The Urban Design Commission on July 23 recommended approval to the Planning Commission for SPUD‑1737, a proposed pocket‑community development at 2944 SW Eighth Street. Staff recommended approval with three revisions to the submitted Master Design Statement: prohibit opaque perimeter site‑proof screening, require screening for commercial dumpsters if they are used, and revise the MDS to consistently reference that applicable elements will be subject to Certificate of Approval review by the Urban Design Commission.

Lara Griggs of the Planning Department introduced the site and described context: the parcel is vacant, directly across from the river trail, and adjacent to a mix of residential and vacant parcels. She said earlier proposals (a glamping/Airstream use) had not realized and that the current SPUD proposes neighborhood‑oriented, low‑impact uses such as live/work and small commercial units oriented to the trail. Griggs noted the site lacks curb, gutter and sidewalks and that the conceptual site plan did not consistently show setbacks; staff asked for setback clarifications and that the applicant revise plans to reflect SRODD (Scenic River Overlay Design District) expectations regarding building orientation to the street.

Applicant Mark (Johnson and Associates) said the project aims to create a pocket community for visitors to the fairgrounds and stockyards and to offer units that could be sold fee‑simple in the future or used as longer‑term rentals. He described limited commercial frontage on the north side intended for small trail‑oriented retail or services and said sidewalks and landscaping would be provided as the project develops.

Commissioners and staff discussed the proper treatment of screening in the river overlay rules; staff reiterated that the SRODD discourages perimeter screening between uses. Griggs said the development should instead integrate the site with adjacent uses and that required sidewalks and street trees would be part of the public‑improvement expectation. The commission voted to recommend approval to the Planning Commission with staff’s three revisions incorporated; the motion passed.

Clarifying details in the record include prior setback conversations (staff referenced 5‑foot and 10‑foot setback notes in early drafts), the project’s proximity to the trail and river access, and the applicant’s expressed intent that commercial uses be small, trail‑oriented and limited in square footage. The recommendation will be forwarded to Planning Commission at its hearing the following day.