2026-10-07 - Planning Board

00:29Oh. the meeting to order of the Yamaha

00:31Planning Board. The planning board

00:32members that are here today are John

00:34Sullivan, David Rossacker, Jorge

00:36Satalongo, Patrick Reagan, Patrick

00:38Morris, vice chair, and I, Michael P,

00:40chairman. Members of the city staff that

00:42are in attendance today are Eric England

00:44may be here in a little bit. He's the

00:46assistant planning director. Mike Carter

00:48sitting next to me is the current

00:49planning manager. Jennifer Taylor will

00:51be here shortly as well with the city

00:52law department. And Clintet Ingram,

00:54recording secretary. Our rules of

00:57procedures are as follows. Notice of

00:59this hearing has been published. Copies

01:01of today's agenda are located on the

01:03table in front of us. You're certainly

01:04welcome to come down and pick one up.

01:06The cases on the consent agenda will be

01:08heard first. Consent cases have been

01:11recommended for layover, have already

01:13been heard, or are perceived by the

01:15planning board to be non-controversial.

01:17Therefore, they will be read and voted

01:19on without the opportunity for you to

01:20state your opinion on the case. If you

01:23wish to have this case discussed,

01:24however, during the hearing during this

01:27hearing, you may remove the case from

01:28the consent agenda. To do so, when each

01:31case is consent case is read, I will ask

01:33if anyone wants the case removed for

01:35discussion. If you do, please stand up

01:39and say so, and the case will be removed

01:41from the consent agenda. This case then

01:43will be heard after we vote on the cases

01:45that remained on consent. When the case

01:48is heard, you will have the opportunity

01:49to come to the podium, clearly state

01:51your name and address, and give your

01:53testimony at that time. When hearing

01:56cases on the regular agenda, the board

01:57will first hear from the applicant, and

01:59after the applicant states their case,

02:01we will hear from the proponents, and

02:03then we will hear from any opponents.

02:06After both sides are heard, the public

02:07hearing will be closed, and no

02:09additional testimony will be permitted

02:11unless a board member requests

02:12additional information. When at the

02:15podium, please clearly state your name,

02:17address, and whom you are here

02:19representing. For the record, your

02:21testimony is very important to us. In

02:23the interest of time and courtesy to

02:25others, please be short and to the

02:27point. We will try to limit each case to

02:2910 men 10 minutes. Those directly

02:32involved in the case, please speak

02:34first. We request that large groups

02:36select a spokesperson to represent that

02:38group, therefore eliminating any

02:40repetitive testimony. When giving

02:42testimony, please provide new

02:44information and try not to repeat what

02:45has previously been said. We do ask that

02:48all speakers and others be treated with

02:50courtesy and with respect. In that

02:53regard, please remain silent while

02:54seated and please turn off your cell

02:56phones. Our decision to approve, deny,

02:59or continue a case made here today will

03:01be forwarded to the city council for

03:03another public hearing and final

03:05disposition by the city council.

03:07Conditional use permits are an exception

03:09to this rule. The board's decision made

03:12here today on any conditional use

03:13permits are final and not forwarded on

03:16to the city council.

03:21>> Lastly, upon the advice of the law

03:24department, all communications to the

03:25board members from attorneys or other

03:27interested parties should be transmitted

03:29through the planning department so that

03:30they are made part of the public record.

03:32The department will then transmit all

03:34that information to the board as well as

03:36to the rest of the public. The city

03:38planning the city of Omaha planning

03:40department will never request a wire

03:42transfer transfer to expedite an

03:44application, release a bid or release a

03:47hold or move permitting process forward.

03:50Furthermore, the city does not operate

03:52any programs that require an upfront

03:54wire transfer with the promise of a

03:56future refund. If you receive an email,

03:59phone call, or text message claiming to

04:01be from the Omaha Planning Department

04:04demanding a wire transfer, it is a scam.

04:07A current copy of the Nebraska Meetings

04:09Act is can be found in the white binder

04:11in this room. With that, I have no

04:14changes to the current agenda here

04:15today. So, I will first read the cases

04:18that are on consent. And again, if you

04:20want any of these cases removed from the

04:22consent agenda, just raise your hand and

04:24and that case will then ask that you

04:26have that case removed and I will remove

04:27that from consent.

04:29So, I'll first read the cases that are

04:31on consent for approval. The first one

04:32is item two. It's case C10 26162

04:37C1263.

04:40The applicant is with Sonia Acquisitions

04:42LLC. It is on consent for approval. The

04:45request is final or preliminary plat

04:48approval of Autumn Estates, a

04:49subdivision outside city limits, a

04:51portion of which is proposed as a

04:53cluster subdivision with reszoning from

04:55AG to DR, R4 and R5. And this was laid

04:59over from our August 5th, 2026th

05:01meeting. The location is south of 189th

05:04and Fort Street. Would anyone like to

05:06have this removed?

05:11Next is item three, KC 326214,

05:16applicant planning department on behalf

05:18of the city of Omaha. This is on consent

05:19for approval. The request is approval of

05:22the disposition of city-owned property.

05:24The location is north and east of 13th

05:26and U Streets. It's parcel number

05:281139840000002.

05:32The request is and that's it. Would

05:35anyone like to have this removed?

05:39Okay. Next is item four KC 1026211 and

05:43C12262.

05:45The applicant is RW engineering and

05:47surveying. It is on consent for

05:49approval. request is preliminary and

05:51final plat approval of Deer Creek

05:53Highlands REP replat 2, a minor plat

05:56outside city limits with resoning from

05:58DR&R4 to DR and R4. The location is

06:0212413 and 1250 GB Street. Would anyone

06:07like to have this removed?

06:12Next is item six, KC 1226218. Applicant

06:16is Green Slate Development Partners on

06:18consent for approval. Request is

06:20preliminary and final plat approval of

06:22Kellum's first edition replat 1, a minor

06:25plat inside city limits. Property is

06:28located within an ACI area of civic

06:30importance overlay district. The

06:32location is southwest of 24th and Dodge

06:34Street. Would anyone like to have this

06:36removed?

06:40Next is item seven KC 1026220

06:43C726210

06:45applicant is Airhart Hehart Griffin and

06:47Associates on consent for approval. The

06:49request is resoning from DR and R3 to R3

06:53along with approval of major amendment

06:55to the presumed conditional use permit

06:57pursuant to section 55883Q

07:00to allow a secondary educational

07:02facilities in an R3 district and

07:04expansion of the MCC overlay district.

07:07The location is 15650 Howard Street.

07:10Would anyone like to have this removed?

07:16And our last case on for consent

07:18approval is KC 1026213.

07:22Request is on consent for approval.

07:24Request is resoning from DR to R4. The

07:26location is 5114 Q Street. Would anyone

07:29like to have this removed?

07:33All right. Those are all our cases are

07:34on consent for approval. I have one case

07:36that is on consent for layover and that

07:38is case item number 11 case C826219.

07:43The applicant is Mike Leensen. It's on

07:45consent for layover. Request is approval

07:47of a special use permit to allow

07:49development in an ED North Hills

07:51Environmental Resources Overlay

07:53District. The location is 13305 North

07:5647th Street. Would anyone like to have

07:58this removed?

08:01Okay. All right. That completes our

08:04consent agenda items. I would now

08:06entertain a motion to approve the items

08:08that are on consent for approval.

08:10>> A motion to approve agenda items number

08:112, 3, 4, 6, 7, and nine.

08:14>> Second.

08:14>> Okay, we have a motion to second.

08:15Clinet, please record the vote.

08:17>> Morris,

08:18>> yes.

08:19>> Rean,

08:19>> yes.

08:20>> Rosacer,

08:20>> yes.

08:21>> Silango,

08:22>> yes.

08:22>> Sullivan,

08:23>> yes.

08:23>> Mr. Chair,

08:24>> yes.

08:24>> Motion passes. Passes 6.

08:27>> Thank you. Uh, next, I just need a

08:28motion for the one case on consent for

08:30layover. Motion to lay over case number

08:3211.

08:33>> Second.

08:34>> We have a motion to second. Clintette,

08:35please record the vote.

08:36>> Morris,

08:37>> yes.

08:37>> Rean,

08:38>> yes.

08:38>> Rosacker,

08:39>> yes.

08:39>> Solongo,

08:40>> yes.

08:40>> Sullivan,

08:41>> yes.

08:42>> Mr. Chair,

08:42>> yes.

08:43>> Motion passes.

08:44>> Thank you. Okay. Next, we move into the

08:46administrative part of our meeting. And

08:48this is uh you don't know no public

08:50testimony on this uh partic on on the

08:52administrative meeting. Uh the first

08:55one, the only one is item number one

08:57which is KC10 26123 C126124.

09:02The applicant is John Dailyaly Jr. The

09:04request is final plat approval of

09:06Cunningham View subdivision outside city

09:08limits with reszoning from DR to R5. The

09:11location is southwest of 78th and State

09:13Streets. Are you speaking on this?

09:14>> Yep.

09:15>> Okay, Mike.

09:16>> Uh board members, uh the final plat for

09:18Cunningham View is in your review. The

09:22preliminary plat was approved by the

09:24planning board back on July 1st and was

09:27subsequently approved by the city

09:29council on August 18th. Uh the final

09:32plat is generally consistent with the

09:34approved preliminary plat. It creates

09:36230 lots, 10 outlots. Uh one thing to be

09:40aware of uh as far as the conditions go,

09:43uh condition three that talks about a

09:45roundabout. Uh the applicant has worked

09:48with uh city staff and the Douglas

09:50County Engineers Office along with MUD

09:52regarding construction of roundabouts

09:54and it has been evaluated and determined

09:57that that is not a viable uh situation

10:00to provide due to quarter cross-section

10:02standards and critical utility conflict.

10:05So ultimately that condition will not

10:07require uh those uh roundabouts to be

10:10constructed. Um, other than that,

10:13everything else is consistent with the

10:15approved preliminary plat. Uh, the

10:17department does recommend approval of

10:19the resoning from DR to R5 and approval

10:22of the final plat subject to the two

10:24conditions being addressed prior to

10:25forwarding to city council.

10:26>> Okay. Thank you. Are there any

10:28questions?

10:29If not, do I have a motion? Motion to

10:32approve the reszoning from DR to R5

10:35>> and approval of final plat subject to

10:37adjusting the two conditions in the

10:39staff report prior to sending it to city

10:41council.

10:43>> Second.

10:44>> Okay, we have a motion and a second.

10:45Clintette, please record the vote.

10:47>> Morris,

10:48>> yes.

10:48>> Rean, yes.

10:49>> Rosacker,

10:50>> yes.

10:50>> Silango,

10:51>> yes.

10:51>> Sullivan,

10:52>> yes.

10:52>> Mr. Chair,

10:53>> yes.

10:53>> Motion passes 6.

10:55>> Thank you. All right. Next, uh, is item

10:58five. This is a regular agenda, so

11:00there's public testimony in these items.

11:02I'm going to take five and 12 together

11:04because they're related. Um, one is

11:06subdivisions and one is a condition of

11:08use permit. So, I'll first read item

11:10five, which is KC 1026216,

11:15C1226 217. The applicant is City of

11:18Omaha. The request is preliminary and

11:19final plat approval of Bosman addition,

11:22a minor plat outside city limits with

11:24reszoning from AG to R4 along with an

11:26expansion of the MCC overlay. The

11:28location is 4100 North 180th Street.

11:32Item 12 is KC7 and we'll do these

11:35separately. Uh conditional use permit.

11:37Item 12, KC726215.

11:40Applicant is also city of Omaha. The

11:42request is approval of a conditional use

11:44permit to allow safety services in the

11:46R4 district. The location is 4100 North

11:49180th Street. So we'll first hear on

11:52case number five, which is the

11:53subdivisions. hear from the applicant.

11:57>> Uh Matthew Cruz, Lamper, 14710 West

12:00Dodge Road, 68028.

12:03Uh here on behalf of the city of Omaha,

12:06uh has been stated uh f preliminary and

12:08final plat for uh Bossman addition to uh

12:12accommodate the uh fire station 70 uh

12:15that will be constructed there. So here

12:17to answer any questions uh you may have.

12:20>> Okay. Thank you, Matthew.

12:22Are there any other proponents that wish

12:25to speak on this?

12:28Seeing none. Are there any opponents

12:29that wish to speak?

12:31See none. Board have any questions for

12:33Matt Matthew? No. Okay. With that, I'll

12:37close the public hearing on item five.

12:39You want to read your testimony or your

12:42opinion on that?

12:43>> Yeah. Uh so this project is proposing

12:45the construction uh and operation of a

12:47new uh fire station 70 that'll provide

12:51all the normal uh fire station services

12:54uh rescue services, hazardous materials,

12:57all those types of things. Uh in regards

12:59to the platting of the property and the

13:01use permit for safety services, um the

13:05department uh uh does recommend

13:07approval. uh the applicant is encouraged

13:10uh to further coordinate on the uh tree

13:13requirement. Uh there's been some

13:15discussion with the applicant regarding

13:17uh street trees and the other the other

13:19trees that are required on the private

13:21property versus trees that are required

13:23as part of the parkway which is in the

13:25rightway. Uh this process really has no

13:29bearing on the trees that are in the

13:31rightway. We don't have a a a process to

13:34control it as part of the platting or

13:36the use permit.

13:38um those trees within the parkway are

13:40part of a parks department per p per p

13:43per p per p per p per p per p per p per

13:43p per p per purview and uh potentially

13:45the park board. Um so that was something

13:47the applicant will have to continue to

13:49coordinate on that end. Uh therefore uh

13:52as far as the the minor plat does

13:55recommend approval of the MCC overlay

13:57resoning from AG to R4 and the

14:00preliminary plat with the 14 conditions

14:04and approval of the final plat subject

14:06to conditions of the preliminary plat

14:07approval and submittal of an acceptable

14:10final subdivision agreement if necessary

14:12prior to forwarding request to final

14:13action for city council.

14:16>> Okay. Thank you. Matt, have you had

14:18discussions about the tree issues with

14:20uh with the fire department?

14:22>> So, yeah. And so, uh the basically uh

14:26George Miller Parkway is the road that

14:28will be extended west uh from 180th

14:30Street. Uh the requirement for landscape

14:32is street trees along there. Uh during

14:35the design process for the fire station,

14:38there was concern um from the fire

14:40station staff uh to limit those trees

14:43along George Miller Parkway so that the

14:45fire station could both be seen from

14:47those coming there, but more importantly

14:49uh when there's a response uh from the

14:51fire station to allow the apparatus to

14:53come out of out of the fire station and

14:55get on to George Miller Parkway and to

14:57180th Street as quickly and safely as

15:00possible. Uh so we propose shifting

15:02those trees to other locations on the

15:05site not to not to do away with them but

15:07just shift those to the north uh

15:09property line and then also along 180th

15:11Street. So basically just to try to

15:14reshift those on the property. So

15:17>> yeah, we had a little brief discussion

15:19premeating about about this as well and

15:20I think we pretty much agreed that the

15:22line of sight is important for the fire

15:23department to to make sure that the

15:25public safety is is you know foremost

15:28and

15:29>> so we discussed a little bit in pre

15:31meetings.

15:33>> Okay, any other questions?

15:36Okay, not uh close the public hearing on

15:39that and uh with that entertain a

15:41motion. Motion to approve the MCC

15:44overlay district. The approval of the

15:46reszoning from AG to R4. Approval of the

15:48preliminary plat subject to the 14

15:50conditions in the recommendation report.

15:53An approval of the final plat subject to

15:55the conditions of preliminary plat

15:56approval and submittal of an acceptable

15:58final subdivision agreement prior to

16:00foring the request to city council.

16:04>> Second.

16:05>> Okay, we have a motion a second.

16:06Clintette, please report.

16:08>> Morris,

16:09>> yes.

16:09>> Rean,

16:10>> yes. Rosacker,

16:11>> yes.

16:11>> Solango,

16:12>> yes.

16:13>> Sullivan,

16:13>> yes.

16:14>> Mr. Chair,

16:14>> yes.

16:15>> Motion passes 6.

16:16>> Thank you. And then on item 12, may we

16:18hear from the applicant, please?

16:20>> Uh, yes. So, uh, conditional use permit

16:22uh is required to allow for the safety

16:24services uh to be approved to allow for

16:27the fire station 70 to operate on uh the

16:30property.

16:31>> Okay.

16:33Okay. Any other proponents that wish to

16:35speak on that one? Any opponents?

16:38See a close public hearing. Mike,

16:41>> yeah, the obviously this is the use

16:42permit related to the plat. Um, one of

16:45the requirements will be to get the

16:47necessary waiver from the zoning board

16:48of appeals regarding the uh trees

16:51adjacent to the parking lot. Uh, so in

16:55uh approval of the conditional usement

16:57to allow safety services in the R4

16:59district subject to the six conditions

17:01listed in the report.

17:03>> Okay. Thank you.

17:04>> Do I have a motion? Motion to approve

17:07the condition use permit

17:08>> to allow safety services in the R4

17:10district subject to the following six

17:12conditions in the report.

17:14>> Second.

17:15>> We have a motion to second. Clinet,

17:17please record the vote.

17:18>> Morris,

17:18>> yes.

17:19>> Rean,

17:19>> yes.

17:20>> Rosacer,

17:20>> yes.

17:21>> Silango,

17:22>> yes.

17:22>> Sullivan,

17:23>> yes.

17:23>> Mr. Chair,

17:24>> yes.

17:24>> Motion passes 6.

17:26>> Thank you.

17:26>> Thank you.

17:26>> Thank you.

17:28>> All right. Uh, next on the agenda of the

17:30resonings. First one is item 8 KC

17:341026183.

17:36The applicant is with Sony of Saddle

17:37Creek LLC. The request is reszoning from

17:41CC and GI to CC and TOD2 MX along with

17:45expansion of the MCC overlay for a

17:47portion of the site and repeal of the

17:50MCC overlay for a portion of the site.

17:52The location is northeast of 46th and

17:55California streets. May we hear from the

17:56applicant.

17:58>> Good afternoon. Joe Dliff's 10836 Old

18:01Mill Road here representing the

18:03applicant um and for a reasonzoning

18:05request available to answer any

18:07questions.

18:09>> Okay. You want to tell us a little bit

18:10about with the project what you're what

18:12you're planning to do?

18:13>> Sure.

18:15Uh

18:37So this is the existing uh family fair

18:40building. Uh currently there's an

18:43existing strip center here and a

18:46multi-tenant building at this location.

18:49Um

18:52part of the master plan like

18:55development. We're going to redo the

18:56parking lot. Um, cut off some of the

19:00entrances from the back. Uh, the

19:02reasoning here today is for the TOD.

19:05That would be this area back here on the

19:08south south half of these u this

19:10property. And then this lot over here,

19:1446th Street. Uh this would be um

19:19a multifamily building, two levels of

19:22parking garages with four stories of

19:24apartments on top and then um a proposed

19:28town home building off of 46.

19:32>> Is there access for that one residential

19:35unit there on 46th Street?

19:38>> Uh the access would be so there's two

19:40levels of parking. The lower level of

19:42parking would access off of California

19:45and then the upper level would access

19:48off of 46th Street, come down and enter

19:51this way and then the town homes would

19:54um just come off that same uh curb cut.

19:57>> Okay.

20:00>> Okay. Are there any plans for that

20:02family fair building? uh the family fair

20:06um they are leaving um they decided to

20:10leave independently of you this

20:12application or this development. Um

20:14we're currently working on revamping it

20:18with three three tenants. Um at the time

20:23um right now they haven't publicly

20:25announced who those tenants are going to

20:26be. So I'm not at a position to

20:29>> make that an announcement either.

20:32I'm curious more. It's not part of this

20:34particular agenda item, but just

20:35curious.

20:38>> Okay. Any other question for Joe?

20:40>> Thank you, Joe. Are there any other

20:42proponents that wish to speak on this?

20:46Seeing none, are there any opponents?

20:49All right. Seeing none, I will close the

20:50public hearing. and Mike.

20:53>> Yeah. Board members, as as is explained

20:55by the applicant, u this the impetus of

20:58this resoning is really related to a

21:01proposed replat of the property to sort

21:03of get certain existing improvements on

21:06on lots and also uh to allow for future

21:10development of of uh certain plans that

21:13the applicant may have uh based on a

21:15conceptual plan that they show uh show

21:18here. Now technically nothing is

21:20approved uh as shown here for any future

21:23construction. That still has to comply

21:25with those requirements based on any

21:27reasonzoning. But the proposed resoning

21:30is master plan compliant. Uh and we do

21:34support the request. So we do recommend

21:36approval of the resoning from CC and GI

21:39to CC and TOD2MX along with the

21:42expansion of the MCC overlay for a

21:44portion of the site and a repeal of the

21:46MCC for a portion of the site.

21:48>> Okay. Thank you, Mike. All right, with

21:50that, do I have a motion

21:53to approve CCGI

21:56>> CC and GI to CC and TOD2MX

22:00along with the expansion of the MCC

22:01overlay for a portion of the site and a

22:04repeal of the MCC overlay for a portion

22:06of the site.

22:08>> Second. Okay, we have a motion and a

22:10second. Clintette, please report the

22:11vote.

22:12>> Morris,

22:13>> yes.

22:13>> Rean,

22:14>> yes.

22:14>> Rosacer,

22:15>> yes.

22:15>> Silango,

22:16>> yes.

22:16>> Sullivan,

22:17>> yes.

22:17>> Mr. Mr. Chair.

22:18>> Yes.

22:18>> Motion passes 6.

22:20>> Thank you.

22:20>> Thank you.

22:21>> Thank you. Okay. All right. Uh, next is

22:24item 10, KC12 04089. The applicant is

22:28Mark Sanford. The request is approval of

22:32a major amendment to the mixed juice

22:34development agreement for Riverfront

22:36Place. The location is 505 Riverfront

22:39Plaza. May we hear from the applicant.

22:41>> Good afternoon. Uh, planning board

22:42members. Mark Sanford, 12509 Reed

22:45Street, Omaha, Nebraska. I'm the

22:47architect for the project. Uh,

22:50previously this site had had a design

22:53for five town homes uh, along this area.

23:03Uh, that's outlined in black. uh that

23:07since that was precoid uh the owner uh

23:11pulled out and he got a couple more

23:12investors and they decided to come back

23:14and put in some apartments instead. Uh

23:18the five town homes were going to be

23:20three-bedroom units uh which would have

23:23been 15 tenants. This is nine apartment

23:26units, two bedroomedroom units and so

23:28now there's 18 tenants. So three more

23:31people. Uh the plan itself does not take

23:34take up any more space than the previous

23:37uh project. It is still the same

23:40basically the same size, same height um

23:44as the town homes were, but now it's an

23:46apartment. And the

23:50there will be covered garages underneath

23:53the apartments with uh three units on

23:57each floor above that. uh similar

24:00materials uh that have been improved uh

24:03prior. We worked with uh Jed and the

24:05planning department on materials as

24:07well. Uh a lot of brick, a lot of nice

24:10finishes uh which would fit in very

24:13nicely done in this site and be a very

24:15attractive project.

24:17Open to any questions you may have.

24:20>> Mark, has there been any outreach to the

24:22residents that live in the other um

24:24towers next door, the town homes? I

24:26believe that one of the the uh owners,

24:29Kevin Cavan, had originally reached out

24:33to the tenants. I'm not sure if if he's

24:35met with them. Was trying to get that

24:37answered prior to this meeting and uh I

24:40need to find that out. I do not know if

24:42he's done that. I asked him to do that

24:44months ago,

24:46>> but you're not sure.

24:47>> I am not sure if he's done that.

24:49>> Okay, great.

24:51>> He's not here.

24:52>> He is not here. I'm I'm

24:55>> all right.

24:56>> Oh,

24:57>> right. Are you Kevin?

24:58>> Have you?

24:59>> Yeah.

25:00>> All right. Well, before you come up

25:02here, Kevin, do you have anything out?

25:04>> That is all that I just wanted to

25:05present the project.

25:06>> All right. So, I'm going to ask you to

25:07come up as a proponent then and just

25:08enter your name and address for the

25:10record and and then maybe answer the

25:12question that Mr. Morris had asked.

25:14Okay.

25:23Hello. Uh Kevin Cavan, 4902

25:27South 180th Street.

25:30>> And the question was, have you had any

25:31outreach with the with the neighboring

25:33uh individuals in the other town homes

25:36that are in that

25:38>> specifically about the change too from

25:39like what was previously approved to

25:41what you're proposing now? Has there

25:42been a has there been a meeting with

25:44everybody, I guess, is my question.

25:45>> There's not been a new meeting as far as

25:47meeting with the neighbors directly. Um

25:49I went to the path that I was told um is

25:52the correct path and that is I gave the

25:54plans to the master board which I'm also

25:57on. Um and then there's two people I

26:00believe on that board to then relay the

26:03information to the condo board and they

26:06give that information to all the

26:08neighbors. And so it was short notice. I

26:10think that was only like a week or week

26:12and a half ago but I let the board know

26:14and gave them the plans. So what

26:17happened from there I don't know. You

26:18you know when the board delivered the

26:19notice to the neighbors then

26:21>> that I don't know.

26:23>> Okay.

26:26>> I just curious before how many are here

26:28to testify on on this case? Just anybody

26:31else?

26:33A couple of you. Okay. Um

26:36>> Okay.

26:38All right. Any other questions you guys

26:41have? Kevin

26:42or Mark?

26:45Gallup.

26:46>> Yeah.

26:47>> Um, have you met with Gallup?

26:50>> No.

26:51>> No.

26:52>> No. Um, with the the board and Gallup, I

26:55I know a lot of it is going to be

26:58cosmetic. I can't say that for sure, but

27:00it's more of the the look of the

27:02building and we're more than willing to

27:04work with what requirements they have

27:06because obviously we wanted to look

27:07good, too. Um, kind of the first step

27:10here for us was to get a structure that

27:13would work and then if we knew that,

27:16then we could improve upon plans,

27:18renderings, things like that. Meet with

27:20the board to go over finishes. I did

27:23that with them with the the other one

27:25here years ago. And the number one thing

27:28that's most important is class A

27:30materials. And we know that there's, you

27:33know, that's something we're going to

27:34do. Obviously, we have to.

27:36>> And Kevin, are you and Mark aware of the

27:39um architectural review committee

27:42process that Gallup has to go through

27:44just so you know where this goes next.

27:48>> Yes.

27:49>> Yeah. Okay.

27:49>> Okay.

27:50>> I haven't worked with them directly so I

27:52don't I know there's definitely a

27:53process but I personally don't know

27:55every step with them.

27:56>> Yeah. This was kind of a master planned

27:57area. Obviously there's a red a

27:59development agreement out there and

28:01everything. So there's just a strict you

28:02know a pretty laidout process. I just

28:04think it'd be it's valuable to know how

28:06that moves um through that review

28:09process since there are you know they

28:12have a fair amount of influence it

28:13seems. So

28:14>> absolutely.

28:16>> You got we got a letter here from Gallup

28:18u dated September 30th. Did did you did

28:21we was that letter shared with you about

28:23some of the things that they're they're

28:24requesting you as a

28:26>> that was in your email too

28:27>> and Mr. Sanford to do?

28:29>> Yeah, we received I just received that

28:31yesterday. [clears throat] It did not

28:33show up on my email and they said it was

28:35via US mail and it never I have not seen

28:38it. I did see it. Mike sent it to me

28:41just yesterday or was that today, Mike?

28:44>> Okay.

28:44>> But I did look at it and I know there's

28:46a process to go through Gallup, but I

28:48did not receive that prior to that.

28:50>> Yeah.

28:51>> Okay.

28:52you know, and Mark, you probably know

28:54this, but you know, I think this board's

28:55been pretty consistent over the years

28:57about, you know, making sure that the

28:59neighborhood and neighbors have a good

29:01handle on on what's going to happen and

29:03and what, you know, what what's going to

29:05look like. So,

29:06>> that's very important to think. So, just

29:08so you know that,

29:10>> Mr. Chairman,

29:11>> uh, Kevin, nice to meet you. Uh,

29:14congratulations on acquiring a kind of

29:16premier piece of property on the

29:18riverfront. uh you seem like a

29:20reasonable uh gentleman and developer.

29:23Would you be willing to take the next 30

29:26days to meet with the all the parties

29:28that we're talking about that are that

29:30have some stakeholder interest in this

29:33and uh you know meeting their concerns,

29:36answering their questions, etc.

29:39>> Yeah. Yeah. I'm not against doing that.

29:40Yeah. And maybe I just that's the only

29:42way to go about it. Um it just it

29:45creates a lot of obviously Yes. That's

29:48always been the plan. Always will be.

29:50Um,

29:52I guess where I struggle with and I'll

29:54just have to get over that is, you know,

29:58they want finishes, things like that

30:01that we don't really have determined

30:03yet. Um, and so it just seems almost

30:05like the uh not backwards, but just I

30:10kind of need to know what I can build

30:11first, what's going to fit, what all of

30:14you would be okay with. And then once I

30:16have that concept, then I can build upon

30:19that and make sure it's what everyone

30:21else is happy with, too.

30:23>> Sounds like you've done a very good job

30:25with the planning team, but there are

30:27other entities that are involved here

30:28and one with some authority through a

30:31redevelopment agreement. Um, so it seems

30:34like a meeting of the minds is probably

30:37necessary.

30:41>> Yeah. I mean, you're I mean, you've been

30:42you've been How long have you owned the

30:44property? Oh, it's been like uh six

30:48years.

30:48>> That's what So obviously another 30 days

30:53probably won't be that that big a deal

30:54for you to

30:56>> since you've been holding on to this

30:57property for so long. But it's very

30:59important I think that that you have

31:00those

31:02>> chairman P. I need to disclose that in

31:052020 I represented the developer and the

31:08purchase of this lot. I have non no

31:10ongoing contracts with him. uh and I

31:14received financial compensation at that

31:17time, but I have not no ongoing

31:19contracts with him uh nor any ongoing

31:22interest in the development that is

31:24being presented today.

31:25>> Okay. So, I think you're fine within the

31:27the rules. You don't have to recuse

31:29yourself from the since you have no

31:30interest in

31:30>> correct. Okay, good. Thanks for

31:32disclosing that. Appreciate that.

31:35>> Okay. Thank you. We may call you up here

31:38and back up in a bit, but I'm going to

31:39ask if there's any other proponents that

31:41wish to speak on this.

31:44Seeing none, are there any opponents in

31:46that wish to speak? Please come forward.

31:48Name and address for the record.

31:51Members of the board, Jacob Craft here

31:53with Fraser Striker, 1501 Mike Vehey

31:57Street. Um, I'm here on behalf of the

32:01association, uh, the specifically the

32:03Riverfront Place Master Association.

32:05Also like to recognize, uh, Mr. John

32:07Branset are behind me, the president of

32:08the of the association, and we would

32:10just echo the comments that have been

32:13made by the board thus far already that

32:15there really hasn't been a meeting of

32:16the minds on this issue. There are

32:18agreements, development agreements and

32:20of the like that do require a process to

32:23be followed and that process has not

32:25been followed. The first notice of these

32:28plans were given to uh Mr. Brandsteader

32:32after they had already been submitted to

32:33the the planning board. So there was no

32:36pre um pre-discussions or anything like

32:38that on this topic and we just simply

32:40request this be laid over 30 days to

32:42allow for those discussions in that

32:44process to be followed. If there are any

32:46questions I'd be happy to take them at

32:47this time. This is also I'll just

32:49mention on behalf of Gallup they echo

32:51this as well as other members excuse me

32:53other members of the association and

32:55residents that are here as well today.

32:56>> But do you represent Gallup?

32:58>> I do not represent Gallup but they have

32:59sent us a letter. We have been in

33:01communication with them and they have

33:03allowed us and said it would be fine for

33:04us to to mention their letter and and

33:06and their position as well.

33:08>> Okay. Thank you.

33:11>> Jacob, I have a question.

33:12>> Yes.

33:13>> Attorney

33:15here as well and she may have a comment,

33:18but what what is your understanding of

33:20the legal authority of the entity you're

33:22representing under the agreements that

33:24are in place? So the legal authority

33:26these are all binding agreements that

33:28run with the properties that uh apply to

33:30all owners of the properties and they

33:32set out a certain process that needs to

33:34be followed on any sort of approvement

33:36to be done on the lots on the

33:38properties. Uh that implies also going

33:40to the architectural review committee

33:42submitting plans ahead of time and

33:44allowing them to have some sort of

33:46discussion and say in that in that

33:47process.

33:50What is the process for a developer or

33:52architect to be aware of exactly what

33:55you said?

33:57>> Well, the property owner has a copy of

33:58all of these bylaws and all of these

34:00development agreements, or at least they

34:01should, right? They're provided to them

34:03that they they're they're a property

34:04owner and they they apply to them. So,

34:07any architect that's working with the

34:08property owner, I would hope would

34:10receive them. In this case, the

34:11applicant, Kevin, would have them and be

34:13able to provide them to uh Mr. Mr. uh

34:16Marks, is it Sanford, excuse me? Yes. um

34:18in order to allow this process to be

34:21known and adhered to.

34:23>> Thank you.

34:25>> Okay.

34:27>> Okay. Thank you, Jake.

34:28>> Thank you.

34:30>> Are there any other opponents that wish

34:32to speak on this?

34:35>> See none. Jennifer, our law department,

34:38city law department, do you have any

34:40opinion on the legal aspects of what

34:42we're looking at here today on the

34:44agenda?

34:46Jennifer Taylor, City Law Department.

34:48Uh, as we've encountered in previous uh,

34:51instances,

34:53obligations or covenants that are

34:55outside of city code or city law um are

34:58not necessarily the purview of this

35:00board. Those are private matters that

35:02need to be dealt with by and between the

35:04parties that own the property and that

35:05are subject to the covenants. That is

35:07not to say that those covenants aren't

35:09valid or binding. They are just not

35:11relevant to the city's process in

35:12evaluating a project.

35:15Okay. Thank you.

35:19All right. Any other questions at all on

35:22this? Okay. If not, I'll go ahead and

35:24close the public hearing and uh Mike

35:26comments.

35:28>> Well, I mean obviously as the discussion

35:30has occurred, um I mean the report that

35:32we had shared does recommend approval.

35:35We feel that uh the project does uh meet

35:39the requirements can be approved for the

35:40major amendment. Um, obviously there's

35:42some things in the report that it talks

35:44about that needs to be addressed as part

35:46of that uh before that request could be

35:48forwarded to city council. Ultimately,

35:51you know, the board has the purview if

35:52they so choose to to lay it over for

35:55whichever reason that they feel is

35:57appropriate. But as far as the

35:59department goes and our recommendation,

36:01it would still stand that we do

36:02recommend approval of the amendment uh

36:05to the riverfront place mixeduse

36:06agreement subject to submitt of three

36:08acceptable signed copies of the

36:10amendment prior to forwarding the

36:11request to city council.

36:12>> Okay. Thank you. All right. Before I ask

36:14for a motion then uh

36:17Mark and Kevin, where'd you go? Oh,

36:19there you are. Okay. I think you've kind

36:21of heard where where we're at and and I

36:24I don't know which which way the board's

36:26going to go with the motion here, but I

36:27think a layover is probably appropriate

36:29thing to do, but the communication is

36:32vitally important. This is this is a

36:33this is a premier piece of real estate

36:36for the city and and the communication

36:38is extremely it's important in any

36:40aspect of development, right? But I

36:42think it's very very important that you

36:43get together with the the related

36:45parties to this and make sure that

36:47everyone is understanding of what's

36:49going on. and I think it's very very

36:50important that you do so. So if we can

36:52get that done in the next 30 days, you

36:53can come back and hopefully we can get

36:55this thing moving forward for you. Okay.

36:57So that's just my comment. With that, I

36:59will entertain a motion.

37:00>> Mr. Chairman, I'm going to motion to lay

37:02over the approval of the major amendment

37:04to the mixeduse district development

37:06agreement for Riverfront Place for 30

37:08days.

37:10>> Second.

37:10>> I I'm going to ask for clarification of

37:13that. If you're just saying 30 days,

37:15that kind of that kind of closes that.

37:17So, if you want to leave it open-ended,

37:18I just say make a motion to lay it over,

37:21but it's up to you.

37:24>> I'll stand with the motion in fairness

37:26to the developer as well.

37:27>> Okay.

37:28>> Second.

37:29>> Okay. Okay. We have a motion in a

37:30second. Lynette

37:32>> Boris,

37:33>> yes.

37:33>> Rean,

37:34>> yes.

37:34>> Rosacker,

37:36>> um I have concerns about the the layover

37:38with the processes. You've got two

37:40different entities that they have to

37:41seek uh a lot of detailed information

37:44and approval from. um 99% of that has no

37:48bearing on what we're doing here. And

37:50and so my concern is that we put a

37:53different additional hurdle in front of

37:55them that's going to make it difficult

37:57for them to come to this point. We're

38:00talking about just whether this type of

38:02structure can even be built, not what

38:05kind of brick or any other structure or

38:07anything else that's on there. And I

38:09understand that both Gallup and

38:13[clears throat] and Riverfront have

38:15concerns, valid concerns in what should

38:18be put there, but I think that inserting

38:21ourselves into that process is is really

38:24unnecessary. So I'm going to vote no.

38:28>> Okay.

38:29>> Silago,

38:35>> I also vote no.

38:38Sullivan.

38:39>> Yes,

38:39>> Mr. Chair.

38:40>> Yeah. To to your comment, David, you

38:43know, I don't disagree with anything

38:44that you said, but at the same time that

38:46I don't think it precludes us laying

38:48this over. It doesn't preclude us from

38:50from voting on it next time around when

38:52it comes around again.

38:53>> I I just this is one project and we face

38:56these issues with covenants all the time

38:59and I just think that's inserting

39:01ourselves into something that that

39:03that's not our authority. And so I don't

39:06think it's necessary for us to be there.

39:08>> The the one thing I just want to make

39:09clear, I'm I'm laying this over because

39:11of the lack of communication. I'm not

39:13laying this over because of the

39:16covenants or anything like that. Like I

39:18realize that's outside the purview of

39:19what we're here to do.

39:21>> My my recommend recommendation to lay it

39:23over is strictly because of the lack of

39:24communication.

39:25>> Yeah.

39:26>> And and I'm going to vote yes as well on

39:28this just for that that same reason. I

39:30think it's very important for the

39:31discussion to take place. Now, if you

39:33come back and say we've had the meeting,

39:35nothing's changed, we still have the

39:36option of approving it at that time as

39:38well. So, uh that's just my opinion on

39:41it, but I think it's important for you

39:42at least to have the dialogue. Okay? So,

39:44I vote yes

39:47to

39:47>> 42 pass. Okay. Thank you. All right.

39:50Thank you all. Okay. Good luck.

39:56All right. Let's see. I think we have

39:58one more item. Uh next uh we have item

40:0113 which is case C704076.

40:05The applicant is Mark Sanford. Request

40:08is approval of a major amendment to the

40:09conditional use permit to allow

40:11religious assembly in the R435 district.

40:13The location is 3812 and 3766

40:17Fort Street. May we hear from the

40:19applicant?

40:20>> Hi Mark Sanford 12509 Reed Street. I am

40:24the architect for this project. Uh the

40:27project itself is just the replacement

40:30of an existing building that uh needs uh

40:33a lot of work. So they're going to

40:35remove this building. Uh it's still a

40:37religious facility. It's for the a

40:39Buddhist temple that's been there for a

40:42long time. It's a new owner of the

40:44Buddhist temple and they will have the

40:47same uh uh practices and and attendance.

40:51Uh might be a little bit less. Prior to

40:54this, uh there was another amendment

40:57that showed a much larger structure, a

40:59lot more parking, but this is just to

41:01replace an existing building that's on

41:03the site, and it was recommended that we

41:05come for a conditional use permit for

41:08this site.

41:10>> Has there been any issues with parking

41:12that you know of right now?

41:13>> Not that I know of, but uh we are going

41:16to add a little bit more parking

41:18>> uh to take care of the uh the request

41:20from the planning department.

41:22>> Right. Okay, thank you Mark. Are there

41:25any other proponents that wish to speak?

41:29See, are there any opponents?

41:32>> Are you gentlemen here for any

41:33particular case?

41:38>> Yeah. Okay. So,

41:40>> okay. Okay. Thank you.

41:41>> I'd like to clear out a building. I'm

41:43sorry. [laughter]

41:45>> All right. No, no opponents then. All

41:48right. With that, I'll close the public

41:50hearing. And Mike, what do we have? Uh

41:52yeah, board members, this this request

41:54uh is an existing uh Buddhist temple

41:58facility uh proposing to build a new

42:01building for as an event space. They

42:03have an existing gathering space that's

42:06a larger space. So I think one of the

42:08main reasons that we wanted to have a

42:10public hearing on this case is to make

42:12sure that the applicant is aware of the

42:15additional parking that's going to be

42:16required. Um, as part of this request,

42:19uh, we're, uh, determining an an

42:22occupancy of that largest place of

42:23public assembly of about 154 people. Um,

42:26so right now, the current plan that they

42:28have shows about 14 stalls total being

42:31provided. Uh, we're going to require, as

42:33part of this, uh, request and

42:36recommendation is up to 39 stalls to be

42:40required in order to address the maximum

42:42occupancy of that largest place of

42:44public assembly. That's really the the

42:46main reason that it was not on a

42:48consent. We wanted to make sure the

42:49applicant is aware of that. Um so based

42:52on that uh we recommended approval of

42:56the major amendment to the conditional

42:58use subject to the five condition list

43:01in the report.

43:02>> Okay. Thank you, Mike. With that, do I

43:04have a motion?

43:05Uh before we do that, I just want to

43:07confirm with Mark that uh they're you've

43:10talked with your client about the 39

43:12spaces and and they're they're

43:14understanding that and ready to go for

43:16that.

43:16>> Yes, they're they're aware of that and

43:17they do have the space for it.

43:20>> Okay. But that's the only

43:21>> with that uh I'll recommend approval of

43:23major management of the conditional use

43:25permit subject to the five conditions of

43:27the staff report.

43:29>> Second.

43:29>> Thank you. I have a motion to second.

43:30Quinnette, please report the vote.

43:32>> Boris,

43:33>> yes.

43:34>> Rigett,

43:34>> yes. Rosacker,

43:35>> yes.

43:36>> Silago,

43:36>> yes.

43:37>> Sullivan,

43:38>> yes.

43:38>> Mr. Chair,

43:39>> yes.

43:39>> Motion passes 6.

43:40>> Thank you.

43:41>> Thank you very much, Mark.

43:42>> Thanks.

43:43>> All right, that concludes our items on

43:45the agenda for today. Short meeting, but

43:49uh with that, I will need a motion to

43:50approve the premeating minutes and the

43:52regular meeting minutes from our

43:54September two, 2026 meeting.

43:57>> So moved.

43:59>> We have a motion

44:00>> and a second. Okay. Glenn, please record

44:02the vote. Boris,

44:04>> yes.

44:04>> Rean,

44:05>> yes.

44:05>> Rosacker,

44:06>> yes.

44:06>> Sautongo,

44:07>> yes.

44:08>> Sullivan,

44:08>> yes.

44:09>> Mr. Chair,

44:09>> yes.

44:10>> Motion passes 6.

44:11>> Motion to adjurnn.

44:12>> Motion to adjurnn.

44:13>> Second.

44:14>> And Clint, please.

44:17>> Sorry.

44:18>> Uh, Morris,

44:19>> yes.

44:20>> Rean,

44:21>> Rosacer,

44:22>> yes.

44:22>> Solongo,

44:23>> yes.

44:23>> Sullivan,

44:25>> yes.

44:25>> Mr. Chair,

44:26>> yes. Motion passes.

44:28>> Thank you. Hey, Scott.

44:54>> [music]

```*