Good evening, everyone, and welcome to committee and ordinance. I'm chairman Pedro Espino. To my right is vice chair, councilwoman Shelly Peterson. To my left is councilman Oscar Varga, as well as councilman Justin Royer. Thank you so much for being here.
Today is October 22, and the time is 6PM. Thank you. Madam clerk, please call the roll.
Vice chairwoman Peterson? Present. Councilwoman Harris is absent. Councilman Vargas? Present.
You have four present and one absent. You have a quorum.
Thank you, madam chair. I know that there is so many people here. You will all have an opportunity to speak before us, so take your time. Make sure you sign in. I'll enter today a motion to take an item out of order.
Thank you. Thank you. Madam Clerk, item number two,
Item number two is an ordinance and amendment of chapter 27 of the code of ordinances entitled the City Of Providence zoning ordinance approved 11/24/2014 as amended to change the zoning district on the official zoning map map for the property located on assessor's Plat 33 Lot 34122 To 24 DeSoto Street from R 3 to MMU.
Thank you. And we have from our planning department, mister Bob Ayesha to present on this. Bob, as you walk towards us, I'll entertain a motion to enter into the records. So obey?
Motion is made by Councilman Peterson, second by Councilman Vargas. All in favor, aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. Also, I'd like to entertain a motion to enter into the regular Exhibit C, which is the letter from the CPC.
Made by Councilwoman Peterson, second by Councilwoman Baigas. All in favor, aye. Opposed, aye. You. Mr.
Good evening, mister chair, members of the committee. Good evening. Robert Azar, deputy director, department of planning and development. This petition, I believe has a substitute, Madam Clerk, is that right? Yes.
And has that already been accepted? It has. Okay. Thank you. These are three lots on DeSoto Street.
They're currently zoned R3, which is three family residential. However, they're occupied by industrial businesses. And sometimes we see that, that you have these sort of legacy businesses that might have been established before there was zoning or they may have been established by variance. But this is an area that is has a predominance of industrial uses. And it is directly adjacent to the MMU 75 zone, which is a mixed use zone that allows for a variety of different uses, including light industrial, residential and commercial.
All zoning changes have to be consistent with the comprehensive plan, particularly the future land use map. This area is intended by that map to be one where medium density residential uses are located adjacent to business and mixed use development. So given that, the city plan commission voted unanimously to advise the city council to rezone these lots to MMU based on the conformance with the comprehensive plan and with the purposes of zoning. Thank you.
City Sergeant, can you bring me up anyone that has signed up to speak on item number two, please?
Thank you. The first person that has signed up to speak on this item is Derek Sack. Derek Sacco. The next person is Gracie Mendez. I wonder city sergeant, is this for item number two?
He may have taken the wrong one. It doesn't say it on the other side, number two. Right.
there anyone here that signed up to speak on item number two? Because I see six people signed up on this item, but it might be the you had a your intention may have been to speak on a different item. Exactly. So do we have anybody to speak on item number two? All right.
So hearing none citizen I'll just citizen, can you put this back there? All right. Hearing that there is no one here to speak on item number two, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. I moved. Made by Councilwoman Peterson, second by Council Member Bargas.
Opposed, the ayes have it. And after hearing the testimony from the CPC, mister Azar, and and all these stated facts, I'll entertain a motion to approve. So move.
As amended. Motion is made by Councilwoman Peterson and second by Councilman Vargas. All in favor, aye. Aye. Opposed?
The ayes have it. Item number two is approved. I'll entertain a motion to take another item out of order. Second. All in favor, aye.
Aye. Opposed, the ayes have it. Thank you. Madam clerk, item number four.
Item number four is a petition from Gilberto as applicant and landowner J and B Auto Repair and S and E Properties LLC submitting a zone change for the property located on assessor's Plat 110, Lot 409118 Silver Lake Avenue from R 3 to C 3.
Thank you. Mister Aza, will you be speaking on this one? And now I'll entertain a motion to enter into the record Exhibit E. May I a Councilwoman Peter, second by Councilwoman Peter. All in favor, aye.
Opposed? Aye. Thank you. And the letters of testimony, will be exhibit Madam Clerk, do you have the exhibit? Exhibit, it is the letter from the CPC.
Yes. And also, I'll entertain a motion to enter into the record exhibit F, which is the letter of testimonies made by Councilwoman Peterson, second by Castro Mubayga. All in favor, aye. Opposed, yes. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This petition is for a piece of property that is currently located in the also in the three family residential zone. And like the last one, this is a nonresidential use. It's an auto repair facility.
And it's a little unclear how this became to be an auto repair facility, but the city doesn't recognize it as such. It's possible that it had some sort of non residential use, some commercial use and over time it kind of morphed into auto repair facility without getting the proper zoning. And I believe that this is currently under violation and it doesn't have a license to operate. So the owner has petitioned to change this to C3, which would allow for auto repair. It so happens that there is a C3 zone directly across the street on Farmington Avenue.
And because of that, and the way that the future land use map of the comprehensive plan is drawn, it would be permissible for you to change this to the C3 zone. So, city plan commission did have concerns about the condition of the site and the way that this facility is being operated, particularly that there's no screening from neighboring property and there's no tree canopy or any sort of landscaping at all. And there was also some evidence that there had been some storage of vehicles and maybe even some repair being done in the public right of way. So, these are conditions that have to be the way it's operated with respect to outdoor repairs and things like that. Those are going to have to be rectified if they're still going on as a condition of getting a license and complying with zoning.
But the City Plan Commission, in its recommendation to approve this, has requested that the petitioner screen the property in compliance with Section twelve oh two AA of the ordinance and that they meet the canopy coverage requirements under the supervision of the city forester. We would ask that prior to the zoning change be going into effect that they get a zoning certificate to indicate conformance with these changes. And also there is a request that a footnote be added to the map to limit the use of the lot to vehicle repair and service. If you don't do that, then then this lot would be eligible for any other use in the in the c three zone. So, if you so choose, you could amend this to add that footnote.
Thank you, Mr. Eisen. Do we have anybody that has signed up to speak on Item four? City Sergeant, can I get anything you have on Item four? On Item number four, we have Stephanie Amansar.
Would you like to come up and speak on Item four? City Sergeant, could you please put this back? Mr. Aza, what was the recommended amendment? Can you come up again, please?
The recommendation was that a footnote be added to the zoning map to limit the use of the lot to vehicle repair and service. So that would be so that other types of commercial uses wouldn't be allowed. It would just be for that.
So vehicle and repair service?
