 Good afternoon. I'd like to bring the October 30th 2023 Planning Commission meeting into session. Welcome to Planning Commission members, staff and guests. Multiple staff members are here today to ensure that the meeting runs smoothly and all applicants and members of the public are able to participate in the meeting at the appropriate times. If you're here today and would like to speak about a case, please provide your name clearly into the microphone and please be sure to sign in either at the back of the room or the podium for documentation purposes. If you're here today to speak about a case, you must speak up when the chairperson calls for a public comment. And I'll call the roll. Mr. Cawsey? Mr. Cook? Ms. Davis? Mr. Harp? Mr. Osorio? Here. Ms. Thomas? Here. And Mr. Frost? Here. We have quorum. I'll give a brief meeting overview. Applicants with a request before the Planning Commission are allotted a presentation time of 10 minutes. This time should include but is not limited to an overview of the project, case, history and any pertinent meetings held regarding the request. This time also includes all persons presenting information on behalf of the applicants such as attorneys, engineers and architects. This time limit does not include any questions asked by the Planning Commission or staff regarding the requests. During the public comment period, members of the general public are given the opportunity to address their concerns and intervals of two minutes. After the public comment period applicants have five minutes to respond and once Planning Commission begins deliberation no additional comments will be permitted by the applicant or the public. The administrator does have a timer and will make presenters aware of when their time has expired. The Planning Commission reserves the right to amend these procedures on a case by case basis. Are there any changes to the agenda? There are a couple of changes since publication. As you know, this is our meeting has been rescheduled from October 12th. So what was on the agenda case number five, which is text amendment 2023-0005, was forwarded to the City Council zoning public hearing for South Carolina Code section 6-29-760 and that was heard on October 17th. And also case number six, which is annexed 2023-0018, which was Park Lane Road annexation, was also forwarded to the City Council's October 17th zoning public hearing. Other than that, the agenda still stands. Thank you. The Planning Commission uses the consent agenda to approve noncontroversial or routine matters by single motion and vote. Examples of such items include approval of site plans, annexations, and street names. If a member of the Planning Commission or the general public wants to discuss an item on the consent agenda, you must speak up after the consent agenda is read. Then that item is removed from the consent agenda and considered during the meeting. The Planning Commission then approves the remaining consent agenda items. So I'll read through the consent agenda. The first is to approve the September 14th, 2023 meeting minutes. Second, under future land use map amendment and zoning map amendment for appending annexation is annexed 2023-0022 at 1200 Hayward Street, formerly known as 101 South Evans Street. This is a request recommendation on the assignment of land use classification of urban core mixed residential type 3 and the assignment of zoning of community activity center corridor district for appending annexation. The property is currently classified as mixed residential high density and zoned M1 by Richland County. Case number three is under major site plan review. This is S plan dash 2023-0011 for 111 and 161 Pontiac Business Center. This is a request for major site plan approval for the construction of a 90,950 square foot self storage facility. The property is zoned LI light industrial. Case four is also a site plan major site plan. This is S plan dash 2023-0012 82 41 Park Lane Road request major site plan approval for the construction of a 140,000 square foot public health laboratory. This is the South Carolina DHEC lab building. The property is zoned INS Gen Institutional General District and that is it for the consent agenda. All right thank you. All right is there anyone in the general public that would like to see a consent agenda item removed and placed on the regular meeting agenda? Seeing none hearing none is anyone from planning commission that would like to see an item pulled and moved to regular agenda. Mr. Chair I don't see any need to have it removed but I do have a question about case number 82 41 Park Lane Road if I could ask the staff a quick question. Is that something that would require a removal if it's just a question clarification? We can see if your clarification can just be answered by staff without having to discuss it. Okay yeah my only question was about the traffic study in terms of what did that look like and how much was included in that in terms of the times that they maybe that the study was performed. Yeah I think if we were gonna discuss that which we can we would need to pull that off consent. No I don't want to do that thank you. Okay so no items to be pulled by the planning commission from the consent agenda on the regular meeting. Seeing none I will accept the motion on the consent agenda. Mr. Chair I recommend that we approve September 14th 2023 minutes along with today's consent agenda with any staff comments. Got a motion to approve the meeting minutes and the consent agenda. Can I get a second? Second. Got a motion and a second all in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? No. The ayes have it. Motion is approved. Okay now the planning commission will now move forward with those items on the regular agenda. We will use the following outline for regular agenda items. The administrator will introduce the case. The applicant will have 10 minutes to make a presentation. Planning Commission may ask questions. The public comment period will be open to those present. The public comment period will be closed. The applicant will have five minutes to respond to any public comments and planning commission may ask additional questions of the applicant and then deliberation and action by the planning commission will occur. Once the planning commission begins deliberation no additional comments will be permitted by the applicant or the public. So the first case on the regular agenda, pardon me, is a zoning map amendment. This is ZMA-2023-0014, 2401 Gadsden Street, 701 Chester Street and the parcel next to 701 Chester Street. This is a request for a recommendation to rezone the property from RSF3 which is residential single family small lot district to MU2 which is a mixed use district. I will go ahead and read the staff recommendation. This is in the Elm Park neighborhood. So this is about a 0.91 acre collection of parcels which is currently vacant and being used as storage and the staff recommendation it says while there are MU2 parcels adjacent to the properties the proposed rezoning is for three lots that front Chester and Gadsden Street which are both part of the single family residential street grid. Staff typically does not recommend rezoning single family zone properties to a more intense mixed use district particularly when there is a clearly defined boundary that would be eroded as a result and or when is it it is inconsistent with the future land use for the area. Staff finds that the proposed zoning is inconsistent with the future land use classification in the Columbia Compass Envision 2036 and with the adopted area plan and recommends denial of the request. And I would also just like to mention just for the record before we get into the discussion is that there have been some letters received a few of which you received via email when we had the original meeting scheduled for the 12th and then you've got a couple that came in today that you should have hard copies of as well. Okay we've heard the case we've heard the staff recommendation are there any questions to staff before we hear from the applicant assuming the applicants present any questions at this time for staff is the applicant present would like to give a presentation yes ma'am do you want to present anything on the zoning yeah please step forward and I'm Jennifer Powers and I own the property that's in question. This property was purchased somewhere around 2015 and Coxson-Dinkins had given me a survey of the property or there was a survey filed at the time. The property was zoned a pud zoning at that time and the sewer line that I discovered after much to do with the city and Coxson-Dinkins runs completely across the bottom part of the RS3 at Chester and Wayne Street. This reduced the possibilities of any type of development significantly and it has not been resolved as the city did not want to take responsibility for a prescriptive easement and they are using the sewer on my property without an easement so they felt that I needed to pay to move the sewer. So that is just not something that I'm financially able to do so I have been trying to maintain the property at a great expense fight the urban camping and the homeless people in that area. So this property has been quite a challenge for me for a long time now at the top of the hill is a VFW building it's approximately a thousand square feet block building with about an eight inch concrete floor two bathrooms and it was used as a VFW for 50 years so I have been using it because I have a license a business license across the street I'm a general contractor so I've been using this building in conjunction with my business and for storage and such so I've noticed that the MU1 on Wayne Street that some of these businesses have been closed down for years they didn't change any of their zoning they have not changed the zoning right adjacent to me on a vacant lot that is zoned MU2 on Gadsden Street so evidently they have just cherry picked me out of the out community there to change my zoning I'm contiguous with M2 zoning all around me and at the back of my houses of which I live in one the city allowed junk King to come in with a garbage transfer station and gave them a business license and I've had to fight that for almost a year to get that removed so evidently you know I feel like I've been singled out for one thing I've asked for suggestions from city development on what they think could go there because the demolishing of a VFW that was there from the 20s is not a not an easy thing to do is a demolition and there's just not enough room my street has 10 feet less and right of way street right away than the rest of the streets in Elmwood Park I'm really not a member of Elmwood Park because I don't have sidewalks I don't have street lights I don't have anything that the rest of Elmwood Park has and so but Elmwood Park you know I've always been very cognizant when I built the other three houses and renovated the one that I stay contiguous with materials with you know nice building aesthetics and I've always kept this property in utmost a condition because I own from Gadston Street all the way to Wayne Street on both sides so there's no one else other than one other neighbor that would even be affected by noise or by anything else now I'm not because it was MU2 gave me the options of maybe a little social club I thought a pickleball court then everybody got upset about you know Wall Street Journal says the pickleball court is noisy you know nobody really has any any any statistics to prove anything they just don't like it so I wrote a letter to the HOA and asked them for suggestions of what they'd like to have there or whatever so everybody just wants me to demolish the building or build houses when houses are just not going to fit on there's only one buildable lot so I have to come up with something that accommodates this sewer main that runs completely across the property and I believe one of the former commissioners is Cox and Dinkins so I hate it that Jean Dinkins missed it because I've worked with him for years but you know that's just the facts so the city doesn't want to help you with anything but I'm paying commercial garbage I pay commercial taxes I applied in 2020 for a sewer tap which was a commercial payment for that and they put the tap in but during the pandemic this zoning got done without any notice to me and so here we are and the building is kind of unsightly and I I don't know what to do with it I don't want to put a lot of money in it because the neighborhood won't let you do anything it needs I need either some help or I need the city to remove that sewer off of the lot so I can build residential it was a significant investment for me and I'm aging out I'm in my 60s now and this was you know a retirement vision but I'm afraid that you know it's gonna cause a hardship for me but I can't continue to just pay taxes on a piece of property that's not developable or somebody needs to come up with something else you know I could use it for parking to go along with the little building but I can't use it to dig into a foundation or do anything with that sewer so maybe the city can correct their sewer issue and move the sewer over further to the embankment and then the lots could be developed but then that's still gonna cause parking situations because we don't have a wide enough street like the rest of the streets in Elmwood Park so I am I'm a general contractor I was a title agent for 41 years in fact mr. Fuller I worked with mr. Fuller when I was in my 20s I don't know what else to do to try to accommodate a neighborhood that won't give you any solutions but just wants to complain the property was zoned the way they haven't done anything with the vacant lot right next door to me which is in the residential district so evidently they've just singled me out I don't I need either help or I need an explanation of why I've been singled out by the city and you know how all this came to be without any notice so getting to that I think that the environmental issues that I have with the M you won behind me which is underground leakage and this and that and I fight the homeless situation like it's the Wild West down there and I've been doing this for 24 years now so I don't know what the city or what this neighborhood expects me to do to continue to pay taxes on a piece of property that's not developable or to dump money into something that is not going to give me any return so I need help if it's a planning commission plan something but they they're not gonna you know that there's only one lot that can be built on so I don't understand the uproar of the neighborhood they just that I was told by the HOA that they were concerned about they didn't want any high rise down there well even the way it is it's three stories is is allowed so I mean I couldn't afford a a concrete four-story structure if I wanted to but I've lived down there I have built these houses in a time when the neighborhood was not desirable I couldn't even get financing from our local lenders I hopped my house in Heathwood to move into Elmwood 25 years ago I cleaned up a whole entire city block that was that wasn't worth lending on nor anybody living in and I've endured a lot and my stuff is impeccable my houses are impeccable my yards are impeccable but to just to maintain that lot across the street cost me about twenty five hundred dollars a year so I pay two hundred dollars a month for a guy to come and cut it and I'm getting no help from the city all of the adjacent property is the embankment it billows into my property they do nothing with the MU two people next door it's just it's just what they want and they've spent copious amounts of money on this greenway rail to trail that was given away I happened to be there at the time when the deal was made by Jim Papadia with the people that formally owned that property and I saw the transaction and it was not copacetic so I don't know what the city wants to do but I need help and I'd like some consideration and some help not just complaints and not just changing my value of my property thank you before you step away just real quick are there any questions for the applicant from planning commission at this stage no sir no that's the MU to you'll see that little triangular jut that comes into Gadsden Street that's it between you and the rail that's right yes ma'am any other questions for the applicant thank you you're welcome and is there any other folks here from the public that would like to speak for or against this particular project this case yes sir come on up please state your name okay Alvin Porty junior just a reminder we'll have two minute increments for others for against the project I've been a neighbor of miss powerful good many years over there on Chester Street and she's been a good person for the community and those three houses she fixed them up because if you've seen it before she bought it it was bad and when she got in she cleans it up and it all those houses look real good I would like to see that the city would move the drainage over so she can do something with that property and she's been a good person for our community and I'm support her for doing that and I hope the city would see fit to do that it's gonna cost y'all money to move that drain over but then she could put houses on it and then y'all could probably put a sidewalk in and that'd be more taxes more money for the city to make money you can you can tax them so that'd be a win-win for everybody she's been good look out for thank you okay all right is there anybody else here from the neighborhood that would like to speak for against yes sir hello my name is Joe checker I live in the Elmwood Park neighborhood I live close to these lots that Miss Power zones and I would like the property not to be rezoned and remain single-family home I think a business in that corner would bring a lot of traffic and a lot of noise almost any commercial business that you put there is is not going to be good for the neighborhood I think building single family homes on the property would help maintain our property values and help our resale values keep the neighborhood a family friendly neighborhood thank you thank you all right is there anybody else here that would like to speak for against yes ma'am hello my name is Celia Macintosh I've been a resident of Elmwood Park since 2009 and over that time we have seen incredible growth and progress in the neighborhood and like others have stated I would encourage the city to do what they can to be in good governance of Miss Power's properties but rezoning that to an MU2 is not the right answer here yes there is the MU1 yes there is the MU2 but her lots are critical in maintaining the fabric of the neighborhood that has developed over the last 15 years on Wayne Street there are maybe eight houses now very large homes and so the fabric of that side of the neighborhood has drastically changed if we were having this conversation in 2005 it would look very different but today it's really important that those stay residential that traffic through that area stays residential she herself mentioned that the streets are narrow so any sort of commercial activity in that area just needs to be kept to a complete minimum there's a charter school planned for that MU2 behind her and the neighborhood worked very closely with them to keep their entrance and exit on Elmwood under the overpass rather than coming into the neighborhood and so to rezone this property here would be flying in the face of all of that to try and keep a cohesive sense of residential atmosphere in that area and we're gonna hope to continue that the development is just walking right down Wayne Street and I mean as you guys will see tomorrow night we'll have 2,000 trick-or-treaters running around a neighborhood that is seeing a complete 180 even in the last 10 years so thank you for your consideration thank you alright is there anybody else from the public that would like to speak for or against seeing none Miss Powers is there anything else you would like to say as it relates to the comments you've heard is that somebody's left their phone here so they might want to come and get it is that that is an incorrect statement as to what the property would have looked like in 2005 I've been down there since 97 in 2005 nobody wanted to move on my street and there were no houses in the back and I will agree with the lady that I mean she's not one of my immediate neighbors so she must live up in the Elmwood Park somewhere but is that I have industrial behind me or or MU one which is pretty invasive I don't know if she gets to listen to the dumpster that's dumped at 2 o'clock in the morning and but I do and the city doesn't seem to care anything about that you know as far as the neighborhood is concerned because it's right it's within maybe 15 feet of my back door so I still feel that you know they cherry pick me and most of the people I sense I own the whole block there is no one else other than the one neighbor that just spoke and the lot right across from him is in you to the lot right directly across from him is zone MU to so it doesn't matter if my lot is residential or not he's got MU to across the street from him whether he likes it or not so I just don't see the rationale but thank you yes ma'am thank you that will close the public comment period are there any questions and we will begin deliberations are any questions from the planning Commission over to staff just one question for with she mentioned that it was read it was a zoning of PUD prior to this last zoning is there any information to that regard and what the PUD zoning required yes it was previously a residential PUD development with I believe five residential homes planned so it was a residential PUD and I believe that was passed in 2007 okay ma'am we're we're in deliberations now so public comment period has been closed any cool any other questions from planning Commission over to staff if there are no further questions I will entertain a motion I'll make it Mr. Chair I'll make a motion to deny SMA 2002 3 0 0 1 4 2 4 0 1 Gadson 701 Chester and NX 701 Chester all right we have a motion on the table to deny the request is there second second all right I got a motion and a second all in favor signify by saying aye any opposed say no the ayes have it the motion passes the next the next case on the agenda is case number 8 this is ZMA dash 2023 dash 0 0 1 5 at 22 12 Senate Street this is a request for a recommendation to resound the property from RSF 3 residential single-family small lot district and the old Shannon lower Waverly historic district area a to RM 1 mixed residential district in the old Shannon lower Waverly historic district area a this is a point 2 6 acre parcel which is vacant and the I'll go ahead and just read the staff recommendation this is this lot is in a block that is consistently RSF 3 and while the recommendation to rezone a property to a more intense district within a single-family block is generally discouraged the maximum density that this lot could accommodate for duplex or multifamily use with the proposed zoning district of RM 1 is two units as well the property is within the old Shannon lower Waverly historic district the maximum density combined with the historic overlay which will require review of the design and massing of the structure provides a level of assurance that a proposed development would be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and provide needed infill development in this area staff finds that proposed zoning is consistent with the future land use classification of UCR 1 and the Columbia's Compass Plan and that a recommendation to approve is appropriate before we have the applicant but come forward or any questions that we all have for staff sorry let me also mention apologies that I did there were yes to letters received via email from folks in the neighborhood these came in before the previously scheduled meeting on October 11th those should have been forwarded to you via email yes thank you is the applicant present would like to come forward yes sir hello everyone Timothy web so 2212 Senate Street as mentioned is a quarter acre lot it currently has 11,297 square feet with the 40% potential lot coverage so building size has the availability of 4518 square feet or potentially with 3518 and a thousand square foot ADU what we are proposing is a duplex property to family property that blends traditionally with the historic neighborhood I've also done duplexes in historic districts as it includes everywhere from West Columbia to city of Columbia so very familiar with the preservation committee and team and different teams around city of Columbia as you look at the first two blocks of Senate Street on the left side all our zone are one there's an L shape of R and one up Walnut and Senate Street and also I have a colleague or buddy of mine that also is in the neighborhood that owns a duplex on Pine Street I saw the letters that may have concerns of parking and things of that sort so I want to make sure that we are not disrupting the neighborhood with the two family dwelling that we will have and I'm hoping to hear any neighborhood feedback thank you thank you all right are there any folks in the public that would like to speak for or against this project yes sir come on forward choose me choose Thomas 19 year resident of the lower Waverley community and I welcome all development to the area as we know it's been blighted for some time especially when I got there back in 2004 look forward to different properties coming I think that Tim will do an awesome job and having a residential duplex put there and I recommend it yes sir thank you yes yes sir my name is Mike Burley I'm a lifelong resident of the Waverley area and first of all I want to make sure you definitely keep it historic my concern right now is the parking on my block alone there's only probably occupied where they're full of rental houses right now and we can only park on one side on Oak Street there are four there are only 14 possible parking spaces right there right now we're just four occupying houses there are probably 11 cars for just those four houses so I really would like to see y'all put a pause on this and just look at the parking because that's a serious issue and right now they're probably several houses that are vacant if we get any more houses I don't know what we were part I have a disabled neighbor now and he comes there they're blocking the driveway so they can't even get this out he would have to walk a block so I ask that you look at the parking is a serious issue right now in that area so please take a look at that before you consider that yes sir thank you all right in you yes sir yes my excuse me my name is Bobby Taylor I live across the street from this property now ten years ago they wanted to try to move up in there but now that the neighborhood and the law has cleaned it up and and it's peaceful now I sit on my porch at night 10 11 o'clock you come by my house anytime the light is on you cuz I keep the door open and you get to move in new people in that it'll go right back I feel as if it go right back where we just worked hard to get from it's peaceful there old people live there you don't know what we might get you know I'm talking like so let's just keep it like it is thank you thank you yes sir good afternoon I'm Reverend Michael Buxon I am the senior pastor at Chappelle Memorial AME church which is right around the corner from this property this that property number one the parking is going to be one thing it's already tough for us and I can imagine what it's like for the residents that live there now my other concern is that this is a historic area and I know that we're doing some building at Chappelle and we are held to a certain I guess standard or whatever to make sure that the property blends in with the neighborhood I know that's different from what this gentleman is planning to do but there's already one side that is zoned for duplexes and my fear is that if we open the door for this then it will change the entire landscape of this historic district that we're in and I know at Chappelle we're fighting very hard to keep historic Waverly and lower Waverly as close to what it is and help others to renovate their homes to kind of just keep it's because it's a historic area and I'm just afraid that if if you allow this property to be rezoned it's gonna open the door for some others to be rezoned and the historic lower Waverly community will not be what it is now if you're gonna put something on that lot let it be a single family dwelling there are plenty of other ones in that area and I think that the area that's already zoned for duplexes is enough plus the parking I would hope that you would consider this very seriously thank you good afternoon my name is Vivian Clark-Armstead I'm president of the MLK lower Waverly neighborhood association and as part of a spokesman for the community we are not in favor of changing the zoning or of our community we are a residential community we are a historical community we have been under siege from regeneration we're overrun with students we're overrun with cars we're overrun with even foot traffic in our area between us and five points a duplex will only bring younger people predominantly students back from school into our community and we're fighting that as we speak now because of the foot traffic it is increased littering as they walk from restaurants and cook out and different things that they throw their containers along the streets so we're constantly having community cleanup campaigns the property value in that community will be impacted we want to remain a single family zone residential community historically an African-American historical community is what lower Waverly at one time no one wanted lower Waverly when it was old Shandon and so now that people are seeing that it is advantageous and profitable to be near five points to be downtown to be in our community we are being under siege we're being sent letters we're being sent false postcards we're getting phone calls daily from people trying to buy our property actually went one day and there was a man actually in my yard taking pictures of my property saying that they were want to develop it into something different we do not want our community to be something different I have been in that community I bought my home there in 2015 but prior to that my grandmother lived in that community and I went to the old Waverly elementary school which was closed during regeneration we are insistent that our community remains a historical residential single-family homes they are welcome to build a single-family home there do not change the character of community and do not change the status of the zoning for our community is our request to you to consider today thank you thank you is there anyone else that would like to speak for against yes ma'am thank you my name is Julie Hartwell and I own the lot adjacent to this property and I have every intention to develop that lot as a single-family home I think you also have a letter from the property owner on the other side who also has every intention to maintain the single-family status of our neighborhood I'm requesting of course that you deny this request I am a lifelong resident of the neighborhood I attended hand graduated from Drew High School and still reside there today and would like to see the character and property value in my neighborhood maintained single family houses are selling in my neighborhood and there is plan development of at least four vacant lots as single-family dwellings as I said as a lifelong resident of the neighborhood I ask that you deny this request to divide the block that is currently 100% single family and slice in this zoning designation that's different as my neighborhood president said we receive constant calls from developers to buy our property and create halfway houses and other residential types that are incongruent with our historical designation so I'm asking that you please deny this request thank you yes ma'am thank you good afternoon and I'll be very brief my name is dr. Bambi Gaddis I live at 904 Oak Street my husband and I have resided in that location since 1992 I have raised a 43-year-old daughter from her almost infancy I have 226 I have a 26-year-old grandson a 16-year-old grandson all of them resided at some point at 904 and now I have two great-grands who visit frequently I don't have to repeat what has been said but I know that it is irresponsible of me not to express my concern of what has been stated we really need your support to try to the best of our ability we are we are I am all for business I am all for business development of continuing to deteriorate the community that we're just trying to keep together so I appreciate your consideration in all of this is there anyone else in the public that would like to speak for or against seeing none mr. Webb I'll offer if you have any last comments to state based on what you the comments you've heard and yes so very briefly I've heard the comments and my goal is not to deteriorate the neighborhood it's only to add value I'm not familiar if anyone sure if anyone's familiar with the duplex right across from the Bull Street district I have brought value to that area with revitalizing the duplex there also in the I mentioned the West Columbia Brooklyn neighborhood of revitalizing a 1900 old mill home and adding value to that neighborhood as well so I have no intention of degrading the neighborhood also the lot size is 52 by 108 so we have a tremendous amount of space as mentioned the lot is over 11,000 square feet to include and incorporate parking plan to continue the to have the parking issues that are currently the neighborhood is facing and I'm also open this duplex if approved to hear feedback from the community as well approve moving forward with this thank you thank you all right with that we will end the public comment period is there any questions from planning commission to staff have a great question yes given that the block is consistently RSF 3 and given that the recommendation to resume a property to a more intense district within a single family block is generally discouraged what makes this specific one different it's a good question I definitely think there was some you know discussion amongst staff and I think this is one of those ones that was kind of in a gray area but again because of the it is a residential mixed district so it's not the uses that would be allowed in RM are not as extensive as if it for example were a mixed-use districts still pretty much a residential use and based on the lot size the two the two unit maximum because of just dimensional requirements right it wasn't going to be able to be developed as an extremely intense district but also it's got the historic overlay but this is also great example of why we ask applicants to coordinate with the neighborhood because their opinions are certainly valuable as well so that was just the staff's kind of analysis of this parcel in this location in this district that answer your question yes thank you I have one as well so on this particular street all the houses are single family homes correct I think on this side of the street but then across the street is the RM one so there are some duplexes I believe on the other side of the street okay and it doesn't change anything and requirements do it be historical correct it would the recommendation is to keep the historic overlay on the on the parcel any additional questions this year I have a question as relates to parking how has the parking been addressed with this applicant in terms of are they meeting specific requirements or is that kind of open at this point so the rezoning is just a first step with the applicant we had a pre-application meeting with the applicant to discuss the rezoning application the applicant would need to submit actual plans later on and parking would be assessed at that time I can tell you that the requirement is two two spaces per unit although in it being with an overlay it's it's actually one it's cut in half with that overlay so that would it would remain the same regardless of the district thank you all right any any further questions from planning Commission to staff any questions of the applicant here or none yeah any additional comments or discussion but no other questions or comments I'll entertain a motion Mr. Chairman I make a motion that we approve ZMA 2023-0015 22 12 Senate Street the request to rezone the property from RSF 3 to RM 1 all right we got a motion to approve the rezoning can I get a second second got a motion and a second all in favor signify by saying aye any opposed say no no I believe the eyes have it but do we want to call please yeah that would be great mr. causey mr. cook approve miss Davis and I mr. harp mr. asorio no that was a no okay miss Thomas approve and mr. frost approve okay the motion passes five to two the eyes have it the motion is approved we'll move on to other business no no worries I think the only thing I was gonna mention today is to remind everybody of their training opportunities that are coming I know Sky and Lee have been sending all different things me email so just as a reminder there is a there is a remote training opportunity tomorrow about greenways so if you haven't signed up for that and would like to please get in touch with sky then there's an in-person one on November 17th but as you know we've got three hours per year for maintenance requirements and since it's November we're trying to squeeze all that in so please just keep that in mind I actually sent an email in reference to the remote course and I didn't get a response back oh about is it about tomorrow okay we'll follow up on that okay you'd like to attend I might would like to attend to Mars too is it is it an hour and a half full hour and a half yeah let's see tomorrow's is beyond greenways the next step for city trails and walking routes it's at one o'clock it's one and a half hours okay so okay we'll send some follow-up information on that one for tomorrow that'd be great one at 1 p.m. yep yes this is a zoom one we don't have as many zoom as we used to but there's a little bit of a mix so I think this may be one of the last remote training opportunities so yeah we'll send we'll go ahead and resend that this afternoon or or first thing in the morning thanks all right is there any other business you're none old except a motion to adjourn mr. chairman I'd like to make a motion to adjourn today's meeting that emotion can I get a second second all in favor signify by saying hi any opposed no meeting is adjourned thank you