Harrisburg City Planning Commission - 08/06/25

like to call the Harrisburg planning

commission to meeting to order at

approximately 6:33.

Um, commissioners, uh, you received the,

uh, oh, before I get, uh, into the

agenda, I'd like to welcome our new

board member and make sure I said your

first name right, Bur

Ber. Okay. Vincent, right?

Welcome aboard. Um, I noticed you're

sort of was interested in comprehensive

plan and all that. U, you came to the

right place.

And uh we're very objective in our

meetings. We have experienced

commissioners here and u we only very

objective with our decisions

based on zoning compre you know

comprehensive plans and everything else.

So welcome good to have you on the bill.

Okay

with that commissioner um received the

July 2nd meeting minutes. Um, are there

any changes, additions, deletions?

>> If not, could I get a motion?

>> Motion to approve.

>> Is there second?

>> It's been moved and second for approval

of the minutes as they are. All those in

favor state by saying I.

>> I. I.

>> Opposed. Abstensions.

One extension.

two extensions.

Um, with that, a motion carried. With

that, under old business, item number

one, this is a variance application for

508 and 510 North Second Street. It's a

zone commercial neighborhood. It's filed

by David Butcher with WCI Partners LP.

is to convert the existing office

building to multif family dwellings with

a total of 11 units. St.

>> Uh yes, the applicant is proposing to

convert the existing office buildings

into an 11 unit multif family dwelling

which requires zoning hearing board

approval of a variance from the density

requirements outlined in section

7-307.3A

of the zoning code. Buildings on site

will be converted into one-bedroom units

ranging in size from 435 ft to 588 ft.

There will be 5 units in 508 North

Second Street and six units in 510 North

Second Street. Properties at 508 and 510

North Second Street comprise a project

site totaling 09 acres and featuring two

three-story buildings. Former is a 3519

foot structure which was constructed

1920 and the latter is a 3822t

structure which was constructed circa

1900 although they were most likely

although they're almost certainly they

were constructed at the same time. The

properties are bounded by the property

at 512 North Second Street to the north,

North Second Street to the east,

properties at 124 to 132 State Street to

the south, and the property at 507 Adams

Alley to the west. These attached

masonry structures mirror each other and

feature elements of the Second Empire

architectural style. Character defining

features include the brick facade, the

brownstone water table featuring

decorative metal grates over the

basement windows, large ornate

entryways, decorative window headers,

large ornate cornises with brackets and

medilians, two-story porches at the rear

of the side elevations, large dormers

with pediments, and a slate maner roof.

The main entryways are topped with

simple transoms displaying the property

addresses and feature tall panled wooden

doors set within substantial frames

featuring fluted pillers and brackets

and wide pediments with decorative

woodwork. They're accessed by brownstone

stoops with metal railings. The property

at 508 North Second Street includes a

secondary entrance featuring a panled

wooden door with a half view pane in

place of one of the first floor windows.

It is accessed by a brownstone stoop

with metal railings. Administration

includes at least six 20 over two wooden

windows on the front elevation of each

property. 510 North Second Street

features a seventh window where the pair

features a door. Those on the first and

second floors feature decorative wooden

headers with scroll work. The third

floor dormer windows feature arch top

sashes, fluted pillisters, brackets, and

substantial pediments with keystones.

Penetration on the side and rear

elevations features windows in a variety

of sizes, pane configurations, and

settings. There's a first floor oral

window with one over one wooden windows

at top panels on the side elevation of

508 North Second Street. Structures

feature manered roofs with real slate

shingles and otherwise appear to be

topped with flat rubber roofs. Aside

from minor modifications, primarily on

the side rear elevations, the buildings

retain a significant amount of their

architectural and historic integrity and

reflect many of the same architectural

features as other buildings in the

neighborhood and particularly along the

500 block of North Second Street. As

such, theru structures contribute

significantly to the eclectic and

diverse architectural and historic

character of the streetscape and

neighborhood. The planning bureau staff

recommends the request be approved with

the following conditions. If the

applicant receives approval of the

requisite zoning relief requests, uh

they must secure city council approval

of the associated land development plan

for the proposed conversion. any

exterior alterations to the building

will receive approval from the historic

preservation specialist or if necessary

receive harp approval of a certificate

of appropriateness application and the

applicant will coordinate with the

department of public works to ensure the

account billing reflects the

establishment of the pro proposed uses

on site. Plane bureau staff recommends

the request be approved for the

following reasons. The adaptive reuse of

vacant and undesired office spaces

compels significant investment that

requires commensurate relief from the

density regulations of the zoning code

as noted in the financial evaluation

provided by the applicants the applicant

in their supplemental narrative and the

unique interior configuration of split

level floors and thick masonry party

walls precludes combining proposed

units. Other conversions of former

office buildings in the surrounding

neighborhood have demonstrated the

proposed use will not impact will not

adversely impact the character of the

neighborhood and the project will help

retain existing architecturally and

historically significant buildings

endangered not only by the threat of

extended vacancy but by the by the

deteriorating buildings to the north.

And finally, the proposed reuse will add

residents to the neighborhood to

activate the street on nights and

weekends and grow a customer base to

support local businesses and will

provide additional units to the downtown

housing inventory. Uh and it should just

be noted that um this uh review and the

following one are for the same uh

project. It's just the zoning relief and

land development components of those.

>> Okay.

>> Thank you, staff. Uh could you state

your names, address, and relationship to

the project?

>> Sure. Uh Dave Butcher with WCI Partners.

Her address is 1900 North Second Street.

Um we are the developer for the project.

Lori, 1900 North Street, WCI.

>> Okay. You you both heard the uh uh

conditions by the staff. Are you

acceptable of those conditions?

>> Yes.

>> Okay. Thank you. Did you want to add

anything to advice?

>> No, I think staff covered everything.

>> Okay.

Um, I don't have any questions at this

time, so I'll come to my commissioners

and see if they have questions or

concerns. Commissioner McKenzie.

>> Yeah, I don't have any specific uh

questions on the project. I mean, I

think it's a a good plan. It is, you

know, needed. Uh, and I understand the

finances. The struggle I have is

utilizing a variance as the route to get

here.

U and I guess I would ask Josh, can you

do you have available the definition an

MPC of what a variance is relative to

financial difficulties not being an

applicable

uh issue? I don't have anything with

respect to

>> Does our attorney have it maybe with her

>> okay

>> I don't have it memorized the exact

language and I'm not trying to deep fix

the project I'm just wondering whether

there's another route rather than create

creating an open avenue for others

>> to claim I bought a building I paid too

much for it now I need a variance and I

just see a slippery slope and not again

nothing about your project but is there

another route

>> to get you to where you want to So, I

would note that um and I'm certainly not

a a lawyer and don't know the specifics,

but I know that other um applicants in

the past um especially those that have

legal counsel have referenced uh state

um Supreme Court decisions that do

establish some threshold of financial

hardship, especially for dimensional

variances, I think, over as opposed to

like use variances. Um so, I know that

that's out there, but I don't know the

specific language or what that threshold

is, and it's probably a case- by case

basis um for that matter. So, I know

that that's out there. Um, but that's

just from my experience being in these

meetings and hearing legal counsel

reference those and seeing them

referenced in supplemental narratives

for that accomp projects.

>> Yeah, I mean the dimensional absolutely

the fact that the building was built

before there was zoning and the zoning

never would allow our city to be built

no matter how you write it. Um, and if

those were the issues that were coming

to us relative to variance,

I think that would be clean and clear.

But the fact that the arguments has been

private is on finance.

I struggle I have a tough time with I

respond to that. Yeah, thank you. I just

to clarify there so the there are unique

physical circumstances in the building

and that is our primary. I concluded the

financial but um in our narrative that

we submitted with the project most of

the points especially the initial points

are relative to the physical

circumstance property which does meet

>> explain them to me if you would yeah so

there are elevation differences on the

second floor between the front and the

back so these units cannot be combined

same condition exists on the third floor

there's an elev that's similar

>> it's typical Harrisburg typical Harris

switches where they have the different

elevations and then there's a thick

party wall in between both of the

buildings that impedes the ability to

combine those with a logical circulation

plan.

>> So, and then that condition also exists

on the first floor. So, that is our I

understand your concern. Um, and I agree

with Jeff. I I just I don't have the

legal um cases at hand, but I think

there have been some cases that have

been um approved. Uh a precedent has

been established based on financial

circumstances, but we leaving that

aside. There are unique physical

circumstances

>> and I think the few financial ones that

I have seen you know in in looking at

the histories typically have been a

building was owned by the applicant

zoning was adopted

and created the financial but not

through no action of theirs. uh in this

case the building's been bought

um with the known restrictions and and

now trying to uh I guess I'm just

struggling whether variance is the right

tool to get here or there's another

avenue but again not against the project

I think it needs be done but it's a

bigger long-term issue I think and we're

recrafting what variances will be in the

city going forward

>> what about with respect to the physical

circumstances I think under that

criteria

>> well it ties back It works in my mind it

works back to we're trying to get to a

certain number of units because the

dollars follow the bathroom in in our

bathrooms and kitchens.

You know, if we were talking about a

building where by right it could have

six and you're trying to go to seven

units or eight and you're trying to go

to 11, you know, I mean, but the the the

starting point in that particular zoning

area for right or for wrong is, as I

understand from your right up pretty

low, you know? for the conversion. So

that's that's all I have to say here.

Thank you.

>> Uh Commissioner Tool.

>> Uh yeah. Uh Officer Jeffrey, you have no

problem with the uh with the density on

this.

>> Um yeah, you know, uh I think in my

initial uh discussions with the

applicants, I did reference and from

looking at their uh initial submissions,

um uh I did make a comment to them that

I think their front and uh rearu uh

units proposed could be um combined and

to create like seven units for example.

Um and then uh in further discussions

and doing a site visit that's when I um

observe the switchback staircase that

they had referenced. I had pictures of

that in the in the case report and it

was evident that like yeah you it's not

just so easy as like punching through um

you know

little dividing wall or something like

that to add these. Um so I do think

there are um issues beyond the finances

uh of this uh as far as combining units

and how this building functions uh as a

multi family dwelling. Again, this was

originally a single family dwelling, so

it wasn't as big a deal. Gets converted

to office. And now, you know, the

office, you know, these are trends that

cities go through at different um you

know, uses of these downtown properties.

And so when you look at what's the use

after the commercial, um I think you

know what they're lay what they've laid

out uh makes sense from the way the

floor plan lays out.

>> Yeah. I you been on this commission too

long wanted to see trends change like

this. I mean, there was a time when we'd

roll up our sleeves and and combat this,

you know, but I think density is one of

the issues that we have to in light of

the housing crisis that we have to

lighten up on. So, uh, the other thing,

unless the solicitor disagrees with me,

I think we allow the applicant to

verbally amend its proposal so that we

could factor in the physicality of it

whenever we

u we make our decision.

Okay.

>> All right.

>> And to be Yeah. And to be clear, uh, if

if that explicitly noted as a condition

as a reason for approval. I that was an

oversight on my part to not include

that. I had hoped to at least make

reference to that throughout the uh case

report.

>> Okay. Yeah, I understand Vern's concern

just you don't want to set a bad

precedence here. So,

>> um yeah, I'm in favor of it. So,

>> okay. Uh Commissioner Nor.

>> Um No, I don't have any questions or

concerns. I I actually do feel that the

applicant

outlined the physical constraints, you

know, as being one of the the hardships

created here in this situation,

you know, over the financial. So, I I

don't have concerns with this.

>> Commissioner Jordan.

>> Yes. Um, so first of all, I wanted to

start off by saying thank you for the

well written application narrative is

very helpful.

>> Um beyond that um I noticed that you

referenced laundry facilities. Will

those be in unit or is there like a

shared facility among

>> Okay. Um as far as the pricing goes I

assume it'll be market rate. Um do you

have any general idea what your range

might be?

>> Probably 1100 to 1200 range.

And then um my last question was for

Jeffrey. Um based off of um what you

have on the case report in the first

page, uh I assume that these square

footages are allowable for um onebedroom

apartments.

>> Yeah, I don't I mean the zoning code

doesn't have anything with respect to

what the minimum size of a unit is.

There there are codes uh bureau

requirements, but uh these do exceed

them. I don't know what they are. I

think they might be 350 ft um off the

top of my head, but

>> but not as far as the zone.

>> Not

thank you.

>> And just um one common response to the

size of um our one of our most popular

properties

is 922 North Street called Union. It's

right. It's the kind of a boss kind of

facade. Um those units are 490 square

feet and they're one bedrooms. Um

they're really efficiently laid out with

probably doors in them that kind of

combine the bedroom and living or space,

but it just makes it feel larger. Um

anyway, that's our most popular

property. There's a lot of demand for

that size. Um this is just me

speculating. I got my first apartment,

all kinds of stuff, DVDs and CDs and

books and stuff. Today, it's all on one

device. So, just it seems that the level

of square footage just doesn't isn't

needed for a lot of things.

That's

it's not total, but there's a segment of

the market that likes

Thank you,

>> Commissioner Benson.

Okay, with that, I'll go to the public.

Um, if anyone has uh for against this

project, please stand and state your

address. I'll start at the middle

and to my right. I guess that's it. Um,

commissioners, um,

I'm going to probably vote in favor of

it. I I know my vice chair is concerned.

Um, but I'm with everyone else as far as

the hardship being the physical layout

of the building. The hardship there,

that's what I can see over you know,

making it

over the fiscal at this time.

>> If I may again, I just think we're using

the wrong tool to get to the right

place. This even though I think we

probably should be having discussions

about some reasonzoning. I hate to talk

spot reszoning, but it may be

appropriate in the downtown given the

variety of buildings that we have,

densities and capabilities. Uh I just

struggle with any language in here that

talks about the fan financial. I think

that makes this a very dangerous

document to have in our archive and

perhap carrying in the next meeting the

meeting after that and meeting after

that. We go back 20 or 30 years we used

to hear a lot of that. Will you let so

and so do this? And I think we kind of

shut that down a lot with parking and

rest again. It's a great project. You've

got a good architect. I'm sure it'll be

a stellar solution. They always are.

It's just are we using the right tool

that doesn't create a bigger problem to

get to a short-term gain on just this

one project. So that's all I have to say

on that basis. I I can't vote for it at

this point as written.

>> Okay.

>> Uh with that, uh

>> I will say and I apologize. I will um

going forward I will look into what the

case law says so that I can inform you

what the courts are saying or if they've

changed in any way what the test should

be if there's a percentage you know if

it's up to the discretion of what the

commission would like but I will avail

myself of the case law and make you guys

available um to have it as well and then

you know going forward you can make a

more informed decision based on whether

or not it's the way you want to do

But can I get a motion?

>> Motion to approve conditions.

>> Is there a second?

>> Second.

>> It's been moved and a second for

approval with the conditions. All those

in favor state by saying I.

>> I.

>> I. Oppose.

>> No

>> abstensions.

Motion carried.

>> And uh I think you can probably uh take

a motion on the land development plan.

Um I don't have any other additional um

conditions on that recommendation other

than tying it to the to the zoning

relief and you know having it be pred

predicated on the zoning relief being

granted. Um so the testimony would be

the same.

>> Okay.

Number two, of course, I'll read it for

the minutes. It's a land development

plan application for 508 and 510 North

Second Street zone commercial

neighborhood followed by David Butcher

with WCI Partners LP to establish 11

total units between the two buildings.

Did you want to I guess add anything to

that?

>> No, nothing further unless there's any

questions on application.

>> Okay.

With that, I have no questions on it.

Commissioner McKenz,

Commissioner,

Commissioner Merrick,

>> none.

>> Commissioner Jordan,

>> no questions.

>> Commissioner Vincent.

>> Um, my only question, I've read over the

the the parking piece, how how did that

determination about ample parking like

if you can just give me a brief synopsis

of that.

>> Uh yeah, so um that was uh based on my

uh experience visiting the property,

being able to park out in front. Um

there's at least from my experience

driving down Second Street, which I do

every day. Um there is generally parking

available in front of these properties.

Uh the properties just to the north, 512

and 514 North Second Street, those are

not occupied. Um they're actually in a

fairly deteriorated state. Uh, and then

you have the, uh, AFL CIO parking lot

just to the north. And I think there's

like four about four parking spaces uh,

along that on street parking spaces

along that uh, section of Second Street.

Um, and then there is, you know, parking

um, along State Street as well. Uh,

especially at night, um, less so during

the day, I'd say, but uh, you know,

that's kind of the complimentary use of

people coming in to work there and then

leaving um, in the evening. and then the

residents being able to park there. So,

and those are, you know, I think

ticketed or metered until um five I want

to say um six um and so there would be

parking available for the residents at

night to park on street.

>> Yeah. And and

yeah, I mean usually in the zoning code

there is a uh component whereby um and

this is more for the zoning relief which

is not required because in the sand

district but they talk about the

complimentary uses and being able to

share parking spaces and those are

relative to on a property and shared but

the same principle would apply to

publicly

U my understanding is that the owner is

getting bids right now.

>> Yeah, we we um I think there's alignment

with our interest and your interests and

getting those down as possible. We would

like them not to come down during or

after we construction.

So we are encouraging the owner.

>> Any other concerns? commissions.

>> If I might, I think what you're

referring to uh has been an issue that

we've had in other locations in the

downtown and I'm speaking from the

parking authority side here and that is

the want and printing of permit parking

for residences. And if you look at the

number of permits that are out there and

the one mark amount of spaces that are

available, I know that's been many a

concerns and phones calls I've had over

the years and that has been used on some

of the larger developments downtown as

the excuse for why, oh, we can make this

work. We'll we'll tell the out of town

folks that they can spend $60 a month to

get a parking permit and then take a

resident who's been in the area for 10,

20, 30 years. they have no space and and

so that is a problem that we've had

we've not been able to resolve and it

all and that's comes back to the parking

deal and all the issues there but you've

probably heard us talk about it this and

I agree with Joffrey's uh assessment

this particular location has a higher

density of available parking after hours

but again you're in that district you

may still be competing um a little bit

but you know that's you know it's not a

huge development and but he is correct

in the CN district we do not require

parking and that's the thing so it

becomes a functional thing but it's part

of a bigger problem that we we've got to

deal with in the downtown for those

places that aren't CN

>> okay if anyone were against this project

I'll start the middle again to the right

that commissioners um could I get a

motion

Motion to approve with conditions.

>> Is there a second?

>> Second. It's

>> been moved and a second for approval of

this project with conditions. All those

in favor state by saying I.

>> I.

>> I.

>> Oppos.

>> No.

>> Motion carry.

>> Thank you.

Okay. Um on old business under land

devel uh number three land development

plan application at 1081 Elliot Street

which is zone industrials followed by

Charlotte Kim Warrior the Cult region

border to construct an industrial

building and associated site and access

improvements. The applicant has

requested a continuence to the September

3rd HPC meeting. Commissioners, could I

get a vote on

>> I actually have a revision to suggest.

Um, in the email submitted by Capitol

Region Water, they are requesting a

continuence until October's meeting, not

September's.

>> So, I think we should amend that

request.

>> Thank you.

>> And vote on

They actually have not submitted

anything.

>> They haven't submitted,

>> right? So they and and I can I can

coordinate with them and see if they

want to like withdraw and then resubmit

to to be within the time frame. They

actually did submit something, but as I

was going through the their drawings, I

noted their building was going to be in

the floodway, which they're not

permitted to to have per our zoning

code. Um, and so they first requested

the first continuence because they're

still working with uh PA because our

zoning code does note that PA D can

issue

uh approvals for development of the

floodway. I don't know if they will. I

don't know if they're going to redesign

this or just scuttle the project with uh

altogether. But uh if timeline becomes

an issue um I can uh work with them to

just have them formally withdraw and

then resubmit.

Okay, this is with the um amendment from

our commissioner.

This would be continued to the September

I mean October meeting.

>> October 1st.

>> Okay, it's been moved and second for the

continuence to the October meeting. All

those in favor signify by saying I

>> opposed.

Under new business, this is a variance

and special accept application for 1932

on F Street which is own residential

medium that medium entity is followed by

you.

>> How can how pronounce the first name?

Martin.

>> Okay. Jennifer with the Y. Uh Martin

Martinus. Uh this is to convert the

existing single family dwelling to a

two-unit multifamily building.

>> Uh yes. So, the applicant is seeking to

formalize uh the conversion of existing

structure as a two-unit multif family

dwelling, which requires zoning hearing

but approval of special exceptions for

the proposed use and relief from the off

street parking requirements for sections

7-305.7

and 7-327.6

the zoning code respectively and

variances for relief from the density

regulations and spec and specific

criteria in sections 7-307.3

and 7-309.2b

of the zoning code respectively.

Property 1932 Forester Street is a 005

acre lot featuring a 2 and 1/2 story 22

foot structure which was constructed

circa 1900 per the Dolphin County tax

records. Property is bounded by York

Street to the north, the properties at

1934 Forester Street and 1933 York

Street to the east, Forester Street to

the south, and the property at 1938

Forester Street to the west. The semi-

detached structure features elements of

vernacular and Queen architectural

styles. Character defining features

include the brick facade with common

bond bands, the enclosed front porch

clad and vinyl siding, the rear edition

constructed of CMU block featuring a

wooden fire escape to the second floor,

and the third floor dormer with steeply

gabled roofs painted with uh with

painted wooden shingles. The main

entrance features a simple wooden door

flanked by divided light sidelights and

topped with a divided light transom.

There is a secondary entrance accessible

via concrete path and steps along the

building which features a circular pane

and sheltered by a small awning. There's

also a panled metal door on the rear

elevation. Fenestration also includes 16

windows which are primarily one over one

windows. There is a prominent oral

window on the second floor of the front

elevation. The structure is topped with

steep gable roofs claden asphalt

shingles. As a semi- detached structure,

the building mirrors architectural

features of its pair to the east,

although there are differentiations in

some aspects such as the enclosed porch

and the building addition on the rear

elevation and generally reflects the

massing of other properties in the

surrounding neighborhood. As such, the

building contributes minimally to the

architectural character of the

streetscape and neighborhood.

The planning bureau staff recommends the

request be approved with the following

conditions. Uh granted of zoning

approval to move forward with the

project as proposed. The applicant shall

allow the codes bureau to perform a

comprehensive inspection to identify any

outstanding code violations and will

receive approval for all necessary city

permits prior to receiving a certificate

of occupancy.

and the applicant must provide a

detailed site plan developed by a

professional demonstrating how the rear

yard will be developed and whether all

street parking will be provided on site.

If that is the intention, any new

development must be in conformance with

the applicable zoning regulations. Uh

and to kind of clarify that second part,

um the rear yard is currently kind of

dirt. Uh there's a shipping container

and there's some uh yard waste and

construction waste. It's clear that

there's space to be able to provide the

two Wall Street parking spaces required.

Um, so the special exception for that

aspect of the uh proposal uh could be

obiated, but I have no uh documentation

that indicates whether the applicant is

intending to do that. So that's why I

kept that uh zoning relief request in

there. Um, plan B staff recommends the

request be approved for the following

reasons. While the plan bureau does not

believe the existence of illegally

established units on site creates a

basis for the establishment of a

hardship or justification for zoning

relief requests as that may only

encourage such work. In this instance,

the subject property does exhibit

conditions that support the granting of

zoning relief, including the size of the

structure, the possibility to construct

all street parking on site and the

applicant's ownership of the adjacent

vacant lot, which if consolidated with

the subject property would obate the

need for variance for relief from the

density regulations.

The property and address the primary

concern of the public regarding the such

conversions, specifically the impact on

parking available to existing residents

through the provision of the required

parking in a new parking area at the

rear of the property and due to the

availability of Amplalon Street parking

along the frontage of the property with

Forester Street. Uh, and this is due to

um the uh adjacent property next door

which is vacant. Uh and then finally,

the existence of other of other property

conversions in the surrounding

neighborhood demonstrates the allowance

of a new such conversion would not

adversely impact the community.

>> Thank you, John. Um could you state your

names, address

um relationship to the project?

>> My name is Jennifer Martinos um 250

street in Harrisburg and I'm the owner.

>> Is this gentleman with you? Okay.

All right. Um, you heard the u the

conditions. Are you acceptable of those

conditions?

>> Um, I wanted to say the parking um the

reason the the yard is was in disarray I

guess when you went there. The

neighbor's tree fell. Uh, so you saw the

large tree and all of that. Um, that has

been cleared. It's been cleaned off. It

actually knocked off my fence. Uh so

that has already it's been handled has

been fixed and we did do the the

parking. Um in the back there's there's

spaces for I mean I have pictures for

the spaces for the

>> Yeah. Well, we would need to see like a

site plan to demonstrate that it was in

conformance with the applicable

regulations.

>> So the the back of it um the back of the

house

It does have like Jeff said does have a

lot of room for parking. So I did

already create uh two parking spaces

so that each unit can have its own off

street parking in the back of the house.

the tree that fell has been removed. So

the it does have a fenced in yard in the

back of that and it's

okay. As Jeff said, u you would have to

probably send him a plan on how that is

set up in the back. We don't have any

proof with us right now. So the parking.

So you're accepting the second condition

of developing a plan. That's correct.

>> The plan is for the for the the yard.

For the park

>> for the yard, how the yard will be laid

out. Yeah, that's what we would need a

plan.

>> The yard. Okay. Yes, of course.

>> Sorry. Also with the um as far as codes

on June 6 of 2025,

I included it in the package. They um

they already went offer

he went he did an inspection of the

entire property.

Uh the upstairs already passed

inspection. It's everything was good. Um

there weren't any issues. He saw the the

downstairs him and um officer Wilson

they saw the downstairs

because I had um items stored there. I

had the floors that have been installed,

the leftover floors and all of that. Uh

pretty much he said just bring us back

once this has been concluded. Uh because

I was already in the process of the

zoning process, the varian um so it's

just a matter of kind of having them

walk back through the property

and then there were no issues already.

So that as a condition

you have not you don't have official

reports do you or

>> um I do note they they were out there um

but uh I don't have like an official

inspection report from the code.

>> They said they cannot

say anything about downstairs because

it's a one unit. So they said we can't

say this

first floor pass inspection. We can't

say one pass inspection. So, we can't

say anything because it's just one

family. So, if um this is a condition, I

guess I would have to let them know,

hey, it's a condition, just going to put

something in writing that says this area

inspection, whatever, however they want

to word it, but they couldn't because of

that.

>> Okay. Yeah. Whatever documentation you

get, you send it to Jeff so we can see

that it's been done and that's part of

the conditions here. Okay.

Um,

of course that was one one of my

concerns with the parking, but you

covered that. So, um, I'll go that's all

I have right now. So, I'll go to my

commissioners. Commissioner.

>> Yeah, I don't have any problems with the

project. Nice. The photos look like

you've done a very nice job. The key

question I have, you took you took

ownership of this building fairly

recently.

>> 2024.

>> Okay.

>> April.

>> Did you use a realtor for that?

>> Uh, no I did not.

>> Okay. Okay. Sometimes we have issues

with realtors that don't disclose proper

aspects of zoning. And I just wanted to

find out if you were a victim of that.

>> No.

>> In this case,

>> the previous owner um he was a older he

is an older man. He that it was a two

family and I did as it states on the

county website said multif family. So I

>> did it's I saw in here there's a 2017

addition done to the building. Do you

know if they pulled a building permit

for that? Um I do believe they did. I

looked back through the um through the

decent records which is our code records

um for that and it looked like it's

always tough to tell because sometimes

what a owner will write is just like

>> is not what they

>> overall improve or they'll say something

very general like home improvement and

you know and what it is is it's I think

in this case it was enclosing that front

porch area and so that's um I think that

also created some discrepancy in the saw

some note in here about non-conformance

reports and amelioration in 2020.

>> Yeah. And so that and that's another

reason we want um you know the codes

bureau to do a thorough inspection to

make sure that was all done up to speed

that they have insulation if that's

necessary, any wiring that's going

through there.

>> Um because it's a little unclear as as

to whether the former owner or a former

owner um was very clear with the city

when they were doing that.

>> Okay. Thank you.

>> Um I'm sorry. Just wanted to say I

believe I included it in the package but

In 2017 is when that edition was done.

Um they were codes went and in 2018

uh it says there that um they gave them

I think it was 60 days or so. Then there

is the the paperwork where it says it

was brought into compliance. They did go

they inspected it.

>> They saw that it was all done.

>> Yeah. And I'm I'm just I was just trying

to establish whether those issues were

brought on by the current owner or was

something that was there. And that's not

you're not guilty for the past.

>> Yeah. Again, this is a application that

probably would have been dead on arrival

a couple years ago, but I I both

apartments seem to be good size and

you've addressed the parking issue, so

I'm in favor of

>> Okay, Commissioner,

>> I don't have any uh questions or

concerns. I actually echo what

Commissioner Oul said in regards to the

project. I think what's interesting is

Dolphin County property records list

this at or categorize this as a

multi-dwelling unit, which is a

discrepancy with what the city's records

are. So, it is fair that a purchaser of

this property would be under the

impression that this would already be a

multi-unit dwelling, you know, approved

as such.

>> Um, so I don't know what the city can do

to coordinate with the county records

that they're more you know, in

alignment.

>> I have brought this up with the county

in person on the phone in email asking

them to change that because it's and I

think they did it used to be property

use and they changed the property class

which doesn't really help at all. But as

I can as far as I can gather from my

discussions with them, it's a taxation

classification for the county's taxes.

And I believe a lot of them are based on

the last time we did a countywide tax

assessment, which is in like 2004. Um,

and so you've got this like old kind of

like zombie information just continuing

through. And I've asked them to remove

it or call it tax class or something and

they just don't. And so a lot of this

and we and we're correcting it either in

talking to members of the public or

realtors. Um, and that's one of the

reasons we've updated our um, uh, flood

plane zoning certification. It used to

just be give you zoning and give you

flood plane and and now we have it uh,

give additional information and make

sure like it's coming before the uh,

instead of just going to the codes

administrator. Um, so we've tried to

make our property transfer review

process more robust so that we can catch

these things and we also, you know, are

always trying to clear this up with

anybody that calls in and asks.

>> Commissioner Jordan,

>> no questions.

>> Commissioner Benson,

>> no question questions. Great job being

proactive with the parking.

Thank you.

>> Okay. Is there anyone in the public or

against this project? Start with the

middle.

Commissioners, can I get a motion?

>> I'll make a motion to approve. And I

think we have uh

>> two conditions with the two conditions

noted.

>> Okay. Is there a second?

>> Second.

>> Been moved and second for approval of

this project with the two conditions.

All in favor state by saying I

>> opposed.

Motion carries. Good luck.

>> Thank you.

>> Item number five. This is a special

exception application for 2609 North

Trench Street. It's zone riverfront

followed by Noah Parsons with Triple P

Fitness. This is to replace the existing

front yard grass with Astro Turf.

>> Uh yes. So the applicant is proposing to

replace the existing front yard grass

with astroturf. Um and I guess it's not

technically astroturf. I think it's soft

lawn. uh comfort barefoot comfort uh

which requires zoning hearing board

approval of a special exception

application for section 7-321.4B

of the zoning code because the proposal

constitutes development as defined in

section 7-333.2

the zoning code which is not permitted

within a 50 foot front yard setback.

First section 7-307.3 of the zoning

code, a variance would be would

generally be required. However, given

the existence of the off street parking

area already encroaching into the front

yard setback, the proposal only requires

a special exception application for the

expansion of a non of an existing

non-conforming aspect of the property

per section 7-321.4B

of the zoning code. The property at 2609

North Front Street is a49 acre lot

featuring a one-story 3800 foot

structure which was constructed in 1950.

Property is bounded by the property at

2615 North Front Street to the north,

North Second Street to the east.

Properties at 2601 North Front Street,

102 Rner Street and 2604 North Second

Street to the south and North Front

Street to the west. This detached

structure features elements of the

international architectural style.

Character defining features include

brick facade with a painted mural on the

front and side elevations, the

asymmetrical front facade featuring a

row of fixed pane windows, a regular

penistration pattern along the side and

rear elevations, and the prominent brick

chimney in the rear. Main entrance

features a full view metal door topped

by a simple metal transom and a shallow

black awning set within a substantial

concrete surround. The rear entrance

reflects this design with a full view

metal door set beneath a shallow awning.

Administration also includes windows in

a variety of sizes and paint

configurations. The front elevation

features a row a of fixed pane metal

windows a top hopper windows set within

concrete lint headers and lintils.

Windows in the side rear elevations

feature the same windows design set

within simple brick frames and a

regularly spaced pattern. Structure is

topped with a flat rubber roof. The

property otherwise features minimal

landscaping it as bushes along the

building foundation have recently been

removed with two separate parking areas.

Although the building differs

marketkedly from many of the others

along Fun Street and the neighborhood

and in the neighborhood to the east, it

does contribute to the varied

architectural character of the corridor

and makes a minor contribution to the

architectural character of the

streetscape and neighborhood. The

planning bureau staff recommends the

request be approved with the following

conditions. Uh the proposed turf may be

installed no further into the setback

than the existing parking surface and

the applicant must reinstall the

landscape screening along the parking

area which was recently removed in

violation of the parking facility design

standards and install landscape

screening along the frontage with the

sidewalk. The applicant should relocate

the pedestrian connection to the public

sidewalk to the southern frontage of the

parking area to retain a direct

pedestrian connection to the building

and ensure that pedestrians are not

required to intermingle with vehicular

traffic to access the building. Uh the

applicant must remove the unpermitted

penetent signs along the front edge of

the property and given the location

within the AE flood plane and the and a

flood plane. The applicant must ensure

that any investments in the property are

submitted to the planning bureau for

consideration review against the flood

plane regulations and best practices

before work can commence. The turf and

ramp as well as an unrelated fence

project submitted separately from the

zoning relief request must be included

in the floodplane development

submission. The project will also

require review by Capital Region Water.

Planning Bureau staff recommends the

request be approved for the following

reasons. Although the planning bureau is

skeptical the proposed turf will

replicate the appearance or

functionality of natural grass and

concerned about the proposal

establishing a precedent for other front

street property owners. Project must

only receive approval of a special

accept exception application the

threshold for which is lower than for

variance. The project could function as

something of a test case to determine

how well the proposed project product

integrates both aesthetically and

functionally into the Front Street

corridor. And finally, if the conditions

of approval are adopted by the zoning

code, the project could result in an

overall benefit to the viability and

utility of the property while addressing

various zoning violations on site.

>> Okay. Thank you, Jeff. Could you state

your names, address, and relationship to

the project?

>> Uh Noah Parsons, 2609 North Front

Street. Uh building business owner.

>> I'm Chris Brun. I'm a synthetic turf

international dealer here in

Pennsylvania and registered with the

city and helping with this project. We

hope.

>> Okay. Uh you both heard the approval

with the conditions. Are you acceptable

of those conditions?

>> If possible, could we have him restate

the condition? I just feel like there

was a lot.

>> Yeah. Sorry. Uh so the proposed turf may

be installed no further into the setback

than the existing parking surface. So

that's about I think like three feet

from the sidewalk. Um uh and the

landscape screening must be installed on

the parking area there. So that's a

requirement of our zoning code to have

parking lot screened and that uh

vegetation was removed sometime in the

last three years. The most recent um

Google Street View images is from like

October 2022. Um so I'm not sure.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Like it's now like Tanark I

think. Uh just Tanark.

uh bushes, maybe like Chinese grass,

something like that. Um

and then uh having a landscape screening

along the frontage with the sidewalk. Uh

so there were two little bushes kind of

near where the um walkway connected to

the sidewalk. Um and while there's no

requirement for that, I noticed I noted

that in the um diagram of how the uh

turf is installed, there's like um

nailer boards, I guess, on the ends and

stuff. And we just want to make sure

that's not exposed to people just

walking on the sidewalk or just kind of

visually just right there up against uh

the sidewalk. So to have a little

screening and that could be something as

similar as like a flower planting bed or

something like that just to improve the

aesthetics of the uh property. So that

was the first one. Um and then they

relocating the pedestrian connection to

the public sidewalk uh to the southern

frontage of the parking area. So, I

noted that in the application it says

there's going to be no change to

pedestrian access, but in the proposal,

the um ADA ramp goes right into the

parking lot. So, anybody that's going to

be walking to the property would have to

walk into the driveway where, you know,

where the where there's people maybe

pulling in or pulling out. Um and so

having a direct pedestrian uh connection

from the end of the ramp out to the

sidewalk maintains that separate uh

pedestrian connection um that exists

there now. Uh and then uh removing those

penant signs uh that are out there. Um

and then finally uh just any work that

occurs on site requires um a flood plane

development permit and and CRW

coordination. Um, I know CRW has been

getting some of these uh synthetic turf

uh uh proposals um in more recent years

and they need to make sure that it to

ensure that it's still uh a pvious

surface that the subsurface the rock and

soil and whatever else is is done

correctly so that it doesn't light back

up or something. So that's something CRW

has been telling us that they need to

review.

>> How do we review that? Uh so assuming

this would get approval, I would put you

in contact directly with them and they

would work with you directly.

>> Okay. Um

one of my questions always with everyone

is uh did you contact the community? And

I noticed you do have a

um

couple sheets here filled out but they

don't have addresses. they mainly your

clients. So the community right there,

did you contact any of them?

>> Yep. So all our neighbors as well as

multiple of the people on that list are

neighbors along Second Street there um

as well as Front Street in addition to

our clients and then as well as an

online petition that's I believe over

300 people signed as well.

Okay, next time just well next time we

should have the address so we know just

by St. Harrisburg we don't know if

they're living it out on the hill

how they affect the community. Um

and the other um I guess you don't have

no problem with parking there. I don't

know.

>> No, but it's all by appointment based so

there's only one-on-one training

sessions maximum six trainers and six

clients. So that's never an issue.

Okay.

>> And I'd note they did uh in 2023 got

approval to set up the fitness center

use and as part of that they did get

relief from the off street parking

requirements based on the uh by

appointment only scheduling.

>> Okay.

>> I'm not too familiar but are you going

to do your training out on the astro

with this?

>> Yeah. So essentially what we'll be doing

is we'll be replacing the front grass um

with this specific permeable turf. This

is designed to look exactly like natural

grass to kind of maintain that maintain

that front street vibe. And then

additionally uh very permeable. I can

have Chris talk more about kind of the

specifics there.

And kind of the goal here is just to

have a riverfront training environment.

Something that this area or any area

really hasn't seen. Um so it'll be

solely for structured uh one-on-one

training sessions. Won't be any

equipment outside of equipment that's

brought in or brought out during the day

and then brought back in.

>> Okay.

Um those are the only questions I have

at this point. U Commissioner

McKisick.

>> Yeah, this is kind of an intriguing one.

I I can kind of view it out there and

I've watched what you guys have been

doing and it's kind of interesting. So,

it will be one-on-one training out there

and Okay. Yeah. And and again, the

permeability, we've done a lot of fields

over the years. And the uh flood plane,

I don't know where the flood plane lies

out there. Are you above it?

>> It's the whole property is entirely in

the flood.

>> It's the whole thing.

>> Pretty much all front street is there.

>> Yeah. And and we got involved in

cleaning one in North Carolina after

those floods last fall.

Um Yeah. But anyhow, um it's it's can be

a good product. Sand bed or is it rubber

based or how do you do the crumb?

>> Um

can you hear me?

>> Yeah. Uh we use a stuff called Envirill

which is acrylic. Um it's not the

typical football field where they put

like you know this much sand and then

this much

>> up tires,

>> right?

>> Which some people say is not real

healthy. You could have mercury this is

has micro band in and it's very safe for

kids to play on and it's very pet

friendly too.

>> Okay. Yeah, that sounds the uh I have no

problem supporting this. The only thing

as I might suggest a condition that just

to note that this shall not be used for

parking at any time. No, because we have

designed them and parked on them. It's

not good but it happens. So, and I know

we've struggled with front front yard

parking down Front Street for a lot of

years. So,

>> yeah.

>> Yeah.

>> And that property that used to be a

fully just like impervious service and I

remember they came back and and because

they expanded it from to the one side of

the walkway. Um, so they did like the

pvious pavement.

>> Nothing else. Thanks. Commission to

Yeah, I agree with Vern. This is a this

is a new one on us. Uh

this doesn't require the like the

drainage infrastructure that you put on

a football field, doesn't you? You're

just putting it on

>> No, you know, I'll talk to the the folks

about that, but I usually put a clean

stone down first about 4 in.

>> Then I'll put a finer stone and compact

it all out. That gives natural drainage.

The turf actually has PF holes on the

bottom of it every four inches. So

there's holes like the size of a pencil

that help it drain.

>> And the test results, as he said, it

drains

600

gallons in per hour. So as he says, it

drains better than grass.

>> Yeah. Just curious. Yeah,

you got my vote.

>> You rais a question if I may. Um, do you

I assume you guys do a perk test to go

with this to ensure the um the

underlying soil is not a clay.

>> I can. I'm not accustomed to it.

>> Okay.

>> And I think that's something that

probably um

I'm just thinking about.

>> I noted in the cross-section of the of

the product in the brochure, it talks

about compacted uh subgrade and and then

it has the um stone on top of that. So

that's something that you know CRW will

tell them like yeah it needs to be this

spine of stone or whatever.

>> Yeah. I just I was just curious if you

had because I know we've dealt with that

that silty clay so along Front Street

and it can be kind of doesn't like to

give up the water.

>> Um yeah I uh

I think this is very innovative. I have

been going back and forth about whether

it should be a separate condition

um in respect to capital region waters

review and just any design coordination

in respect to storm water planning,

infiltration and the flood like drainage

into the flood plane. So, I mean, I know

you're saying it's coordinating

being like the flood plane review and

coordinating with CRW,

>> but there's also the drainage aspect of

this

turf of the water going directly

into,

you know, into the soil. There's

they also might have an issue of

actually seeing reverse

water filtrate happening if there's a

flood situation

where

I don't know. I mean the

I'm just wondering if there should be a

separate I'm I I'm leaning towards there

like you kind of just like made a one

statement like the project will require

review by CRW and I'm just I think there

should be it should be a condition that

CRW approves of the drainage and ration

design of this project.

>> Sure, I think that's sensible

>> and that is my only concern with this

otherwise think it's pretty cool.

>> Okay,

Commissioner Jordan.

>> Yes. Um, so there was made reference to

the concern for this setting a precedent

going forward, right?

Yeah, that was so I guess this is maybe

a hypothetical question is because you

talk about the fact that this could

function as a test case. Is there any

way from a language standpoint to make

this like revisionary for this

particular case?

>> Um, you know, I think I I don't know

that we've ever used that terminology in

the zoning relief uh process. Uh we use

it in HARB uh but that's a bit more uh

the scope is a little different of their

review authority. Um, so I I think it'd

be tough to say, well, we'll let this

happen, but

>> everything else is, you know, subject

one to one basis because that's the case

anyway, right? Um, about what's relative

to that property or whether it's a

variance versus a special exception. So,

um, I I didn't know really how to put

that down. I mean, like I said, my my

one concern was basically saying like a

lot of other people saying, "Well, I

don't want to mow my lawn every year."

So, why don't we just do this? And then

all of a sudden, you've got this carpet

of, you know, turf like laid out along

Front Street here. And I think

>> um you know that I think that's still a

a possible concern, but um like I like I

noted in the case report, I mean, this

is a special exception. It's not a

variance. And so the and so the

threshold is lower. I came into this

honestly expecting to recommend denial

and I I couldn't get there while I was

reviewing the case. So

>> yeah, because If I'm just being honest,

that's kind of where I'm at. I think for

your business, this makes sense. But

since there doesn't seem to be any

gradation, it's either all or nothing.

That's where my concern lies.

I think that's it for me.

>> Commissioner Vincent.

>> Yeah, that my big question would be, you

know, what happens after that CRW?

Do do we have to relook at the storm

water runoff plan? Like what does that

look like from our end and our

responsibility? Does it come back to us

after that?

>> I don't think so. I mean CRW would

basically tell them here's how you do it

or you don't get approval from us. Uh so

it would kind of be a you know binary

like once they get there,

>> right? One of the things here is it's

such a small parcel, it doesn't reach

the thresholds of the square footage

that typically pushes it in the county

conservation or NPDS or anything like

that. So all those guards are down. This

case is coming back to CRW to kind of

pick up that role.

>> Okay.

Is there anyone from the public for

against this project?

One in the middle, two on the side.

Um, commissioners, um,

could I get a motion with Ann, you want

to add your condition to

>> Yeah, we're adding

>> two

>> two additional condition.

>> If you're if you're good with the

parking, it's showing up. I've just seen

too many impervious areas get a, you

know, get an inch and a half of asphalt.

When I go back to the Civil War Museum,

we had almost an acre of impervious area

and they came back and asphalted it

three years later.

>> There's a bus parking below the hill

there. So,

just happens.

>> Nobody remembered. They didn't know it

was there.

Um, I mean, I guess there's a

possibility for um possibly doing like

hatching at the edge of the parking lot

so it doesn't have to be like repaved as

um as uh concrete or something like that

and then just with curb stops set apart

from that. So that creates that. I just

want to make sure that anybody who is

walking because you're right across the

street from River Park. Somebody may,

you know, take the green belt up there

that they're just don't have to walk

into the parking area and maybe

somebody's backing out and hits them

that they have their own, you know, uh,

separated area to walk up.

>> Um, yeah. Does that

making sure

I would make a motion to approve this

with the conditions uh stated and also

adding a condition that uh no parking of

vehicles would be allowed on uh this

area and um amending condition for uh to

separate out a uh review and approval by

Capitol Region Water for the design of

this uh drain. dage and infiltration of

the of the area.

>> I I would second that.

>> It's been moved to second for approval

with the added conditions. All those in

favor state by saying I.

>> I opposed.

Okay. Motion carries. Goodbye.

Anybody

want to see?

surprising.

>> Yeah, they converted ago.

>> Yes, this is fun.

So I have a question.

>> Is that like um I know like tennis in my

days they're grass courts.

[Laughter]

>> I get the city to fund it.

Okay. Uh let me see where are we?

Uh at the item number six, I believe. Um

this is a land development plan

application for 315 North Second. It's

zone commercial neighborhood. is

followed by Adam Gretman and with

Gretaman Properties LLC is to convert

the existing office building to a 10

unit multi- family dwelling.

>> Uh yeah, so the applicant is proposing

to convert the existing office building

into a 10-unit multif family dwelling.

Uh commissioners probably recall this

from last month uh when the applicants

received um variance approval uh to

establish the 10-unit uh multif family

dwelling. Uh the property at 315 North

Second Street is a 0.1 acre lot

featuring three attached buildings, a 2

and 1/2 story 232t

structure, a three-story 2700 foot

structure, and a three-story 4938t

structure, all of which were constructed

circa 1900. Property is bounded by

Barbara Street to the north, the

property at 210 Pine Street to the east

and south, and North Second Street to

the west. These attached masonry

structures which are or will be

internally connected uh feature elements

of varying architectural styles. The

southernmost of the three buildings

features elements of the federal

architectural style. Character defining

features include the painted brick

facade, the arched entryway, an awning

and access ramp at the rear entrance and

the regular fenistration pattern. The

main entrance is recessed behind an

arched entryway featuring wide pillers,

a keystone and a decorative sconce and

features a panel door flanked by divided

lace sidelights and topped with a

sunburst transom featuring the property

address. Administration on the front

elevation features five 12 over 12

windows with wooden sills and decorative

brick headers which all feature painted

wooden shutters. There are an additional

five divided light windows on the side

and rear elevations. Structure is topped

with a gable roof clad asphalt shingles.

The middle building features elements of

the Italian 8 architectural style.

Character defining features include

painted brick facade and water table,

the decorative metal grates over the

basement windows, the former entryway

converted into a Juliet balcony, the

consistent fenestration pattern, the

threestory bay window, and the

decorative stepped corn brick cornness.

The front main entrance is no longer

accessible from the street as the stairs

were removed prior to October 2008 and

replaced with a decorative metal railing

but features a wooden panel door set in

a simple frame and topped with a sconce

um top of the sconce. The entryway

previously featured an arch brick

surround which has since been infilled

with brick. Administration on the front

elevation includes 17 divided light

wooden windows set in simple wooden

frames. Those on the first and second

floors include storm windows. There are

an additional five divided light wooden

windows on the rear elevation which also

include storm windows. The structure is

topped with a flat rubber roof. The

northernmost of the three buildings

features elements of the classical

revival architectural style. Character

defining features include the painted

brick facade, the double-sided access

stairs, the regular fenistration

pattern, the substantial brick, the

substantial corners featuring brick

posters, decorative brick and wood

elements, and a central embattlement

with narrow windows and a large

three-story decorative brick chimney on

the side elevation. The main entrance

features a panled wooden door set in a

simple panel frame blank by sconces and

topped with a divided light transit. It

is accessed by birectional brick steps

with a simple metal railing.

Administration on the front elevation

includes five 9 over9 windows with brick

sills and headers which all feature

painted wooden shutters. There are an

additional 11 divided light windows on

the side elevation and two dormers

topped with substantial pediments on the

side roof flank flanking the large

chimney. Structures topped with a gable

roof clad and real slate shingles. The

buildings retain a significant amount of

their architectural and historic

integrity and exhibit a unique

configuration of three conjoined

structures of differing architectural

styles. And although they differ

significantly from other properties on

the block, particularly those to the

north and south, they reflect many of

the same architectural features as other

historic properties throughout the

downtown historic district. As such, the

structures contribute significantly to

the eclectic and diverse architectural

and historic character of the

streetscape and neighborhood. The

planning bureau staff recommends the

request be approved uh for the following

reasons. The project has received the

requisite zoning relief approvals to

convert the property into a 10-unit

multif family dwelling. The adaptive

reuse of vacant and underutilized office

spaces into apartment buildings is a

long-term trend for the neighborhood.

Other conversions of former office

buildings in the surrounding

neighborhood have demonstrated the

proposed use will not adversely impact

the character of the neighborhood and

the project will help retain existing

architecturally and historically

significant buildings endangered not

only by the threat of extended vacancy.

Um oops, sorry.

Um and the proposed reuse will add new

residents to the neighborhood to

activate the street on nights and

weekends and grow a customer base to

support local businesses and will

provide additional units to the downtown

housing inventory.

>> Thank you, Jeff. Could you state your

names, address, and relationship to the

project?

>> Richard, architect by design.

>> Uh, Michael White, owners rep, project

manager, 232 Jackson.

>> You bothard the staff conditions. Are

you acceptable of those conditions?

>> There were no conditions. Sorry, I I

said I said approval with conditions,

but uh there were no conditions.

I'm so used to those conditions. Boy,

it's automatic. Okay, no conditions.

Um, I have no questions at this time.

I'll start with my commissioners

commissioner.

>> I'd like to say I don't like the

project, but many many many moons ago

about 35 years ago, we did the com

combination of those and so it's good to

see it being carried into the future. At

that point it was Bell Telephone or

Bellip PA and that was their first

growth out into that area and it was

there was a lot of discussion about tear

down and build new at that point and

they

converted them the way they did and now

it's great to see that all the work was

done made it easy. you don't you don't

have any property lines to move and and

so it's good you know I've been watching

it sit there empty so

good luck

>> yeah the only question just out of

curiosity would you figure out whether

you or whether Belle owns the parking

lot or if it's part of the applicants

>> is um a permanent easement to the

benefit of the

Okay. I know that was up in the air last

time we were together.

>> Yes.

It's not it's not a lease

commission.

>> Okay. That that was going to be my

question. Um because then on the site

plan like on the plans. So it it's shown

in the existing

um overall site plan but then it's not

shown on the proposed plans that

adjacent like the permanent easement

being there.

the permanent there. I'm not sure which

plan you're looking at just the overall

site plan. I mean the plan set

you know you've got your ex you have

existing site plan where it does show

the entire building footprint plus the

parking area and an easement but then in

your proposed

plans

>> I think

the floor plan

>> there's no site plan

>> site work

there's no proposed site work there's no

Okay. All right. Well, okay. I

understand that then. That's how it's

reflected. Okay.

>> Commissioner Jordan,

>> no questions.

>> Uh, Commissioner Benson,

>> no questions.

>> Uh, is there one one person in the

middle?

>> Down to one person. Nobody on my right.

Um, said you're in favor of it. Didn't

help you.

>> Commissioner is going to get a motion.

>> A motion to approve.

>> There's no condition.

>> I'll still try to get a

>> I'll second.

>> Okay. It's been moved to second for

approval with no conditions. All those

in favor state by saying I

>> I oppose.

Motion carries. Good luck.

>> Thank you.

Item number seven, this is a lot

consolidation and land development plan

for the SRTA

and M facility in the block generally

bound by her street. The Harrisburg

Cemetery, State Street and Cameron

Street industrial followed by Richard

Par. The Suscoana Regional

Transportation Authority is to demolish

existing structures vacant rights away

and construct a new operation and

maintenance facility with a temporarily

transfer center.

>> Um yes. So the applicant is proposing to

vacate various rights away in the block

generally bounded by her street, the

Harrisburg Cemetery, State Street and

Cameron Street, consolidate the subject

properties, demolish the existing

structures on site, and construct a new

Sesuana Regional Transportation

Authority operations and maintenance

facility with a temporary transfer

center on site. Project A is comprised

of 14 parcels. Uh 901 North Cameron

Street, 650 North 12th Street, 603, 611,

and 627 North Cameron Street, 700 Monroe

Street, 901 North 12th Street, 527 North

Cameron Street, 1100 State Street, and

three parcels collectively addressed as

1151 North Street, totaling

approximately 15 acres, which features

eight distinct buildings and several

other structures across the site.

Project site is bounded by 107 North

Cameron Street and 102 North Pearl

Street to the north, North 12th Street

and the Harrisburg Cemetery to the east,

State Street to the south, and Cameron

Street to the west. The northernmost

property currently accommodates the

existing Serta O andM facility comprised

of a two-story office building and

maintenance garages with two separate

maintenance garage buildings to the

north. These structures total 1,247

ft with the maintenance garages being

constructed in 1910 and office building

component being constructed 1950. The

property has function functioned as the

maintenance facility for the region's

mass transit operator operator going

back to the earliest days of the city's

trolleys. The garages are primarily

one-story masonry structures featuring

elements of utilitarian industrial style

with the office building in the

southwestern corner featuring a more

modern mid-century architectural style.

Character defining features of the

garages include the large roll down

garage doors and the tall blue metal

cornises overhead. Character defining

features of the office building include

the varied masonry facads with

differentiated vans, the large wings

extending from the main entrance, the

prominent stair and elevator towers and

the irregular fistration pattern. The

entire site is paved as parking or

access drives and is enclosed by an 8ft

high green chain link fence topped with

barbed wire. Central block features an

institutional campus previously owned by

Goodwill Industries and is comprised of

four separate buildings totaling 100,956

square feet. The campus buildings were

constructed at various points between

1950 and 1987. Buildings are primarily

one-story masonry structures featuring

elements of utilitarian commercial and

industrial style with a more modern

office building along North 12th Street

being two stories and featuring a more

modern architectural style. The

industrial buildings along the western

and northern um

uh facades have little architectural

character. While the character defining

features of the office building include

the prominent entryway with a two-story

glass curtain wall, the regularly spaced

brick columns on the northern and

southern facades and the regular

fenistration pattern. Block features

parking lots and access drives

interspersed amongst campus buildings

with a vegetated buffer of varying

depths and states of maintenance around

the periphery. Block to the south

features two use surface parking lots

enclosed by chainlink fences, some of

which are topped with barb wire.

Properties were formerly the site of the

state testing laboratory. Currently, the

sites only accommodate impervious

services and overgrown vegetation. The

eastern block features the city-owned

parks and recreation facility comprised

of four separate buildings totaling

16,740

ft. The campus buildings were

constructed at various points between

1960 and 1992. The buildings are

primarily one-story masonry structures

featuring elements of utilitarian

industrial style with no defining

architectural characteristics. Property

features parking areas and access drives

fronting garages and maintenance or

storage buildings. Overall, while the

project site does feature elements of

other industrial properties along

Cameron along the Cameron Street

corridor in respect to both existing

site conditions and building design, the

properties do not contribute to the

architectural character of the community

and in fact largely detract from it. As

such, the project represents a welcome

improvement to the corridor.

The planning bureau staff recommends the

request be approved with the following

conditions. Uh the project must receive

approval of the street vacations for

portions of Foster Street, Goodwill

Drive and North 12 Street as well as

various other public rights of way

running through the project site prior

to filing the lock consolidation at LDP

LDP final plan set with the Dolphin

County Reporter of Deeds. And I know

this is a little bit um a weird

condition here that it's not being filed

um uh concurrent with this uh land

development plan. I think because it's

involving um both city land as far as

the park and recreation facility uh and

like state land. Um the applicant has

been in coordination with like the law

bureau about how best to handle this,

whether this is just through a um city

council resolution or whether it

actually requires this. So I think

they're still working that out. Um but

they do eventually had to be vacated in

some. Uh the applicant must secure

approval of a letter of map provision

from FEMA so that the development can

proceed as proposed and must eventually

receive approval from the flood plane

administrator for both the structural

demolitions on site uh which I've just

recently reviewed and approved. Um as

well as the as well as the new all new

proposed construction including

buildings, fences and signs. Uh and the

applicants are uh have been working

since I think December uh with uh FEMA

on the documentation for that letter of

map revision. Um and so they're

currently in the midst of that uh

process. Uh the applicant should

coordinate with the city arborist to

increase the ecological impact and tree

canopy on site by incorporating native

tree species and pollinator plants

particularly on the western edge of the

site around the storm water detention

infrastructure which can also address

localized air pollution created by uh

Cameron Street and Hurst Street

infrastructure. I should say State

Street. Um they do have a much more uh

vegetated proposal as proposed as

compared to the last parks and recck

facility. Uh but the city art is

currently reviewing that. We just want

to make sure it's following our

standards uh and best practices um from

that perspective. Uh and finally, uh the

proposed transfer center component of

the project should be considered a

temporary accommodation and the

applicant must continue long-range

coordination with the city on an

alternative location that enhances

coordination with the Harrisburg

Transportation Center. better

accommodates rider origin destination

trips and more closely conforms to the

city's comprehensive plan as well as

previous studies developed by Pendot

including the Harrisburg Transportation

Center TOD master plan from December uh

2017.

Uh the plan bureau staff recommends the

request be approved for the following

reasons. The project will expand and

modernize operations and maintenance

facilities, consolidate agency staffing,

increase efficiency, and improve their

ability to provide services to the

region's residents, businesses, and

visitors. The project site is a

conspicuous location located at the

intersection of two state routes. And

the removal of deteriorated and

underutilized buildings and replacement

of large expanses of impervious surface

with vegetation and a modern transit

facility building will bring aesthetic

improvements not only for passers by

local residents and workers as well. And

through coordination with FEMA, the

project will result in a site that is

flood plane compliant and more resistant

to future flood events in the Paxton

Creek.

>> Thank you, Jeff. Could you state your

name, address, and relationship to the

project?

>> Yes. Uh, good evening. My name is Bill

Schnore with Stantech Consulting.

We're the representative for Susana

Regional Transportation Authority for

this project.

>> Are you acceptable of the conditions?

>> Yes, we have reviewed the uh case report

and working with Mr. Knight and we are

agreeable to the conditions of the

recommended approval.

>> Commissioners um have no questions. This

is pretty straightforward. I'll start

with

>> Commissioner.

>> I'm sorry. We um I would just like to

say in addition to this, as both um

gentlemen alluded to, there is currently

a memorandum of agreement that the law

bureau has and is drawing down on. It's

technical. Um, and while the MPC does

provide for us to do things like this

for ease, like to do it through

agreement and contract, there still are

things that can't be passed over and

have to be councilmatic. So, I am I do

have the agreement and we are in favor

of the project. It's just a matter of

basically doing what you're saying is

that there are certain steps that cannot

be skipped. Like we cannot do a street

vacation by contract. you know what I

mean? So the bulk of this um is in the

agreement and it basically has a lot of

input of what Jeff has said. Um we are

just um commenting now and drilling down

into the technical aspects of it so that

we have an agreement that both makes it

easy and still provides for city council

to have their input.

As I said, it's it's pretty

straightforward and I'll start with

Commissioner McKenzie.

>> No, the only thing I can say is I think

we need more drawings for the land

development plan. It's not well enough

engineers. You're just kind of making

>> get paid by sheet

>> by the pound probably. No, but no, you

guys have it's a heck of a set of

drawings as I was going through there.

Seems pretty tight, but

Commission,

>> I'm really happy to see this kind of

investment on Cameron Street. Uh I think

the last time it was investment like

this, Vern was the architect and hope

this goes a little bit smoother than

that project through no fault of yours.

>> Only took 16 years.

>> Yeah.

No, I'm all favored.

>> Commissioner Murray,

>> I don't have any uh questions or

concerns here. I think it's a extremely

thorough and well-designed uh land

development plan.

>> Thank you,

>> Mr. Jordan.

>> Yes. Um I have two two major concerns. I

guess the the smaller of them from

looking at the site plans is it and

correct me if I'm wrong, as far as the

sidewalk goes along Cameron, it is

directly against the lane of traffic. Is

that correct?

>> Yeah, there is. straight up against the

curb

>> uh which is on the edge of traffic.

>> Right. Okay. Um my my concern with that

is anybody who's driven along Cameron

Street despite the 35 mile per hour

limit, people go 45 and then some. So to

be a pedestrian walking directly against

that type of traffic is unnerving to say

the least, yet alone there's a safety

aspect to it. Um just looking over some

of the specifications

to um there was let's see here basically

of course saying that there's a minimum

of six feet but then when the sidewalk

is directly adjacent to moving traffic

the desired minimum is 8 feet providing

a two-ft buffer for street furniture or

utilities maybe in this case a grass

meeting or something you know that's

something that I would suggest um

just simply you know just for pedestrian

access and safety because it's

essentially a highway still at that

point. Um, and you know, it's kind of

it's kind of a safety issue with people

walking directly across from the the

traffic. So, I don't know if that's

something you'd be amenable to looking

into.

>> We are amenable to do whatever the

commission uh and and the codes

recommends.

>> Okay. So, I I guess I'm going to volley

it over to you, Jeffrey, because that

that would be one of my I guess a

recommendation maybe to install it um as

opposed to two foot buffer for street

furniture perhaps for like a grass

median along the frontage of Cameron

Street.

>> Yeah. And uh the commissioners may

remember that's something we included in

the parks and wreck facility with like

the wider uh sidewalks along her street.

Um I think there's maybe a little bit

more uh maybe constraints on this side.

Uh you're right. The as when I was

walking along taking pictures and

posting the properties, like it is not

fun when you're right next to a truck

barreling down at 45 miles an hour.

>> Um I don't know exactly where the

property lines are relative to um where

the curb is and so what that width is.

It's also a state route. Um so I think

you know a lot of this falls within

Pendot's perview whether they're willing

to do something like this and and for

the most part I think they have been so

far. So, it's certainly something we

would support. We always support wider

sidewalks, especially if this is going

to be a transfer center and people are

going to be walking to the food school,

to the, you know, Sunshine Park, MW

Smith homes, uh, which are just to the

north here. Um, so yeah, we will

definitely in our continued coordination

with uh, the applicant and PennDOT, uh,

advocate for wider sidewalk.

>> Yeah, I I would really appreciate that

because, um, as you can tell, they've

already rebuilt that. um when they took

out the the curb cut where the garage

is, they rebuilt it and that concern was

brought up and as you can see was not

addressed.

>> So that's something that could be

coordinated going forward once this is

rebuilt once again.

>> Yeah.

>> Um and then the second concern which I

think um Jeffrey pointed out is just the

simple fact of where this is located as

far as the transfer center goes. Um the

rest of the project totally on board

with but the transfer center is on

camera It's not close to downtown and

pretty much I can't imagine

who's walking to it. Pretty much it

seems like you would have to catch a bus

to it, transfer there and then catch

another bus out of there. It might work

well for the regional systems coming off

the highway from like York and Lebanon.

But the capital region system that is

based in Harrisburg, it kind of seems

like you're doing a double back,

especially with now the state workers

coming back to work. You know, I can't

imagine we're going to ask them to leave

the

come over here to catch the bus to then

go to the westore for example. So I

guess my biggest concern is the way that

this is constructed. It doesn't look

temporary. It looks like this is once

it's built, it's built. And I understand

that the city and the partners downtown

would like to reclaim the transfer

center. understand that you know there

are private owners in some of the lands

in question closer to downtown and again

like you said that's not necessarily on

this time frame. I guess just my concern

is once this is built where where is the

incentive to look elsewhere because this

this is not designed to be temporary.

>> Yeah. And and that would and that's and

uh the applicant can confirm that that's

been a stated um concern of the planning

bureaus throughout our entire

coordination with them. Uh but in you

know in the applicant's defense we have

worked with the most um obvious

potential property owners around the

Harrisburg Transportation Center, the uh

old post office owner, the owner of the

um former uh Patriot News property

across the street from there. Um and uh

the um I forget the the organization

that owns it directly across um south of

the train station across uh Market

Street there um which owns the now

vacated vacant um and kind of properties

there south of Market Street. And um

we've we've had meetings with them. You

know, there's been some discussion about

what the federal highway uh will fund.

Um, so if you wanted to integrate a

transfer center into a new development,

that has to be just owned, I think, by

Pat or at least have like a permanent,

you know, master lease or something like

that. So, it's not quite as easy as

saying like, well, let's put it there or

let's get a somebody to build a building

that was on there.

>> That's my understanding as well. So, but

it it is it's it's something I've been

pretty firm on is that, you know, we in

coordination with our comprehensive

plan, in coordination with that TOD

study that Pendot themselves did in

2017,

um the transfer center really needs to

be near the train station to get the

benefits of the connectivity of, you

know, having people take the train

downtown and then hop on the or sorry,

take the bus downtown, hop on the train,

go to Philly, whatever, New York. Um,

and also because this is that would be

closer to where the city's major

employers are, the state, UPMC. Um, and

if it's all the way out where it is now,

it's just people aren't going to walk to

that. So, everybody's taking a taking a

bus to transfer there. It Yeah, I

measure I think I measured it on the

county's maps and it was about a half

mile to get to the train station. Again,

that's an unpleasant walk. Um, there's

you're right next to traffic, there's no

trees, so you're in the summer, you're

out in the sun. um you know no great

places to you know we just I think we

haven't found a viable final solution um

so and this project needs to go forward

the cat sort of uh needs to have a new

operations and maintenance facility the

money's there right now and I mean as as

you guys all know like when the money

comes in like that's the time to strike

here because it might not come back

again for a while and so um you know

we've just been you know kind of

stressing that throughout our whole that

like we understand this needs to go here

now because of the time frame and we

don't have a better option, but our

long-term goal needs to be that this

needs to be closer to the transportation

center. It needs to be closer to

downtown or the Yeah, the train station

and it needs to be closer to downtown.

Uh but in the meantime, we have to have

a transfer center somewhere. And so, um

this is going to go here. I don't know

what materials can be temporary like

i.e. five 10 year versus four year time

horizon. Um, but I've said the same

thing to them too is just like I hope

this is not all paved in, you know,

concrete marble and stuff like that.

That it is uh, you know, something that

is not overly expensive to put up and

therefore overly expensive to take down,

>> right? And and I guess that was my

concern that there might be an issue of

some cost that once it's it's built,

it's just kind of like, well, do we want

to spend the money yet again to put it

elsewhere? Um, and you know, just

speaking for me personally, I wish that

maybe the transfer center was being

being offered separately because like I

said, I have no problem with the system

um with the buildings being rebuilt,

they need to be, but it's just I'm just

concerned that once it's there, it's not

going. So,

>> no, I mean, again, I think the

applicants have we've made them aware.

They've been willing to meet and have

discussions and talk about the options.

it's just it hasn't panned out and and

maybe somebody comes forward, maybe

money becomes available to purchase a

property, you know, and again, like I

said, the it's not even just as simple

as like building it. It's about

ownership and that comes can become a

little bit tricky and that's not going

to happen right away. So, but in the

meantime, we do need these new

facilities. So, um, we felt that putting

that in this case report, uh, you know,

will if somebody needs to come back

later and say, "Hey, this is the city

council resolution approving this and it

says that they're supposed to find

this." So, that gives us the,

>> you know, that gives us the uh uh access

to, you know, changing this in the

future. Like, we're hoping that that's

going to be that is would you say access

or would you say leverage?

>> Leverage. Yeah, that probably be a

better word uh to change that in the

future. Yeah.

Thank you.

>> At the transit center you see the

transfer center.

>> Uh good questions for the architects and

the site civil but I'm thinking like 70

is uh

>> at a time with transfer

>> talking about the temp the transfer

center. Yeah.

>> No. Uh transfer center there's space for

uh

We see

>> because the functions removing what is

kind of tried to do make work on the

square since they built that in what 90.

>> Yeah.

>> And I remember when it hit a lot of

buses you don't see too much there

anymore.

>> It looks like from here 16 salt tubes.

>> Okay.

>> Yeah. But I mean even now you have the

bus back up on the second street

sometime and everybody's got to drive

around.

Yeah, clearly the current uh facility is

not sufficient to safely handle

all the circulation.

>> Just a thought came to me. Um

talking about other places you might

push too late now, but I I was thinking

just for the transfer center and the

other operations tell you where it is,

but uh have you thought about

Maybe you're not aware of it, but the

since I'm a member of the ABC brewery,

that to say I'm a for person, but that

closed down

uh about a month ago. Now, I was

thinking that building, they had the

parking lot behind it and also the

building where the office building

across the street,

I didn't know that would be an area that

if they're, you know, purchased be a

transfer center. They have enough space

for parking back behind the bus and it

wouldn't be that you wouldn't have to

cross Cameron Street.

I never thought I just thought about

that.

>> Mr. probably knows more of the the

properties that have been looked into in

that regard because I know uh Rich Bar

and others at Serta have been working

closely with the city on potential

options that would be you know agreeable

to the city.

>> Yeah. No, I mean there there are a

couple different options for the

properties along that 800 900 block of

Market Street there. Um again it was

more conceptual stuff and never I don't

know how far talks about purchasing

those properties ever got or what level

design

>> part of it is it's already what 70%

owned

>> uh was that those properties

>> yeah that were on I mean it's already

own property too.

>> Yes. Yes. Exactly. And they got it from

Goodwill which was you know amendable to

selling and moving out of there too. I

mean it was yeah it's it's a large a

large part of it is just the ease of

doing this because all of the property

owners and stakeholders in that site

were amendable to changing the city

obviously was like yeah we'll give up

our parks facility you buy us a new you

build us a new one which and like for a

temporary structure that makes total

sense but for a permanent structure it

kind of feels like an easy way out.

>> No like I mean the applicant can tell

you I haven't been

I haven't been given them the easy way

out on on on working through that. But

um yeah, I mean it's it's a challenge

and I know the there have been multiple

designs not even on the east side of the

tracks. There were talks about rerouting

back onto the ground level of the train

station where I guess buses used to run

down there. Uh there's a parking lot

just to the south of it uh where they

looked at it and um for various reasons

that just never that just never

happened. But we're continually looking

at it and at least from my perspective

as the plane director, this is one of

those high level things that anytime

anybody asks me about any of those

properties around there, um I make sure

to mention this first and foremost like

if you're looking to do a development

here, let's talk about how we can bring

the transfer center into that.

>> Right. And and there's plenty of other

transit agencies in the state that we

can look at as examples of doing just

that.

>> Probably agreement with Commissioner

Jordan.

Um, historically with the city, whenever

they do something temporarily,

>> that's it.

It'll never become

>> But, uh, it just sort of, you know,

again, with the post office, I don't

know what that that could be an

excellent transfer center, but you know,

whatever that building sits there

>> for what, $600,000,

>> I can't remember my head

>> or something like that.

I didn't forget about you commissioner

commission.

>> No good discussion. I I have no further

questions other than other than happy

discuss

>> just to please since there's no one in

the public

I can't ask public respond

just for the record

I get motion suggestion maybe Jordan you

want to make a motion with

added conditions.

>> Right. I guess a motion to approve with

the stated conditions and including the

um reference to adding the twoft grass

medium

along um the furniture Cameron Street.

>> Is there a second?

>> Second.

>> It's been moved and second for approval

of the condition.

condition. All those in favor state by

saying I