can also add we felt that um for marketing and susceptibility and that sort of thing, you're really it's the elementary and older kids that are more likely to see the stuff and be affected by this stuff than than at daycare. It's just a younger age. Great. Understood. So that I'm clear, daycare facilities have been struck because it's still I mean it doesn't appear struck in the document that I'm reading. But yeah, sorry. There's two different versions. The one is the version that was at council and then the last page is the to be amended um version. Yeah.

Thank you. I just wanted to make sure that I didn't miss something. No, this is a little bit confusing. Any additional clarity, question or comment? One question. How is this to be enforced retroactively? Meanings if Yeah. So, so right now we it's not a use c specific use category. We deal the zoning code considers it retail sales and service. So, anybody that had a valid occupancy as retail sales and service up until this point, they would be able to continue uh as a as a vape shop. If this were to be adopted, does that mean that any license for a new vape shop would have to take into consideration these new requirements?

Yes. Uh it is um um if it's a little bit of a complicated issue. Um If it's if it's a new vape shop, a new retail, you know, they're coming in for their initial tenant fit out. It was, I don't know, a doctor's office before, that is going to be very clear and very easy um comparatively for us to, you know, take in that application, review it, approve them um under this new use once this this is adopted. Um it is going to be a bit of a challenge if it's an existing retail operation that is increasing the amount of tobacco products or other items um defined here. Um that is again something that we are um working on trying to understand how do we enforce this? How do we capture um those changes? Um and so again that's that is partly a conversation with uh the department of permits licenses and inspections for how they can help us uh with managing that. Um and um it is some uh related to some questions that I have open with the law department um to understand how do we handle that? How do we make sure that we are honoring the pre-existing ones while actually capturing the ones that are transitioning after this gets passed?

Thank you. Excellent. Any additional comments or questions, commissioners? Hearing none. Uh thank you so much. We'll see you back. All right. Um okay, commissioners, at this time we will, uh break until 2 o'clock. We'll start the hearing and action portion of today at 2 pm. So, uh, you can take a break for a few moments. Thank you. You're welcome.

discretionary then it should not be discretionary.

We are about one minute out. Commissioners We have our court reporter. I see. All right. Good afternoon and welcome to the typically hearing and action portion of the planning commission agenda uh for March 24, 2026. Uh today we have no items up for hearing and action. I'm going to read through today's agenda. Today's agenda under agenda item A is the appointment of planning commission officers. Agenda item B is approval of commission minutes. Agenda item C is correspondence. Agenda item D is plan of lots. We have two items today under plan of lots. Three items, I'm sorry. And under agenda item E is the director's report. Um, commissioners, I'm going to go ahead and uh do our first roll call. Uh, Commissioner Burton Faulk, present. Commissioner Hunt,

present. Thank you. Commissioner Antiano, present. Thank you. Commissioner Kelly, present. Thank you. Commissioner O'Neal, present. Thank you. Commissioner Kenttonia is not here today. Uh, Commissioner Repy, present. Thank you, Commissioner Vatz here.

Thank you. And Commissioner Walker here. All right. Thank you so much. All right. Now, heading to the agenda item A, which is appointment of planning commission officers. Uh so under agenda item A, our PC planning commission rules call for appointment of officers. There are three position uh that are officers. There would be a chair, there would be a vice chair, and there would be a secretary. So, at this time, uh, commissioners, we're going to have to vote on those positions before us. First, we'll vote for a commission chair. Do we have a motion for a commission chair? Uh I have a motion to nominate uh Commissioner Burton Faulk uh for a period of six months just because normally we appoint um these positions for two years but understanding that this is commission is new and we don't all know each other yet um I would recommend that you be appointed for 6 months as chair and then we can re-evaluate.

Second. All right. So then I'll do roll call. Uh, Commissioner Burton Faulk. I uh, Commissioner Hunt. I Thank you, Commissioner Ontario. I Thank you, Commissioner Kelly. I, thank you, Commissioner O'Neal. I, thank you, Commissioner Repy. I, thank you, Commissioner Vatz. Hi. Thank you. And Commissioner Walker, I.

All right. Thank you so much. All right, commissioners. At this time, uh, I'd like to, uh, call for a motion for vice chair. I think I would, under the same circumstances, uh, make that motion and ask that we for a period of 6 months hold, uh, Commissioner O'Neal as, uh, vice chair. Do we have a second from the floor? Second. All right. So, we'll move forward uh, and take roll call. That's Commissioner Burton Faulk. I, Commissioner Hunt, I. Thank you, Commissioner Ontario. I Thank you, Commissioner Kelly. I Thank you, Commissioner O'Neal. I Thank you, Commissioner Repy. I Thank you, Commissioner Vatz.

I Thank you. And Commissioner Walker, I All right. Thank you so much. All right. At this time, commissioners, we will move forward to uh vote on a secretary for the commission. Do I have a motion from the floor for a secretary? Uh, I motion that uh, Commissioner Reppy be appointed for six months. All right. Um, I would second that actually. Um, so can we do roll call if there are no uh, further discussion? All right. No debate. No debate. That's okay. You're going to find this is a fun group up here, I'm sure. Uh, so, Commissioner Burton Faulk. I, Commissioner Hunt,

I. Thank you. Commissioner Interiano. I Thank you, Commissioner Kelly. Hi. Thank you, Commissioner O'Neal. I Thank you, Commissioner Repy. Can I abstain? You sure can. Abstain. Thank you, Commissioner Vatz. Hi. Thank you. And Commissioner Walker, I. All right. Thank you. Thanks. I think

so. Very good. All right. So, uh, congratulations on that. We're moving forward to agenda item B, which is approval of minutes. Uh, commissioners, we have minutes before us and um, most of you are new with the exception of uh, Vice Chair O'Neal and myself. Uh, so you would abstain, but we have you here today for quorum uh, for previous meetings. We're going to go ahead. Um, since most of you will be abstaining, I'm just going to uh, say the dates of those and then we'll take roll call. Um, approval of minutes for February 24, 2026. Approval of minutes for December 16, 2025. Another set of minutes for December 2nd, 2025. So, we would need a motion from the floor accepting no um edits.

So, moved. All right. Then I will second and then I'm going to do roll call. Uh, that's Commissioner Burton Faulk. I, Commissioner Hunt, you can abstain. Abstain. Thank you so much. Uh, Commissioner Antiano, abstain. Thank you so much. Commissioner Kelly, abstain. Thank you. Commissioner O'Neal, I. Thank you. Commissioner Reppy, abstain. Thank you. Commissioner Vatz, abstain. Thank you so much. Commissioner Walker, abstain.

Thank you so much. Okay, so now we have agenda item A and B done. Moving on uh to agenda item C which is correspondence commissioners before us for March 24, 2026. We have before us regarding 1127 through 1133 Duffield Street correspondence from Mr. David Hairhog regarding DCP-Lot-2026-000025 for 2544 Crispen Street Lot Line revision. We are in receipt of communication from Tom Maulholland. All right, that concludes correspondence for March 24, 2026. Moving on to agenda item D which is plan of lots. We have before us three items. Those items are as follows. Item number one DCP- lot 20226-000018 at Heron Avenue consolidation. Item number two, DCP-lock-2026-000025 for 2544 Crispen Street Lot Line revision. Item number three, DCP-LOT-2025-00309 Penavan Consolidation. I'm going to uh move back up to plan of lots item number one unless Mr. Shepki uh presenting today would like me to to do any Okay, very good.

All right. So, item number one is DCP-lot-2026-000018 Heron Avenue consolidation. This is a major consolidation in the Polish Hill neighborhood. Thank you. Um so this is the Heron Avenue consolidation. This is the proposed consolidation of 35 parcels into one parcel. The proposed lot would have frontage on Heron Avenue and would be 104,083 ft in area. Several structures are located on the subject property which are to be demolished. And the recommended motion from staff is to preliminarily approve uh the Heron Avenue consolidation and schedule final review on April 7th, 2026.

All right, commissioners. Um we will open the floor for any public testimony. Is there anyone here online? None. Um, commissioners, sometimes we do a preliminary approval and then a final. Do I have a motion from the floor to preliminarily approve uh this lot consolidation for Heron Avenue with a final approval on April 7, 2026? Motion. Thank you. Do I have a second? Second. Second. All right. Um, I'll do roll call. Commissioner Burton Faulk. I Commissioner Hunt. I Thank you, Commissioner Interiano. I Thank you, Commissioner Kelly.

I Thank you, Commissioner O'Neal. I Thank you, Commissioner Repy. I Thank you, Commissioner Vatz. I Thank you. And Commissioner Walker, I. Thank you. Okay. So, moving on to item number two, DCP-lot-2026-000025 at 2544 Crispen Street lot line revision. This is a major lot line revision in the Perry South neighborhood.

So, this is the Crisen Street lot line revision. This is a lot line revision involving four parcels. Uh the proposed parcels 45D, 31, 35, and 37 would have frontage on Marshall Avenue and would have lot sizes ranging from 82,000 ft² or from 8,200 ft² to 11,700 ft². The proposed parcel 45H264 would be 232,287 ft in area. Would have frontage on Crisen Street. Houses are located on the parcels fronting onto Marshall Avenue. A farm is located on the port on a portion of parcel N number 45H264. This is a major lot line revision that was first reviewed by the planning commission on February 24th, 2026. And the recommended motion from staff is to approve the Crispen Street lot line revision.

Okay. Um is there anyone here for public testimony in person or online? Seeing none, uh, commissioners, before us is a, uh, we need a motion for the 2544 Crispen Street lot line revision. Do I have a motion from the floor? So moved. Thank you, Commissioner Walker. Second. I've got a learn. Uh, Commissioner Kelly. And we'll do roll call. Commissioner Burton Faulk. I, Commissioner Hunt. Thank you, Commissioner. Hi. Thank you, Commissioner Kelly. Hi. Thank you, Commissioner O'Neal. I Thank you, Commissioner Repy. I Thank you, Commissioner Vatz. I

Thank you. And Commissioner Walker,

I thank you. Okay, so moving on to item number three under plan of lots. It's DCP-Lot-2025-0000309 at Penn Avenue Consolidation. This is a major consolidation in the East Liberty neighborhood. Mr. Shepky. Uh this is the Penn Avenue consolidation. It's the proposed consolidation of four parcels into one parcel. The proposed parcel would have frontage on Penn Avenue and it would be 102,599 ft in area. A surface parking lot is located on the subject property and this is a major consolidation that was first reviewed by the planning commission on February 24th, 2026. The recommended motion from staff is to approve the Penn Avenue consolidation.

Thank you, Mr. Shepki. All right. Um, is there anyone here that would like to speak on the matter online or in person? Seeing none, uh, commissioners, at this time, we need a motion from the floor to approve. Uh, do I have a motion? So move. Second, Diamonte. Okay, great. Thank you. We have a motion from Commissioner Kelly, a second from Commissioner Walker. It's going to take me time to get used to being able to hear voice and name. Uh, Commissioner Burton Faulk. I, Commissioner Hunt. I Thank you, Commissioner Interiano. Hi. Thank you, Commissioner Kelly. Hi. Thank you, Commissioner O'Neal. I thank you, Commissioner Repy. I thank you, Commissioner Vatz. Hi.

Thank you. And Commissioner Walker. I thank you so much. Okay, that concludes the plan of lots. Thank you, Mr. Shepki. And we are moving on to agenda item E, which is the director's report. Good afternoon everybody.

Good afternoon. Um, first I think on behalf of uh the department of city planning, we just wanted to thank everybody for um welcome the new commissioners for serving in this way the next two years and thank you for our existing commissioners for leading the way and um helping through this transition. So thank you. Um we just have two items really today. one is um if you haven't uh read the news lately or been on the press release from the mayor's office um the comprehensive plan will be proceeding hopefully um any any day now. Thank you to the uh Hines Endowments for coming in with um a significant investment in order to move the plan forward which we really feel is going to provide the um level of predictability um that we need on how and where our city should grow. So we're going to be having um several touch points with both the public and stakeholders including yourselves which I'll touch on in a second over the coming months. Um but it is our intention to complete the plan by August so that hopefully we will be back at planning commission in the fall for um the approval process. So um but in advance of that um in the in last year and as the plan has been going on planning commission has been involved on the various committees so related to housing economy and so forth and so it's our intention to continue hopefully if you are interested and able to participate in that way so that you are um walking alongside us along the way so that there's no really major surprises by the time we get to a completed plan. So, we're just in the process of refining that path and um confirming it

with the mayor's office and we'll be um announcing that soon. And the second and I think previously um Deputy Dash um mentioned that he's been working with the um the chair and Okay. And the um officers from planning commission to figure out um who would like to participate where. So absolutely.

Okay. Um so it's our intention. Let us know. Yeah, we'll be reaching out about that. And the second is just um in the spirit of um welcoming business to our city and advancing economic development, our updated vending program was launched March 12th, I believe, and um our planner Melissa can do it much more justice. But this uh has updated regulations based on best practices nationally is hopefully going to help small business food trucks, other vendors um to more quickly be able to um run their businesses throughout town. So there are specific locations um and just easier uh permitting requirements. So, um, Melissa's team is also hosting a almost a walk-in and get your permanent day at, uh, 412 and, um, I can send the date following up, but I think it's in it's in May. Um, and the intention is to have, um, TCP, PLI, the various agencies. So, if a small business wants to come in and we can support you in walking out with a permit. So, um, it's a fun and exciting one. So

that sounds really good. Thank you. Can I ask a quick question? How is that being promoted to the community? Like how how are we getting word out about that initiative? Yeah. Um so we luckily now have an in-house communications person which is great. So we are on social media. They have an engage page. Um so you can follow that. There was a press release I believe it's March 12th um coming out of the mayor's office. But beyond that, they are um hosting community meetings, like attending as many community meetings. So, they've been all over town um sharing what the updates are and um continuing to spread the word. So, if you have additional recommendations, we're happy to

I am sure you are slammed with all the work and everything we've been seeing. Uh but one suggestion, if you're not already doing, partnering with the chambers of commerce, okay? uh and you know the the business uh community organizations. Yeah. Um and maybe even bringing them more into the fold as partners in that event. Sure. Um given that their membership I'm sure will be really interesting. Yeah. And I'll ask Melissa about that. So I'll check in with her after this. Thank you. Thank you commissioners. Any um additional comment as it relates? All right. Thank you so much and have a great rest of your day. Um okay. Okay. Well, this is the part of the meeting, commissioners, where uh we close out the day. Typically ask for a motion to adjurnn. So moved. A second.

I'll second. And then all in favor, we'll just wave our hands to everybody. I and without.