[City Planning Commission]
[00:00:12]
THE REQUEST IS FOR AEX DISTRICT.
OUR PROPERTIES HAVE BEEN MARKED RIGHT SINGLE DISTRICT.
DISTRICT PURPOSE DISTRICT IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF SYDNEY STREET, NORTHEAST OF SECOND AVENUE.
UH, 7,000 EQUAL LOCATION MAP SHOWS THE PROPERTY IN CITY LIMIT, AERIAL MAP,
SO, UM, SO EVERYTHING SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY, UH, IS ZONED AN R FIVE A, SO DISTRICT WITH FIVE FIVE, THAT'S ALSO CIRCUIT 5 95 IMMEDIATELY.
THE LAW, UM, MIX OF, UM, SINGLE FAMILY USES AND TO SOUTHWEST HAS INTERNAL WORDS USE BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT, UH, ACROSS CAPE STREET IN THE EXISTING CHURCH USE.
AND THIS IS JUST KIND OF MAYBE ADD A LITTLE BIT FURTHER, UM, TO SHOW THE PREDOMINANT USES AND ZONING DISTRICTS.
UM, A LITTLE BIT PREDOMINANTLY, UM, SINGLE BANKING MEDIA, UM, STRIKE, CURRENTLY MARKED BY A SEVEN STREET.
THEY ARE REQUESTING A, A SERVICE TO ALLOW DUPLEX USE ON THE SPACE.
SEVEN FIVE PHOTOS ON SYDNEY STREET, MEANS SOUTH RIGHT INTO THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS ON THE LEFT SIDE OF SYDNEY STREET.
AND THEN A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN FROM SOUTHWEST, YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE SOME PROBLEMS. OTHER CONSTRUCTION.
SO THESE ARE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, UM, OF THE EXISTING R FIVE A SUB DISTRICT WITH THE PROPOSED DA SUBDISTRICT.
UH, ONE OF THE MAJOR DIFFERENCES HERE IS IN THE EXISTING R FIVE A THERE'S A 20 FOOT FRONT YARD, WHEREAS IN THE LIKE SIX CIRCUIT, 25 FOOT FRONT YARD.
UM, AND BECAUSE OF BLOCK BASED CONTINUITY IN OUR CODE, IF A BLOCK IS DIVIDED BY TWO ORON DISTRICT, THE ENTIRE BLOCK SUPPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF DISTRICT THE LATEST FRONT YARD REQUIREMENTS.
SO THIS WOULD MEAN, MEAN A DUPLEX LOT ON THIS BLOCK BASE WOULD MAKE THE RBI INPUT SUBJECT TO AN ADDITIONAL, UM, WHICH COULD CREATE CONFORMING STRUCTURES.
IT COULD ALSO COULD CREATE PROBLEMS IF ANY OF THESE RBI LOT TO DEVELOP OR REDEVELOP.
UM, ANOTHER BIG, UM, CHANGE BETWEEN THESE TWO.
THE, UH, MINIMUM LOCK SIZE FOR A DUPLEX DISTRICT IS 6,000 SQUARE FEET OR, UH, 3000 THE VOLUME UNIT.
WHEREAS YOU, OUR FIVE A FIVE SQUARE FEET, UH, ADDITIONAL SIX FEET IN HIGH, ADDITIONAL 15% IN LOCK COVERAGE.
AND THEN PRINCIPLE WITH PRESENT IN TERMS OF PERMITTED IS OBVIOUSLY TWO MONTHS.
UM, SO WITH THAT STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL, AND I WILL SAY IN THE CASE REPORT, UM, WE CAN KIND HIGHLIGHT, UM, SOME OF THE GOALS OF OBJECTIVE COMPREHENSIVE CLASSIFY.
YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO DO WHAT WE CAN MEETING RESIDENTIAL, HOWEVER WE SAY STRICTLY WITH THEM ZONING AND LAND VIEW.
UM, THERE'S SOME DEFINITE ISSUES, UH, WITH THIS REQUEST, WHICH IS LAWYER RECOMMENDATIONS THAT I CALL REQUEST.
REQUEST IF, FIRST OF ALL, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ONE ADVERSE IMPACT THAT I SEE, ONE ADVERSE IMPACT THAT I SEE IS THE POTENTIAL BLOCK BASED CONTINUITY ISSUE.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER YARD LOT SPACE OR ADVERSE IMPACTS FROM, NOT IN TERMS OF YARD LOT SPACE, I MEAN, THAT WE SAW OTHER THAN THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, LOCK COVERAGE HEIGHT, UM, OR LITTLE BIT MORE IN THE, JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND HOW STAFF KIND OF GOT THERE BECAUSE I MEAN, THIS IS, THIS WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE OF SORT OF, AS YOU SAID, MISSING MIDDLE HOUSE SETTING BEING INSERTED OF, RIGHT? SO THIS IS THE PD.
WOULD IT MAKE IT A DIFFERENCE TO STAFF IF IT WAS STRAIGHT DONING
[00:05:01]
VERSUS A PD IN STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION? UM, UH, I'LL ANSWER THAT PROCEDURALLY.NO, IT WOULDN'T BECAUSE I DON'T THINK YOU COULD SUPPORTIVE PD FOR, YOU KNOW, UH, 7,100 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE LOT, UM, IN AN AREA THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THIS ENTIRE AREA FOR THE MOST PLACE SEVEN R FIVE A, YOU KNOW, SO I DON'T THINK THAT'S A BIG SAVAGE FOR, AND LET ME, LET ME REPHRASE MY QUESTION JUST A MINUTE.
I MAY HAVE NOT PHRASED IT VERY WELL.
SO LET'S ASSUME THIS WORD JUST STRAIGHT R FIVE A AND NOT IN SOME ELSE IN TOWN THAT WAS OWNED R FIVE A, NOT IN A PE WITH THAT, THE IMPACTED STAFF'S ANALYSIS.
NO, ESPECIALLY IN THE PD FIVE, A LOT OF THE, UH, THEY'RE CALLED SUBDISTRICTS WITHIN THE PD, A LOT OF THE SUBDISTRICTS REALLY REFER ENTIRELY OR ALMOST ENTIRELY TO WHAT THAT DISTRICT IS IN BASE CODE.
SO WITH R FIVE A AND D, I THINK THERE'S LIKE ONE DIFFERENCE IN LIKE TERMINATED USES MAYBE.
UM, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, IT'S, IT'S BASICALLY SYNONYMOUS WITH POLITICS DISTRICT WOULD BE IN CHAPTER 51 PAGE AND IF THERE WERE NEIGHBOR COULD SUPPORT THAT HAVE CHANGED STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, THAT'S NEVER SOMETHING THAT INFLUENCES STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
WHAT IF IT WERE IN A CORNER LOT AS OPPOSED TO MID LOT? WOULD THAT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE? IT COULD STILL PRESENT THE BLACKFACE CONTINUITY ISSUE.
UM, HOWEVER WE, THIS CASE, UM, UH, WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT.
I WOULD SAY, UH, BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ESPECIALLY WITHIN PD 5 95, IF YOU'RE AT THE EDGE OF THE RESIDENTIAL AREA, YOU'RE PROBABLY NEAR ONE OF THE MAIN THOROUGHFARES THAT IS ZONE SOME FLAVOR AND COMMERCIAL.
UM, SO THAT MAY CHANGE THINGS.
UM, BUT LIKE I SAID, IT WOULD STILL PRESENT BLOCK-BASED COMPANY.
AND THEN JUST TO, I MEAN, JUST TO KIND OF SUM IT UP WITH DANNY EXISTING ZONING, OUR, OUR SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS FUNDS DISTRICTS IS JUST VERY DIFFICULT TO INSERT SINGLE DUPLEX WITHIN A, YOU KNOW, AN R BLANK A DISTRICT, RIGHT? YEAH.
SO FOR THESE
WE'VE ALSO HAD THIS ISSUE, THIS RECENT REQUEST FOR TH DISTRICT, WHICH IS ANOTHER SORT OF MEDIUM DENSITY KIND OF RESIDENTIAL.
UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, BACK TO THE PROCEDURAL STAFF, UM, OUR ANALYSIS AND STAFF IS CONFINED.
THE BASIS OF OUR RECOMMENDATION IS CONFINED SOME WAYS OF ZONING AND LAND USE.
UM, ANYTHING IN A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THEY WAS PLAN, AREA PLAN CAN SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, BUT IF YOU CAN'T BE THE BASIS OF THE RECOMMENDATION, BECAUSE REGULATORY FEE, JUST GUIDELINES, UM, SO THAT POTENTIALLY PRESENTS THE ISSUE AS WELL.
SORRY, I THINK I'M ALMOST DONE, BUT YOU, YOU KEEP COMING BACK TO THE BLOCK BASED CONTINUITY ISSUE.
LET'S JUST SET THAT ASIDE FOR THE MOMENT BECAUSE THAT SEEMS LIKE A CLEAR, YOU KNOW, CLEARLY HAVE ADVERSE EFFECTS ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
IS IT STAFF VIEW UNDER CURRENT CODE THAT SETTING A SITE BLOCK BASED CONTINUITY COULD KEEPS INSERTING A DUPLEX IN A BAR IN THE MIDDLE OF A BLOCK THAT'S FAR IS, IS NOT COMPATIBLE? YEAH, THAT GOES BACK TO ZONING AND LAND USE ONLY.
THERE'S, THERE'S STILL THAT ISSUE THERE THAT ALSO FORMS THE BASIS OF OUR DENIAL.
UM, BECAUSE WE, WE CAN'T REALLY RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A ZONING DISTRICT THAT'S REALLY INCOMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS AND PLANT USES, WHICH AT DUPLEX DISTRICT, UH, ENTIRELY SINGLE FAMILY AREA.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S SOME GRAY AREA THERE, THERE'S SOME SUBJECTIVITY, BUT GENERALLY WE WOULDN'T CONSIDER THAT COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING ZONING BECAUSE THE DUPLEX TEXTURE, EXTRA SINGLE FAMILY PERMANENT.
WHAT, WHAT WOULD THOSE ADVERSE IMPACTS BE? UH, I HAVE LOTS OF OPINIONS ABOUT THAT.
I'LL TRY TO JUST ANSWER THEM AS SNAP.
SO, SO OUR TEAM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE INCREMENTAL, WE'RE CASE BY CASE.
WE DO CONSIDER LARGER, LARGER GOALS AND LARGER ISSUES, BUT WE HAVE TO DO SO IN CASE BY CASE FASHION.
UM, OUR CODE HAS NOT RECEIVED A MAJOR UPDATE SINCE 1987 MM-HMM.
UH, IT'S ALSO POSSIBLE THAT, UM, DEMANDS ON HOUSING AND, AND WHAT KIND OF HOUSING PEOPLE WANNA LIVE IN, WHAT KIND OF HOUSING PEOPLE CAN AFFORD.
UM, ALL OF THOSE THINGS HAVE CHANGED SINCE, SINCE 1987.
UM, I DON'T SEE HOW THEY COULD COULD'VE, UM, HOWEVER, WE'RE STILL DEALING WITH A, WITH A CODE THAT IS KIND OF REINFORCING VALUES AND LEADS AND EVERYTHING FROM, FROM SEVERAL DECADES AGO.
SO THERE'S A, THERE'S SORT OF A ATTENTION THERE I GUESS YOU COULD SAY.
UH, THE PART ALSO OF, UH, YOUR DENIAL IS THAT EVEN THOUGH YOU SHOWED THE OVERHEAD
[00:10:01]
VIEW OF DIFFERENT HOUSING, BUT THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION IS, IS REALLY A SHORT STREET ALSO AND THAT IT DOESN'T, AND IT DOES, IT DOESN'T GO STRAIGHT THROUGH.IT'S NOT ON A STRAIGHT THROUGHWAY TOWARDS THE OTHER PARTS CITY.
IT'S A, AND IT HAS ON THE CURB RIGHT AFTER IT GOES TO THE NEXT STREET, BUT IT'S NOT A, UM, EVEN THOUGH HE HAD YOUR OLD GAVE A OVERVIEW, IT WASN'T A STREET THAT WAS PARTICULARLY GONE.
SO THE LINCOLN STREETS OR TRAFFIC, AND WOULD IT BE A HUGE CONCERN, UM, IF THERE WERE TRAFFIC CONCERNS OR TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING CONCERNS THAT WOULD COME FROM MR. NAVARRE? UM, I DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY COMMENT SPRING PANEL ON THIS CASE DURING SECOND.
UM, UH, WELL, THE AFFIDAVIT TO SPEAK, HE DIDN'T GIVE YOU UNDERSTANDING OF THE SIDE.
THINK THE PRIMARY REASON TO REQUEST A NEW BLOOD DISTRICT IS TO, HE HAVE TWO BLOOD SKEWS ON THE PROPERTY RATHER THAN SINGLE REASON OF THE YEAH, WE MUCH, WHATEVER'S INCLUDED THE APPLICATION AND THE LAND USE STATEMENT.
YEAH, I CAN KEEP, FIRST ONE IS THIS, ALTHOUGH I READ THIS AND I READ THE CODE, WE, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE BLOCK FORM ABOUT SESSION.
I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU SOMETHING ABOUT THAT.
DO YOU NEED THE INTENT OF THE CODE WAS TO SAY THAT IF YOU PUT UP ONE BUILDING THAT HAS 25 SETBACKS, IT IS MEANT TO CAUSE ALL THE OTHER BUILDINGS ON THE BLOCK TO BE DONE CONFORMING, BECAUSE THAT WOULD SEEM A LITTLE D BECAUSE MAYBE YOU COULD HAVE ON THE CORNER, I'LL JUST USE AN EXAMPLE.
IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, YOU COULD POSSIBLY HAVE ONE OF THOSE LIGHT OFFICE SOMETHING, I DUNNO HOW WE PUTTING SOMETHING THERE.
ANYBODY HAVE A 25 FOOT? THE IDEA WE HAVE CODE WAS PUT TOGETHER TO MAKE THE REST OF THE LOTS NONCONFORMING JUST DOESN'T BRING TRUE TO ME.
SO I'LL GIVE YOU A SHORT ANSWER.
I HAVE A LONGER ANSWER TO THE, THAT I'M USING YOUR QUESTIONS JUST EXPOUND ON SOMETHING.
BUT, UH, THE SHORT ANSWER IS, UH, I BELIEVE THE INTENT OF THAT BLOCK BASED CONTINUITY REQUIREMENT IS, UM, TO PROTECT SINGLE FAMILY USES AND DISTRICTS.
UM, SO LET'S SAY THERE IS A, SOME SORT OF COMMERCIAL DISTRICT OR SOME OTHER TYPE OF DISTRICT THAT HAS LESS OF A FRONT YARD THAN, UM, OTHER SINGLE FAMILY NEEDS MOVE ALONG A BLOCK PHASE.
UM, I BELIEVE THE INTENT IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT SORT OF NON-CONFORMING VIEW USE FOR NOT MIXING RIGHT, IN TERMS OF VISUALLY THE, THE, UH, I GUESS THE INTEGRITY, NOT THE DISCONTINUE WITH ENEMIES.
UM, THE LONGER ANSWER KIND OF GOES BACK TO MY OTHER EX FOUNDING ON, YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT OUR CODE WAS LAST MAJOR WE UPDATED IN 1987.
UM, IT'S REALLY LEFT OVER FROM A TIME THAT EXTENDS PROBABLY BACK TO LIKE THIS CENTURY 1960S, UH, BEFORE PERIOD, UM, WHERE THE INTENT AND DESIRE OF ZONING WAS TO SEPARATE OUT MORE USES AND PROTECT USES WITHIN THOSE SEPARATE AREAS.
UM, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES BEING AT THE TOP OF THAT PRIORITY LIST.
UM, AND I THINK OUR PROPOSED STILL REINFORC THE LOT OF, A LOT OF VALUES THAT SINGLE FAMILY DETECTIONS ARE BEING, THE USE THAT NEEDS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT USE IS THE USE THAT NEEDS TO BE PROTECTED THE MOST.
UM, THERE'S FURTHER, THERE'S, THERE'S SOME EXPECTATIONS WHY THOSE STORIES WERE MADE ALL THOSE DECADES AGO BECAUSE, UM, PLANNING IS REALLY HUNDREDS OR 19 HUNDREDS WHEN URBAN AREAS WERE SUPER CROWDED, SUPER OVERCROWDED IN A REALLY POOR PUBLIC HEALTH CONDITION, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF.
UM, COMING OUT OF THAT TIME THAT THIS WAS TO SEPARATE OUT FOLKS A LITTLE BIT MORE AND ERADICATE SOME OF THE, THERE'S GOOD AND BAD THINGS THAT, UM, SO I THINK THAT'S THE VALUES THAT WERE BEING REINFORCED AT THAT TIME OF THE CODE.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THOSE KINDS OF THINGS WERE SIMILAR NOW OF 2022.
[00:15:01]
KNOW, MAYBE IT'S TO LOOK AT, WELL, SOMETHING TO THAT IS A FOLLOW UP, WHICH, AND I'M GONNA ASK YOU DO THIS.SO WOULDN'T YOU SAY THOUGH THAT HISTORICALLY ONE DIFFERENCE IN DUPLEXES I TALKED ABOUT HISTORICALLY AND SINGLE MAINLY, MOSTLY DUPLEXES FROM OFTEN ALREADY OUT ONE TIME, SO IT WAS CONSIDERED MORE OF A COMMERCIAL CITY COMMERCIAL, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE WHO WOULD LIVE THE OTHER AND THEREFORE THEY LOOKED IN ON THE PERIPHERIES AREAS HISTORICALLY.
IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, MORE OR LESS.
SO, AND MY FOLLOW UP TO THAT AND ALMOST THROUGH, UH, IS THIS, UH, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT THE FACT THAT THIS HAS SINGLE FAMILY ON FOUR SIDES, AS YOU CALL THIS A DUPLEX DISTRICT, A ONE LOT, HOW DO YOU CALL ONE MONTH A DISTRICT FOR ONE? I MEAN, ISN'T THAT SORT OF A, NOT C WELL, IT'S PLANNING TERMINOLOGY, BUT YEAH, YOU RING A GOOD ONE.
BUT YOU USE THE WORD DISTRICT.
THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE FOR AN ENTIRE AREA THAT SAYS SPOTS.
COMMISSION JUST WANTED, OKAY, SO THAT SENSE, YEAH, THAT'S USE THAT EXCUSE ONLY A COURT EXCUSE TAKING AWAY THE DONATIONS.
SO WE'RE TALKING SET BLOCK IS CONTINUING TALKS ABOUT THE SETBACK OF WHERE THE BUILDING IS DETAILED.
SO, OKAY, BECAUSE YOU SAID WHEN THE BUILDING IS BUILT, BUT THAT'S, YOU CAN PUT IT WAY IN THE BACK, BUT IT AFFECT THE OTHERS.
BUT WHAT AFFECTS THE OTHERS IS THAT IMAGINARY LINE COMMISSION HERBER.
UM, SO THE CONTINU LINE, THE BLOCK FACE COMING FROM PARK AREA, THE WAY THAT WE BUILT, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DEVELOPMENT, SUPPOSED TO WALK OUT YOUR PORTION SO THAT THE WHITE BE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS, UM, SOMETIMES DISTANT, BUT YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO LOOK AROUND ON THE PORCH TO GET TO ANOTHER PORCH.
AND THAT'S WHAT I ENVISION FOR THIS AREA.
AND THEY TICKET, THAT'S WHAT I SEE IN PORTUGAL CLIFF, UM, THAT NEIGHBORLY FEEL WHERE YOU COME OUT TO YOUR PORCH AND YOU CAN COMMUNICATE WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS.
UM, HAVING A, HAVE A NEIGHBOR COMING FROM NEW ORLEANS WHERE SINGLE FAMILY ARE ALL NEXT TO DUPLEXES A LOT, UM, WE WALKED OUT ON OUR PORCHES STILL, I'M STILL ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH ONE ANOTHER.
SO HOW CAN WE AFFECT IS ONLY MAYBE THREE PEOPLE.
I, I READ THREE PEOPLE THAT CHANGED POLICY, BUT UM, HOW CAN WE EFFECTIVELY SAY, OKAY, YOU CAN PUT A SINGLE LOT THERE, BUT IT NEEDS TO ADDRESS THAT IMAGINARY THAT'S TRYING THAT, UH, BLOCK FACE COMPANY ARE WIND INSTEAD THAT ALL OF THOSE PHONES ARE IMPACT THE SAME PLACE.
UM, R FIVE A IS THE, UH, SINGLE PEN WE HAVE WITH THE SMALLEST SLOT SIZE, WHICH IS, THIS IS FIVE.
IT'S PROBABLY THINK A DIFFERENT, THE SMALLEST SINGLE SIZE WE HAVE STILL FIVE S SQUARE VENUS, SO THAT'S PRETTY BIG.
UM, IF THIS WAS ON A BLOCK FACE THAT WAS ZONED R 75, UM, THE FRONT SETBACK THERE IS 25 FEET, SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE THIS ISSUE.
SO IT'S KIND OF A, A WEIRD LITTLE, LITTLE PER BUFFER I GUESS, CODE THAT, UM, IS AS I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS IN THE BLOCK FACE BUTTON BE NOT GOING TO BE.
SO WITH THAT IT SAID THAT THE APPLICANT COULDN'T JUST ADDRESS PEOPLE BUILDING IN'T ADDRESS THE SINGLE FAMILY 20 FOOT.
IS IT REQUIRED THAT HE DOES 25? SO BECAUSE THIS IS A GENERAL CHANGE TO A BASE, THERE HAVEN'T BEEN ANY DEVIATIONS TO WHAT, LIKE COMMISSIONER, MAYBE YOU HAVE TO DO ED OR SOMETHING IN ORDER TO CUSTOMIZE.
UM, IN, IN MAKING YOUR RECOMMENDATION, PAT THAT, DID YOU ALSO CONSIDER THE STATE, UH, HISTORY AREA PLAN AND, AND AND, AND WHAT THE VISION WAS FOR THAT AREA ALSO? SO JUST THE PD 5 95, WHICH WE, WHICH IS IN THE PROCESS OF, UH, THAT ALSO HAS HAD EXTENSIVE A TWO YEAR AREA PLAN, A TWO YEAR AREA PLAN, BUT, UM, SHE COULD SET UP FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
BUT DID YOU INCLUDE THAT THAT AREA HAD A PLAIN ALSO
[00:20:01]
INSIDE AND THAT THAT AREA WAS HISTORICALLY, UH, SINGLE FAMILY AREA? RIGHT.SO I, AGAIN, I WILL JUST, THERE WAS BEHIND THAT, UM, AREAS BASIS OF A RECOMMENDATION, BUT THEY CAN'T SUPPORT IT.
UM, IN THIS CASE, YOU GUYS HAVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE YOUR ENGINEERING PLAN.
I, I RECOMMEND IT'S A PRETTY GOOD PLAN, UM, SAYING MAKING SURE SOMETHING'S GOING ON WITH AND ALSO, UM, SORRY, I DID, DID DID YOU ALL, SO IN, IN THE PROCESS OF ACTING FOR THIS, UH, DESIGN CHANGE, YOU ALL DID NOT REQUIRE FOR THEM TO SUBMIT ANY, UM, UM, ANY PLANS? NO, THAT WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED OF THE GENERALISM MAY CHANGE.
UM, WHY WOULD THEY BE IF, CAUSE OF THE TYPE OF DEFECT IN THE WAY THAT THE GENERALISM MAY CHANGE IS TO CONSIDER IF A BASIS CODE EVIDENCE OF, OF ANY CHANGE WITH DEVIATION, THIS MEETING STANDARD THAT'S APPROPRIATE OR, UM, SO THERE WOULDN BE ANY NEED TO SUBMIT SOME SORT OF HIGHPOINT MR. DISTRICT APPROPRIATE.
WE WOULDN'T REALLY NEED TO SEE A PLAN UNLESS WE REQUEST FOR S P OR SO, WHATEVER.
SO WE BE SO Z THE BE ABLE TO EVEN SEE ANY TYPE OF WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, WHAT THE POSSIBILITY.
WE DO HAVE APPLICANTS THAT ELEVATION PLANS AND RENDERINGS AND THINGS, UM, FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES, BUT THEY'RE JUST OBJECTION.
THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE NOT TIED TO A REQUEST IN THE SAME WAY.
THEY CAN BE THE PD OR, BUT WE COULDN'T SUBMIT THEIR YES, THEY, THEY, YEAH, THEY CAN BE CHAIR DISTRIBUTED TO COMMISSION.
BE SURE THE PUBLIC THEY CAN BE STAFFED.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF THE CASE IS APPROVED, JANE IS UNDER THAT PROBABLY THE PLAN.
UH, IF YOU DO WANT TO SHARE THEM, THE SCENE TO FIRST CIRCULATE.
UM, AND THEN BACK TO THE HATCH STATION AREA PLAYING.
UM, THIS IS THE LAND USE CONCEPTUAL PLAN.
SO AGAIN, THIS IS NOT HAS NO REGULATORY TEAM, IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, RECOMMENDATION, BUT THE REMAINS PART OF THIS PLAN.
I, I THINK WE'RE DOWN HERE SOMEWHERE, UM, OFF OF SECTION AVENUE DOESN'T MEETING AS RE OKAY.
WHICH THAT LAND, WENDY STARTED THIS CONCEPT PRIMARILY FOR HAVE HERE, UH, YOU GO RIGHT BACK, THE WHOLE, WE'LL PICK THAT RIGHT BACK UP.
WHEN LEFT OFF, WE'LL GET OFF THE RECORD AND WE'LL COME RIGHT BACK.
UM, SO THIS ONE WAS REALLY, HE TRIED TO FOCUS, THESE ARE JUST THE UPDATES ARE THE QUESTIONS WE RECEIVED AND OUR ANSWERS TO THEM.
AND UM, AND YOU KNOW, SO THAT WENT PRETTY WELL.
SO STAFF HAS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATIONS OF GOK.
AND WE KIND PULLED OUT
[00:25:01]
LIKE I'LL BE WORDY AND LIKE TRY TO EXPLAIN EVERYTHING FULLY AND COMPREHENSIVELY, COMPLETELY ABOUT STAFF REPORTS.AND THEN IN MY BRIEFING IT'S LIKE THE BARE METAPHOR.
LIKE, DO YOU HEAR THE HIGH QUESTION? CAUSE YOU KNOW, LIKE THE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO PARTY YOU, THEY'RE GONNA READ COMMISSIONERS.
UH, FY FOR STAFF, THERE'S A LIVE MICROPHONE SOMEWHERE.
OTHER PEOPLE WE'RE HEARING SOME, SOME STUFF ONLINE AND THEY'LL MAINLY LIKE, YOU KNOW, IT'LL ALL KIND OF COME OUT BECAUSE THE PEOPLE THEIR HOMEWORK, BUT LAURIE WENT OVER IT ALL.
MS. MAYE, WE CAN, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
CAN YOU INTERRUPT MS. PASINA, CAN YOU PLEASE START US OFF WITH A ORAL CALL? YES, SIR.
DISTRICT ONE, ABSENT DISTRICT TWO PRESENT.
PRESENT DISTRICT FOUR? WE ARE HERE.
DISTRICT FIVE, PRESENT DISTRICT SIX.
PRESENT DISTRICT SEVEN, PRESENT.
DISTRICT EIGHT, PRESENT DISTRICT NINE.
GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
IT IS 12:52 PM WELCOME TO, UH, THE DOW CITY PLAIN COMMISSION.
UH, WE'RE GONNA START RIGHT BACK OFF WHERE WE LEFT OFF ON THE BRIEFING, BUT BEFORE WE DO A COUPLE OF QUICK ANNOUNCEMENTS, UH, OUR SPEAKER GUIDELINES AS EACH SPEAKER WILL RECEIVE THREE MINUTES ON CASES WHERE WE HAVE OPPOSITION PER OUR RULES, UH, THE APPLICANT WILL RECEIVE A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UM, I WILL PLEASE ASK ALL SPEAKERS TO, UH, BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, MS. PASINA WILL KEEP TIME.
SHE WOULD LET YOU KNOW WHERE YOUR TIME IS UP.
WE WILL HAVE SOME SPEAKERS ONLINE.
I WILL JUST PLEASE, UH, LET OUR FOLKS ONLINE KNOW THAT YOU, UH, STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT WE MUST BE ABLE TO SEE YOU IN ORDER TO HEAR FROM YOU.
MAKE SURE THAT YOUR CAMERA'S ON.
AND THEN AFTER YOU MAKE YOUR COMMENTS, PLEASE MAKE SURE TO STAY ONLINE AS THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
UH, FOR OUR VISITORS HERE WITH US TODAY, WE HAVE THESE LITTLE YELLOW CARDS DOWN HERE AT THE TABLE, AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT.
PLEASE MAKE SURE AT SOME POINT TODAY TO COME DOWN AND FILL ONE OF THESE, YOU CAN JUST LEAVE 'EM RIGHT THERE ON THE, ON THE TABLE.
WE'D LOVE TO HAVE A RECORD OF YOUR VISIT WITH US HERE TODAY.
UH, LASTLY, UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE, THE BRIEFING OF THE PLANE COMMISSION IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
UH, WE ARE GOING BACK TO WHERE WE, WE USED TO BRIEF BEFORE COVID, WHICH IS IN THE BRIEFING ROOM IN THE BACK.
YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO COME BACK THERE, UH, MOVING FORWARD DURING THE BRIEFING.
UH, IT IS A TIME FOR QUESTIONS FROM, UH, COMMISSIONERS TO STAFF.
WE DON'T TAKE PUBLIC INPUT AT THAT POINT, BUT THEY ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME BACK WITH THAT.
WE'LL GO BACK TO, UH, MR. MULKEY, WE HAD A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS ON, ON, UH, THE CASE IN D SIX.
SEVEN, UH, COMMISSIONER TREADWAY HAD, UH, A QUESTION.
MY QUESTION IS, SINCE WE'VE BEEN ADDRESSING THE SETBACK ISSUE WITH THE ZONING AROUND THIS REQUEST BEING A 20 FOOT SETBACK AND THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST BEING FOR A 25 SETBACK, I JUST WANTED TO ASK STAFF, WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT HAVING A 20 FOOT SETBACK OR IS THAT, WAS THAT NOT PART OF THE EQUATION? BECAUSE THE DUPLEX DISTRICT IS 25? YEAH, SO FOR A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE REQUEST LIKE THIS, IT WOULD JUST BE THE DUPLEX DISTRICT AS IT'S CODIFIED IN CHAPTER 51 A, WE COULDN'T MODIFY, UM, THAT SETBACK.
AND SO AS PART OF OUR DECISION, CAN WE NOT ADD SORT OF A RESTRICTION THAT IT COULD ONLY BE 20 FEET BACK? OR IS THAT NOT PERMISSIBLE BECAUSE IT IS JUST A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE? YOU COULD, UM, WELL, THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS, UM, GIVING THEMSELVES A 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK.
HOWEVER, THAT WOULD NOT GET AROUND THE BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY ISSUE, I BELIEVE, CUZ IT, THE BASE DISTRICT WOULD STILL BE DUPLEX.
COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, THEY, IF AN APPLICANT DECIDED TO DEEDS RESTRICT IT, THEY COULD PUSH IT FURTHER BACK.
BUT THE BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY ISSUE WOULD STILL EXIST BECAUSE IT HAS TO DO WITH THE SETBACK, THE INVISIBLE LINE THAT EXISTS FOR THE DUPLEX DISTRICTS.
[00:30:01]
THAT.SO, AND THE APPLICANT COULD CHOOSE TO DEEDS RESTRICT IT TO MAKE IT SO THAT WHATEVER THEY DECIDE, WHATEVER DUPLEX THEY DECIDE TO BUILD IS ON THE SAME LINE AS THE R FIVE A SETBACK.
BUT BECAUSE THE DUPLEX DISTRICT HAS A SMALLER SETBACK, THAT SETBACK WOULD GOVERN THE REST OF THE BLOCK.
YEAH, SO, SO, SO, UH, DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE A WAY THAT, UM, AN APPLICANT CAN VOLUNTEER ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS ON THEIR PROPERTY THAT ARE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN WHAT BASE CODE WOULD REQUIRE.
HOWEVER, THAT DOES NOT CHANGE, UM, THE EFFECT OF THAT BASE DISTRICT ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
BA BASICALLY WHAT THAT MEANS IS YOU CAN'T USE DEED RESTRICTIONS TO GET AROUND A BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY, THAT REQUIREMENT THAT WOULD APPLY OTHERWISE.
SO I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT YOU COULD DEED RESTRICT THIS PARTICULAR ONE, BUT BECAUSE THE GENERAL ZONING IS 25, THEN NOW THAT 25 WOULD APPLY TO THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES, EVEN THOUGH THIS ONE PARTICULAR PROPERTY AGREED TO DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, THANK YOU MR. MULKEY.
UH, JOHN LEWIS SOCIAL JUSTICE ACADEMY.
I HAVEN'T LOGGED IN AND I CAN SHARE MY SCREEN IF YOU, I JUST NEED TO BE ABLE TO GET TO MY PRESENTATION IS THE THING.
CAN I USE THAT RIGHT HERE? HE'S GONNA BRING ME HIS
[00:38:09]
GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.UM, CASE NUMBER SIX IS Z 2 23 DASH 1 0 7.
THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A PUBLIC SCHOOL OTHER THAN AN OPEN ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL ON PROPERTY ZONED IN R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST LINE OF EAST EAST BOULEVARD BETWEEN KELLOGG AVENUE AND SUNNYVALE STREET.
PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 20.8 ACRES.
IT'S LOCATED IN DISTRICT FOUR, UH, SHOWING YOU AN AERIAL MAP.
UM, BASICALLY, UH, THE SCHOOL SITE IS OUTLINED IN BLUE, PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY SURROUNDING.
HOWEVER, UM, THERE IS, UM, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF ISOLATED MULTI-FAMILY TWO A DISTRICTS, UH, TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CHURCHES IN THE AREA.
THERE'S A LIBRARY ACROSS THE STREET WITHIN A PD.
UM, AND THERE IS ANOTHER PUBLIC SCHOOL TO THE SOUTHWEST OF THE SITE, UM, DOWN EAST KEYS BOULEVARD.
SO THIS LITTLE STRIP RIGHT HERE OF PD 6 71, LIKE I SAID, THERE'S A PUBLIC LIBRARY ACROSS EAST KEYS BOULEVARD AND ONE OF THE, UH, UNDEVELOPED MULTI-FAMILY TWO A PROPERTIES IS ADJACENT TO THAT.
[00:40:01]
ALSO A, A LARGE UNDEVELOPED PORTION OF THAT PROPERTY TO THE EAST.AND THEN ALSO A LARGE SURFACE PARKING LOT THAT SERVES THE PUBLIC LIBRARY.
THE SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS ARE MAINLY R 75 A.
HOWEVER, TO THE SOUTH THERE IS AN R FIVE A DISTRICT, UM, WHICH IS THE SAME AS THE SUBJECT SITE.
UH, THE SCHOOL THAT IS THERE CURRENTLY IS OOW HOMES ACADEMY.
IT'S I BELIEVE A HUMANITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS ACADEMY.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO CONSTRUCT THE NEW SCHOOL, UM, WHICH WILL BE, UH, RENAMED JOHN LEWIS SOCIAL JUSTICE ACADEMY.
AND THEN THEY WILL DEMOLISH THE EXISTING SCHOOL.
UM, AND, UH, THE ATHLETIC FIELDS FOR THAT NEW SCHOOL WILL BE BASICALLY IN THE GENERAL AREA WHERE THE CURRENT SCHOOL IS LOCATED.
UM, THIS IS, UH, JUST A REPEAT OF SOMETHING THAT'S IN THE CASE REPORT.
UM, THE CHART SHOWING YOU THE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO THE R FIVE A DISTRICT AND THEN SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS PROPOSED SCHOOL USE AT THIS PARTICULAR SITE.
UM, THERE ISN'T A GREAT DEAL OF CHANGE IN TERMS OF, UH, SETBACKS.
UM, THERE ARE SOME OTHER DISTRICTS ON THIS PARTICULAR BLOCK WITH THIS SCHOOL.
UM, BUT THOSE ARE, UH, THOSE ARE SIDE YARDS FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT.
SO WE DON'T HAVE THE SAME RESTRICTION IN TERMS OF, UH, FRONT YARD SETBACK CONTINUITY THAT WOULD NORMALLY APPLY.
I'M JUST GONNA TAKE YOU AROUND THE SITE.
THIS IS, UH, THE SITE FROM EAST KEITH BOULEVARD, UM, LOOKING EAST.
AND THEN I'M GONNA WORK MY WAY AROUND COUNTERCLOCKWISE.
UH, THIS IS AN EXISTING, UH, ENTRY DRIVE WHERE THE SERVICE AREA IS.
THIS AREA RIGHT HERE IS WHERE, UH, THERE'S GOING TO BE ATHLETIC FIELDS ON THE PROPERTY, BASEBALL, SOFTBALL, FOOTBALL.
UM, AND THEN I'M GONNA WORK MY WAY, LIKE I SAID, CLOCK COUNTERCLOCKWISE, START TO SEE SOME OF THE SINGLE FAMILY.
UM, THIS IS, THIS IS WHAT I WAS, UH, REFERRING TO THE SINGLE FAMILY THAT IS LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS ACTUALLY A SIDE YARD THAT'S FACING ON EAST KEYS BOULEVARD.
AND THEN THIS IS THE SAME SINGLE FAMILY, UH, LOT FROM THE, THE FRONT LOOKING AT THE, UH, UNDEVELOPED MULTI-FAMILY TWO A ACROSS EAST KEITH BOULEVARD.
YOU CAN SEE THE LIBRARY IN THE BACKGROUND AND THEN DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE EXISTING, UH, MAIN ENTRY OF THE, OF THE SCHOOL.
UM, THERE'S A SINGLE FAMILY BACK BEHIND IN THE R FIVE A, SEE THE UNDEVELOPED MULTI-FAMILY LOT TO THE RIGHT AND THE LIBRARY TO THE LEFT.
AND THEN LOOKING AT THE LIBRARY, UH, WORKING AWAY DOWN THE OTHER SIDE OF, OR THE OTHER END OF EAST KEYS BOULEVARD.
THIS IS LOOKING BACK TOWARDS THE DIRECTION OF THE CAMPUS.
THIS IS THE LARGE SURFACE LOT THAT SERVES THE PUBLIC LIBRARY.
ANOTHER, ANOTHER UNDEVELOPED, UH, PORTION OF PROPERTY ACROSS FROM THE SITE.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THE, UH, ELECTRICAL TOWER.
THIS IS ACTUALLY, THERE'S A, A UTILITY EASEMENT, A ENCORE PROPERTY THAT RUNS ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF THE CAMPUS SITE LOOKING TOWARDS, UH, SUNNYVALE STREET.
AND THEN THIS IS, THIS IS THE SAME SIDE OF THE STREET AS THE CAMPUS.
THE CAMPUS IS ON THE LEFT OF THIS PHOTO, THE SINGLE FAMILY TO THE RIGHT.
AND THEN THIS IS THE UTILITY EASEMENT, THE ENCORE PROPERTY THAT RUNS THROUGH, THERE'S A PUBLIC PATHWAY THAT RUNS THROUGH THERE.
THEN LOOKING BACK TOWARDS THE CAMPUS, THIS IS A LOCATION OF THE, UH, EXISTING ATHLETIC FIELDS.
THEY'RE KIND OF HARD TO SEE BEHIND THE PARKING THERE, BUT THERE ARE SOME ATHLETIC FIELDS THERE.
AND THEN LOOKING BACK TOWARDS THE CAMPUS, AGAIN, THE OTHER EXISTING CURB CUT AND THEN THE EXISTING ENTRY, BASICALLY RIGHT ACROSS FROM WHERE THE LIBRARY IS.
SO THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN CAN SEE, UH, THE CAMPUS OR THE, THE NEW BUILDING WILL BE BUILT ON THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, STUDENTS WILL CONTINUE TO ATTEND CLASSES IN THE EXISTING BUILDING, AND THEN WHEN THEY MOVED TO THE NEW CAMPUS OR TO THE NEW BUILDING, UM, THAT EXISTING BUILDING WILL BE DEMOLISHED.
AND THEN THEY WILL DEVELOP THE REMAINDER OF THE SITE WITH THE ATHLETIC FIELDS.
AND THE PARKING THAT YOU SEE HERE.
[00:45:03]
UM, THIS IS PROBABLY GONNA BE HARD TO SEE, BUT I'M JUST KIND OF, I'M NOT REALLY SURE IF YOU'LL BE ABLE TO MAKE THIS OUT VERY WELL, BUT I'M GONNA GIVE IT A TRY.YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING CAMPUS SHOWING OVER HERE ON THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.
AND THEN WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN BLUE IS THE FOOTPRINT OF THE NEW CAMPUS OVER TO THE EAST AND SOME PAVING HERE IN THE MIDDLE AND THE FRONT AND THE EAST SIDE.
AND THEN ATHLETIC FIELDS WHERE THE EXISTING CAMPUS IS.
UH, SO THE APPLICANT PROVIDED SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE EXISTING, UH, TRAFFIC OPERATIONS FOR THE, THE EXISTING SCHOOL.
UM, AND, AND AS I MENTIONED IN THE CASE REPORT, UH, PREDOMINANTLY RIGHT NOW THE QUEUING AND STUDENT DROP OFF AND PICK UP OCCUR ON THE PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY.
BOTH SIDES OF EAST EAST BOULEVARD APPARENTLY GET PRETTY BACKED UP.
UM, THERE IS SOME STUDENT DROP OFF AND PICK UP THAT HAPPENS IN THE LIBRARY LOT ACROSS THE WAY.
AND THEN IN SOME OF THE, THE SIDE STREETS IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS ALSO, UM, COLLECTS SOME OF THAT TRAFFIC AND PARKING DURING THE, THE PEAK TIMES FOR DROP OFF AND PICKUP.
SO THIS IS EXISTING CONDITION.
UM, UM, BUT WITH THE NEW DEVELOPMENT, UM, ALL OF THE QUEUING IS PROPOSED TO BE TAKING PLACE ON THE, UH, SCHOOL SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, NOT IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, AND IT IS SPECIFIED ALSO THAT THE, THE, THE, THERE'S NO QUEUING, THERE'S NO PARKING, THERE'S NO DROP OFF AND PICKUP ON THE RIGHTS OF WAY OR AT THE, UH, SURFACE LOT FOR THE LIBRARY ACROSS THE STREET.
SO EVERYTHING IS CONTAINED WITHIN THE CAMPUS.
UM, AND I HAVE THIS JUST FOR REFERENCE IN CASE WE NEED IT, BUT THIS IS, THERE'S AN APPENDIX TO THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN.
THIS IS IN THE CASE REPORT AS WELL, UM, SHOWING SOME SIGNAGE, UM, THAT'S GONNA BE PROPOSED, BUT THIS IS REALLY GONNA GET WORKED OUT MORE AT PERMITTING AND, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE SITE PLAN, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND CONDITIONS AS SHOWN IN THE DOCKET.
COMMISSIONER TREADWAY QUESTIONS.
I LOVE THAT THE QUEUING CAN HAPPEN ON THE PROPERTY.
THAT IS IDEAL WHENEVER IT CAN BE MADE TO HAPPEN.
SO I DID, DID NOT REALIZE THAT THERE WAS A PUBLIC LOT BASICALLY ACROSS IN CONNECTION WITH THE LIBRARY.
SO MY QUESTION IS GONNA RELATE TO PARKING MM-HMM.
SO I READ IN THE REPORT THAT 105 SPACES ARE REQUIRED, BUT 183 ARE PROPOSED.
SO CAN YOU JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHY ALL THIS PARKING IS NEEDED, ESPECIALLY GIVEN YOU'VE GOT OVERFLOW ACROSS THE STREET? SO MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE APPLICANT, UH, CUZ STAFF ASKED THIS EXACT QUESTION, AND IT IS, YOU'LL NOTICE IN THAT SECTION OF THE CASE REPORT THAT THAT IS REALLY THE ONLY AREA WHERE STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED BECAUSE WE WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE LESS PAVEMENT AND POSSIBLY SHARING OF THE, THE LOT ACROSS THE STREET.
UM, THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THAT THE REASON FOR THE OVERFLOW PARKING HAS TO DO WITH SPECIAL EVENT PARKING.
UM, BUT SO, BUT STAFF WOULD AGAIN RECOMMEND THAT YOU LOOK INTO A SHARING AGREEMENT WITH THE PUBLIC LIBRARY ACROSS THE STREET.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN REQUIRE, UM, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CERTAINLY WOULD RECOMMEND.
UM, AND WE ALSO, UH, WE ALSO ASK THEM TO LOOK INTO OTHER WAYS OF REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF PAVEMENT SUCH AS POSSIBLY USING, UM, COMPACT SPACES OR AN ALTERNATE TYPE OF PAVEMENT THAT WOULD BE PERMEABLE.
DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY SPACES ARE AT THE LIBRARY? I DON'T, I DIDN'T COUNT, BUT IT'S A MASSIVE LOT.
UM, I, I DON'T, I CAN LOOK THAT UP, UH, THAT QUICKLY.
ANYONE CAN PARK THERE, RIGHT? UH, I I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT EXACTLY.
I MEAN, I, IT'S A PUBLIC LIBRARY.
UM, I THINK I WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO DEFER TO CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ON THAT.
I MEAN, I, I THINK YOU CAN PARK THERE, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU COULD RELY ON IT FOR YOUR OVERFLOW PARKING AS A RULE WITHOUT GOING INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THEM.
SO I'LL FOLLOW UP WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY.
AND ALSO A GOOD QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UH, COMMISSIONER STANDARD, LET ME, I I DO WANNA ASK YOU SOMETHING ABOUT, UH, THE, THE PARKING.
WOULDN'T YOU THINK THAT OKAY, I'M ASSUMING BECAUSE THE, OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A VERY SPORTS ORIENTED SCHOOL.
UH, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE GOT A BASEBALL FIELD, A SOCCER FIELD, AND ARE PLANNING FOR A FOOTBALL FIELD.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE, OBVIOUSLY THEY'VE PUT A LOT INTO HAVING THREE FIELDS AT A SCHOOL.
[00:50:02]
AND ISN'T THE LIBRARY A ACROSS KEITH BOULEVARD? IT IT IS.SO ISN'T THAT A VERY BIG THOROUGHFARE? HOW WOULD SOMEONE, MY FEELING IS THIS, AND TELL ME IF I'M CORRECT OR NOT.
IF YOU'RE COMING TO SEE YOUR KIDS, AND ONE THING YOU HAVE TO THINK IS THE FUNCTIONALITY I WANT TO DRIVE TO THE SCHOOL, THERE MIGHT BE SIMULTANEOUSLY A BASEBALL, A SOCCER, A FOOTBALL PRACTICE GOING ON.
PARENTS GO TO THIS, I CAN'T IMAGINE.
I'M ALWAYS TRYING TO STOP MM-HMM.
BUT WHAT IS THE, THE REALIST OF PARKING ACROSS EAST AND HOW ARE THESE PEOPLE SAFELY GONNA GET ACROSS WITHOUT WALKING ALL THE WAY DOWN TO SO AND SO, SO THIS IS, THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT IT'S NOT PART OF THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FORMALLY.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE ASKED THEM TO LOOK INTO TO SEE IF IT IS FEASIBLE.
UM, IT'S A FOUR-LANE DIVIDED ROAD.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I WANT A LOT OF KIDS TO BE RUNNING ACROSS REGULARLY.
HOWEVER, I WOULD POINT OUT THAT THIS IS A MIDDLE SCHOOL CAMPUS, NOT A HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS.
SO I THINK THE CROWDS ARE GONNA BE DIFFERENT.
IF THERE IS A WAY THAT THEY COULD LOOK INTO, UH, SHARING PARKING WITH SURROUNDING, UH, USES AND THEY CAN REDUCE THE PAVEMENT, WE WOULD APPRECIATE THAT.
IF THEY CAN'T FEASIBLY DO IT, WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING TO, YOU KNOW, NOT APPROVE THE CASE OR CHANGE THE RECOMMENDATION IN ANY WAY.
AND WHAT IS THE POPULATION OF THIS SCHOOL? THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS? I APPROXIMATELY 800.
SO WITH 8 33, WOULD IT SEEM UNREASONABLE TO HAVE 80 EXTRA SPACES POTENTIALLY FOR COMING TO SPORTS THINGS BY PARENTS? I MEAN, WOULD YOU THINK THAT'S UNREASONABLE AT A SCHOOL? UH, WE ASKED, WE ASKED THEM TO LOOK INTO POSSIBLY REDUCING THE PARKING AND THE PAVING IF THEY CAN.
IF IT'S NOT FEASIBLE, THEN THAT CERTAINLY AT THEIR DISCRETION.
BUT YOU DO AGREE THAT SCHOOLS DO HAVE A LOT OF EVENTS, IN FACT, NOT EVEN JUST THAT THEY'VE GOT MUSIC EVENTS, THEY HAVE ALL SORTS OF THINGS GOING ON AT A MIDDLE SCHOOL THAT PARENTS DO COME TO ATTEND? POSSIBLY.
VERY, VERY, DO I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU SAID? I THINK IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF EVENTS, BUT I THINK, I THINK THAT THE, THE APPLICANT IS GONNA KNOW THAT BEST.
IF IF IT'S NOT FEASIBLE, THEN WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING OR, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT CHANGING OUR RECOMMENDATION.
WE ARE JUST ASKING IF THERE'S A WAY TO REDUCE THE PAPER.
SOMETIMES I THINK IT'S GOOD TO GIVE LEEWAY TO PUBLIC SCHOOLS, DON'T YOU, JENNIFER
I THINK WE NEED TO STICK TO THIS PARTICULAR CASE THAT WE HAVE AT HAND.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER STANDARD.
YOU'RE GOT ONE OF MY QUESTIONS AHEAD OF ME AGAIN.
YOU'RE NOW APPARENTLY ARE SHARING NOTES TODAY.
UH, COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOLLOWED BY, UH, COMMISSIONER HARBERT.
GOOD MORNING OR THIS AFTERNOON? THIS AFTERNOON.
UM, I KNOW I'M A I'M GONNA BE WRONG.
THIS I LOVE THE, THE, THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN.
SO MY QUE
SO MY, MY QUESTION IS IN, UM, ALIGN THE LONGS ALONG THE LINES OF PARKING AND PARKING, WHEN YOU SAID, IF I, IF I'M CORRECT, YOU, YOU GUYS DID ASK THAT THEY CONSIDERED COMPACT PARKING.
ARE YOU AWARE THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR SECTION OF THE CITY, UM, WE LIKE BIG CARS, THE BIGGER, THE BIGGER.
IS IT WRONG THAT I HAVE A SONG PLAYING IN MY HEAD RIGHT NOW?
SO, UM, ARE YOU AWARE IF YOU REDUCE OR IF YOU REQUIRE COMPACT PARKING, WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS LOSING PARKING? BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS PARK OUR CAR IN TWO SPOTS.
ARE YOU AWARE OF THAT? SO, SO, SO I'LL THE, THE QUESTION AT HAND, UM, I WILL SAY THAT WE'RE NOT REQUIRING COMPACT PARKING.
WE'RE SIMPLY ASKING THAT THEY, AND IT'S, IT'S LOOK FOR WAYS TO REDUCE THE PAVING.
AND THOSE ARE SUCH AS EXAMPLES.
SO IT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, IT'S A REMINDER THAT THE CODE DOES ALLOW UP TO 35% OF THE REQUIRED PARKING TO BE COMPACT SPACES.
THERE IS A SURFACE LOT ACROSS THE WAY.
CAN YOU LOOK INTO SHARING, UH, CAN YOU LOOK AT ALTERNATE PAVEMENT
[00:55:01]
MATERIAL THAT WOULD BE PERMEABLE? JUST AS AN EXAMPLE.AND AGAIN, THIS IS SIMPLY AN ASK IN TERMS OF REDUCING THE NONPERMEABLE SURFACE.
AND IF IT'S NOT FEASIBLE, STAFF IS, IS WHOLEHEARTEDLY RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AS IS WITH THAT SIMPLE ASK.
SO, SO YOU'RE, SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, JUST SO THAT I GET IT RIGHT, IS THAT YOU'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY REDUCTION IN PARKING, YOU'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY CHANGES.
YOU'RE ONLY ASK, YOU ARE ONLY MAKING THE RECOMMENDATION AND THE SUGGESTION TO THE APPLICANT THAT THEY CONSIDER SOME ALTERNATIVES, BUT IT IS NOT A REQUIREMENT FOR YOUR APPROVAL.
SO REMEMBER, I'LL TAKE A MINUTE TO PLUG THE PARKING THING.
STAFF WOULD ALWAYS LOVE A REDUCTION IN PARKING, BUT, BUT IT'S MINIMUMS THAT DOESN'T SAY THAT AN A THAT A, THE DEVELOPER CAN'T PROVIDE MORE BASED ON WHAT THEY KNOW THE NEEDS OF THE SITE TO BE.
AND SO IF THIS IS A TIME WHEN THEY KNOW THAT THEY NEED MORE BECAUSE OF THE EVENTS.
AND I THINK ALSO, UM, THIS WAS A COMMUNITY ASK THAT WE WANT CARS OFF THE STREET.
WE WANT CARS OUT OF THE
YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT PARKING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS.
AND SO I THINK THAT THEY WERE BEING RESPONSIVE TO THE COMMUNITY CONCERNS AND ASKS.
SO IF THEY KNOW THEY NEED MORE, WE, WE SUPPORT THIS AS IS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WILLER.
AND ALSO, DOESN'T THIS SCHOOL, UM, SIT IN MORE THAN ONE THIRD OR FOUR? IS HIS AT, AT BOTH, UM, KEYS AND AT ILLINOIS? OR IS IT A LITTLE FARTHER DOWN IN ILLINOIS? UH, ILLINOIS IS, IS FURTHER DOWN A LITTLE BIT FURTHER DOWN.
THEN THERE'S SOME, THERE'S UH, SUNNYVALE STREET AND THEN A LITTLE BIT OF SINGLE FAMILY.
AND THEN YOU GET TO EAST ILLINOIS.
THOSE ARE SIX LANES THAT WE HAVE TO CROSS.
UM, AND OFTEN I, I, I LIVED IN THAT AREA FOR A LONG TIME, STILL OWN THE HOME.
MY MOTHER LIVES IN THAT AREA AND WE DO EXPERIENCE A LOT OF TRAFFIC, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S TIME TO VOTE.
UM, A LOT OF THE OTHER SCHOOLS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE ALREADY STARTED THIS TRANSITION PLAN.
SO SCHOOLS HAVE CLOSED, STUDENTS HAVE MOVED ON, VOTING SITES HAVE CLOSED.
AND JUST RECENTLY, HOLMES WAS A VOTING SITE AND THE LIBRARY WAS A VOTING SITE AND WE LITERALLY WERE CHASING EACH OTHER'S TAILS.
UM, QUESTION, DO WE, DO WE KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE, UM, THIS SCHOOL WILL SERVE? UH, THE NEW SCHOOL? I'M SORRY, NOT THE, THAT'S, THAT'S GONNA BE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, OR COMMENT, THE PARKING LOT AT PAUL DUNBAR, DID YOU SEE THE SIZE OF THOSE CAR LOT, THOSE PARKING SPOTS? THEY'RE PRETTY COMPACT.
UM, LAST QUESTION IN CLARITY STATEMENT IS THAT LIBRARY IS THE ONLY ONE FOR SEVERAL MILES AND IT SERVES A LARGE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE AND IT GETS CROWDED AT CERTAIN TIMES OF THE YEAR.
SO JUST WANTED TO PUT THOSE NOTES OUT THERE.
I'M NOT REALLY A QUESTION, BUT YEAH, THAT, UH, USING RECENTLY WE WERE USING THE SCHOOLS PARKING LOT TO PARK TO VOTE ACROSS THE STREET AT THE LIBRARY.
SO, UH, JUST WANTED TO PUT THOSE ITEMS OUT THERE THAT, AND HOPE THAT WE DO MORE HOMEWORK ON WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THAT COMMUNITY, UM, WHEN WE PRESENT.
BUT THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
MY QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT THE, UH, NUMBER MAGNITUDE OF THE ATHLETIC FIELDS ON THIS, UM, PARTICULAR SITE, BECAUSE THIS IS FAR MORE THAN A TYPICAL MIDDLE, MIDDLE SCHOOL USUALLY HAS.
DO WE KNOW, UM, IS D I S D PLANNING TO USE THIS AS A, SOME SORT OF LIKE REGIONAL OR AREA, UM, ATHLETIC FACILITY? THAT, THAT WOULD BE A GREAT QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
WELL MY QUESTION THEN, I HA GIVEN THE NUMBER OF CASES WE HAVE HAD IN THE TIME I'VE BEEN ON C P C WHERE WE, WHERE ATHLETIC FIELDS PRESENT ISSUES TO NEIGHBORS AND WE HAVE, UH, NEIGHBORS HERE TO THE WEST AND TO THE NORTHWEST WITH A 10 FOOT SEPARATION, UM, I DON'T SEE ANY CONDITIONS WHATSOEVER IN THE S U P CONDITIONS ABOUT BALL FIELDS, YOU KNOW, HOURS, DAYS, UH, IT HAS, THEY HAVE DIGITAL SCOREBOARDS.
THERE'S NOT MUCH SEPARATE, IT LOOKS LIKE A FOUR FOOT CHAIN OF FENCE PRESS BOX, IT LOOKS LIKE PRETTY INTENSIVE ATHLETIC ACTIVITY.
SO THERE'S A, THERE'S A 20 FOOT SEPARATION JUST TO SAY.
I MEAN, I KNOW THAT'S NOT A WHOLE LOT MORE WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A FOOTBALL FIELD.
SO WE DID DISCUSS, UM, AMPLIFIED MUSIC, WHAT REACTIONS THEY GOT FROM THE NEIGHBORS IN THEIR RE IN THEIR, UM, OUTREACH.
UM, THEY INDICATED THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE CONCERNS EXPRESSED FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I, I'LL ALLOW THEM TO GO INTO THAT MORE.
[01:00:01]
UM, BUT AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT UH, IF THE COMMISSION FEELS THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE, UM, SOME RESTRICTIONS IN TERMS OF TIMES AND UH, WHATEVER THEY MAY BE RELATED TO THE ATHLETIC FIELDS, THESE THINGS COULD BE, UH, ADDED AS A CONDITION.I DON'T SEE LIGHTS ON THIS PLAN.
IF LIGHTS WERE WANTED DOWN THE ROAD, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THEY COULD DO BY RIGHT.
OR WOULD LIGHTS HAVE TO COME BACK HERE AS A, SOME KIND OF A, A NEW ZONING CHANGE OR AN AMENDMENT? SO, UM, I DID ASK IF THEY WERE PROPOSING ANY LIGHTS AT THE ATHLETIC FIELDS.
UM, SINCE THAT LIGHTING IS NOT REQUIRED LIGHTING, SAY FOR A PARKING LOT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, UM, TECHNICALLY THEY NEED TO COME BACK HERE AND, AND ADD THAT TO THE SITE PLAN.
UM, WHETHER OR NOT, UM, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WOULD MAKE THEM COME BACK FOR THAT OR NOT? I CAN'T, I CAN'T ANSWER THAT FOR THEM.
ONE OF MY QUESTIONS IS ABOUT PROCEDURE CUZ YOU SAID YOU SUGGESTED ABOUT THE PERMEABLE SURFACE, YOU KNOW, AND WE'RE TRYING TO GET SOMETHING CODIFIED ON THAT.
BUT ARE WE ABLE IN THIS TO REQUIRE A PERCENTAGE OF PERMEABLE SURFACE ON THE PARKING? UH, YOU, YOU COULD PUT RESTRICTIONS ON THE AMOUNT OF, UH, IMPERVIOUS SURFACE ON THE PROPERTY.
BECAUSE I KNOW THAT IN SOME PARKING LOTS WHAT THEY DO IS PUT A PROPORTION, AND I'M NOT AN ENGINEER, BUT ON THE, ISN'T THAT CORRECT ON THE FRONT PART OF IT? THAT PART OF IT WILL BE SEAMEN IN PART MORE PERMEABLE TO ABSORB THE WATER.
HAVE YOU SEEN THAT BEFORE? I MEAN, YES.
UM, I, I DON'T KNOW, UM, THAT WE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY LIMITS PUT IN AT THIS POINT, BUT WE CERTAINLY COULD.
WELL I'M THAT WERE, YOU KNOW, UH, IT IS A QUESTION THAT I'M ASKING IS IT POSSIBLE.
ANY RATE, I'LL LOOK INTO THAT.
SO I THINK, I THINK I WOULD JUST SAY, UM, THAT WE, WE DID HAVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THIS, UM, WITH THE APPLICANT IN TERMS OF UM, ALTERNATE PAVING MATERIAL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, SO HOPEFULLY THEY'VE LOOKED INTO IT A LITTLE BIT MORE SINCE THEN AND CAN ADDRESS THAT FOR YOU.
AND A AS YOU KNOW, ALTHOUGH I LOVE D I S D AND I'M THEIR BIGGEST ADVOCATE, ON THE OTHER HAND, I ALWAYS THINK IF YOU PUT SOMETHING IN, THEY HAVE TO DO IT AS OPPOSED TO OPTIONAL.
MY OTHER QUESTION IS ABOUT LIGHTING CUZ I'M ALSO A PERSON THAT BELIEVES IN THAT WE'RE NOT ANYMORE IN 30 FOOT LIGHTS THAT, YOU KNOW, MAY BE REQUIRING SOME NOT SO HIGHLIGHTING THAT DOESN'T, PARTICULARLY ON THAT WEST SIDE, THAT IS RIGHT BY, YOU KNOW, WHERE THOSE FIELDS, BECAUSE I'M SURE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME LIGHTING JUST FOR SECURITY OUT THERE, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT LIGHTING THE FIELDS PER SE.
I'M SAYING THAT I WOULD THINK THE LIGHTS ON THE WEST SIDE MIGHT NEED TO BE MORE OF IT, THE 15 FOOT HEIGHT AS OPPOSED TO THE 30 FOOT HEIGHT THAT GOES RIGHT INTO YOUR BEDROOM WINDOWS ANYWAY.
IF I MAY REAL QUICK TO PLEASE COMMISSIONER STANDARD'S QUESTION ABOUT THE PERMEABLE PARKING.
IF THAT IS A CONDITION THAT THIS BODY WANTS TO DO, IT WOULD HAVE TO PUT ON THE, IT WOULD HAVE TO EXPLAIN HOW IT MAKES THE USE MORE COMPATIBLE.
SO IT'S WOULD HAVE TO EXPLAIN HOW, UM, A PUBLIC, HOW PERMEABLE PARKING LOT WOULD MAKE THE PUBLIC SCHOOL MORE COMPATIBLE TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
WELL, WHAT ABOUT WHEN WE PUT CEMENT? OKAY, I'M ASKING THE CITY ATTORNEY THIS QUESTION.
WOULD IT BE REASONABLE TO SUGGEST THAT WHERE WE ARE PUTTING EXTRA PARKING PLACES THAN WHAT IS REQUIRED, TRYING NOT TO HAVE CEMENT SO MUCH THAT PUTTING PERMEABLE GIVES MORE AREA FOR STORM WATER RUNOFF.
THAT AS A, AS A NON-ENGINEER COMMISSIONER STANDARD, THAT, THAT RATIONALE MAKES SENSE TO ME, BUT I WOULD DEFER TO MR. NAVARRES IN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ABOUT SOME OF THOSE, UH, WATER.
BUT THAT WOULD BE ENOUGH REASONING BEHIND IT TO POTENTIALLY INCLUDE IT.
IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, I, YES, YES.
IF I SAID LIKE 15% AND THAT'S ONE OF MY REASONINGS SORRY, YOU SAID NO, I'M JUST SAYING HYPOTHETICALLY IF I SAID A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE PARKING LOT MUST BE PERMEABLE MADE OF
[01:05:01]
PERMEABLE SURFACE MATERIALS, THAT THE REASONING WOULD BE ENOUGH TO SAY FOR THE STORM WATER RUNOFF, FOR THE EXTRA CEMENT, YOU CAN JUST SAY YES,JUST TWO QUICK FOLLOW UPS ON THE DISCUSSION PER LIGHTING AND THE, UM, OUTDOOR SPORTS CART, WAS THERE ANY, UM, DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT CONSIDERING, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW TO ADDRESS OUTDOOR NOISE SPEAKERS? I SEE THERE'S A PRESS BOX ON SITE, UM, PERHAPS HOURS OF OPERATION AND, YOU KNOW, IF THERE WAS NON-REQUIRED LIGHTING, NO NON CODE REQUIRED LIGHTING RELATIVE TO THESE SPORTS COURTS THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, WOULD HAVE PROVISIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THEM, SAID ANYTHING THAT YOU HAD DISCUSSED WITH THE APPLICANT? UH, WE, WE DIDN'T DISCUSS, UH, THE, THE LOUD SPEAKERS.
WE DISCUSSED THE LIGHTING WHETHER THEY WERE PROPOSING IT OR NOT.
UM, AND THEY WEREN'T AT THIS TIME.
SO THAT'S BASICALLY WHERE THAT DISCUSSION ENDED.
I'M HAPPY TO FOLLOW UP WITH THE APPLICANT.
SO, UM, JUST CURRENTLY ON SITE, YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO PARK ON KEYS AND THERE IS A LANE FOR, UM, PARENTS TO DRIVE IN AND OUT.
UM, ARE WE EXPANDING THAT AREA? UH, WHICH AREA? THE AREA IN FRONT OF THE SCHOOL WHERE PARENTS ARE CURRENTLY DRIVING AND OH, HAVE THE CHOICE TO AND DECIDE NOT TO, IN MY OPINION.
UM, A LOT OF THEM DON'T DRIVE INTO THAT AREA.
THERE'S PARKING AND THEN THERE'S A LANE TO WALK THROUGH, I MEAN, TO DRIVE THROUGH.
SOME PARENTS DRIVE THROUGH IT, I'VE NOTICED AND PICK UP THEIR KIDS.
UM, AND I KNOW A PART OF OUR, UH, YOUR PRESENTATION IS THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE OFF STREET PARKING, I MEAN OFF STREET QUEUING FOR STUDENTS.
SO ARE WE MAKING THAT BETTER OR, SO THE, THE AREA THAT YOU'RE SEEING AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN HERE, UHHUH
UM, THERE IS, THERE IS AN ADDED LOOP, OKAY.
THAT GOES AROUND THIS, UH, NEW SMALL PARKING LOT.
UM, THE SOLID LINES HERE ARE Q SPOTS DROP OFF AND PICK UP IS NOT SUPPOSED TO OCCUR THERE UNTIL THEY GO AROUND THE LOOP AND THEN PICK UP WITHIN THESE DESIGNATED AREAS.
UM, THAT IS THE, I GUESS, PARENT DROPOFF AND PICKUP AREA.
AND THEN WE'RE ALSO ADDING, UM, AND I, I BELIEVE CURRENTLY THE BUSES QUEUE IN THIS AREA, RIGHT? SO THE BUSES WILL NOT SHARE THIS AREA THAT IS DESIGNATED FOR PARENT DROP OFF AND PICK UP.
THE BUSES NOW HAVE THEIR OWN DESIGNATED AREA TO, ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, THEIR THEIR OWN ENTRANCE AND THEY WILL GO AROUND AND QUEUE IN THE BACK OF THE SCHOOL AND STUDENTS WHO TAKE BUSES WILL, YOU KNOW, LOAD THE BUSES THERE AND THEN THEY WILL EXIT OUT THAT SAME, SO THERE'S NO CROSSING OF, YOU KNOW, STANDARD VEHICLES V VERSUS BUSES.
THANK YOU FOR EXPLAINING THAT.
UM, JENNIFER, I THINK THAT THIS IS A GOOD PLAN, UM, AND I APPRECIATE THE GOOD WORK THAT YOU'VE BEEN DOING ON IT.
UH, YOU AND THE, THE APPLICANT IN OUR CONVERSATIONS.
UM, WE MAINLY TALKED ABOUT THE, THE AREAS AROUND THE PERIPHERY, UM, INCLUDING THE QUEUING LINE, THE BUS LINE, UM, AND THEN ALSO WALKING TRAILS.
IN OUR CONVERSATIONS, WE, I, I REQUESTED THAT THERE WOULD BE ONGOING CONVERSATIONS WITH THE NORTH TEXAS COUNCIL, THE GOVERNMENTS OR TECH DOT OR THE AUTHORITIES FOR THOSE AREAS, AND ALSO CONSIDERING A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP, UM, WITH THE LIBRARY ACROSS THE STREET.
AND THE NOTION BEHIND THAT IS BASED ON THE DISCUSSION WITH NORTH TEXAS COUNCIL, THE GOVERNMENTS OR OTHER AUTHORITIES AND THEIR WILLINGNESS TO DEPRESS THE ROAD SO THAT WE HAVE A PROMENADE THAT WOULD MAKE IT A SAFE TREK ACROSS THE STREET TO THE LIBRARY AND POTENTIALLY INCLUDE THE LIBRARY IN THEIR CONVERSATION.
UM, HOWEVER, WE DIDN'T WANT THAT CONVERSATION TO STOP THE SCHOOL GOING FORWARD, AND, AND THEY HAVE AGREED TO HAVE ONGOING CONVERSATIONS WITH ME AND I'M WONDERING IF YOU HAD THAT SAME OR, OR DO YOU HAVE THAT SAME KIND OF FEELING THAT THEY'LL HAVE AN ONGOING CONVERSATION TO STILL DEAL WITH THOSE CONCERNS.
MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY, I THINK WE'VE KIND
[01:10:01]
OF GOT OFF TOPIC FROM THE S U AT HAND.WELL, SO HAS THERE BEEN ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT PARKING IN THE ADJACENT EASEMENT ON THE EAST PORTION OF THE SITE WITH THE 12 FOOT? UM, WALKING TRAIL IS, UH, NO, UH, AS THAT IS, THAT PROPERTY IS OWNED BY ENCORE, BUT CAN THERE BE A PARKING AGREEMENT SIMILAR TO WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING WITH THE LIBRARY ACROSS THE STREET? UM, JUST TO SAY THAT IF WE REQUIRE MORE PARKING AND WHERE THAT MIGHT BE ABLE TO GO, MY BIGGEST ISSUE IS THAT THERE'S A SEA OF PARKING IN FRONT OF THIS BEAUTIFULLY DESIGNED SCHOOL THAT'LL CREATE A HEAT ISLAND AND ALL KINDS OF THINGS.
AND I DON'T THINK IT GIVES US THE RIGHT PERSPECTIVE ON A SOCIAL JUSTICE ACADEMY AND HOW THE COMMUNITY WOULD WANT TO COME AND APPROACH THE SITE.
UM, SO THAT'S WHY I'VE ASKED FOR THOSE ONGOING CONVERSATIONS.
UM, BUT PRIMARILY IF WE WERE TO HAVE THIS QUEUING, WHY DIDN'T IT NOT OCCUR SOUTH OF THE FOOTBALL FIELD, UM, WHERE WE HAVE IT IN PLAN TO THE WEST? DO YOU HAVE I I WILL DEFER TO THE APPLICANT ON THAT.
UM, ALSO WITH THE REQUIRED 105 SPACES, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE 183 IS PROPOSED BECAUSE OF THOSE FIELDS AND THE SOCIAL JUSTICE NATURE OF SOME OF THE OUTDOOR AREAS.
IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING ALSO? THEY, THEY JUST, UH, THEY DESCRIBED IT AS, UH, PARKING FOR SPECIAL EVENTS, ALL INCLUSIVE.
UM, AND THIS QUESTION IS FOR LEGAL.
WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO REQUIRE, UM, CO-GENERATION SYSTEMS INSIDE THE BUILDING LIKE SOLAR PANELS OR SOME SORT OF, UM, CO GENERATING ENERGY SOURCE AS A USE OF THE LAND COMMISSIONER? YOU WOULD HAVE TO EXPLAIN HOW THAT MAKES THE USE MORE COMPATIBLE TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND I WOULD STRUGGLE TO SEE THAT, BUT I CAN BE CONVINCED
UM, WELL, SO IT WOULD BE ALONG THE SAME LINES AS EV CHARGING STATIONS AND THAT, THAT PROVIDE, UM, I GUESS RELIEF TO THE ELECTRIC GRID AND ALSO MULTIMODALITY FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING.
BUT FOR THE SCHOOL ITSELF, IT WOULD EASE THE ELECTRIC GRID IN THE AREA AND NOT BE SO MUCH OF AN EYESORE AS THE, UM, ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION LINES.
MOREOVER, I'M LOOKING AT A SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY, UM, TO BUILD A SCHOOL THAT THEN REFLECTS, UM, WHERE WE'RE GOING IN TERMS OF ENERGY AND LAND USE AS GOOD STEWARDS OF OUR LAND AND ENVIRONMENT.
IS THAT CONVINCING ENOUGH?
COMMISSIONER? YES, I, I I WOULD LIKE TO INTERJECT HERE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS, UH, SEPARATELY OWNED PROPERTY.
SO I, I UNDERSTAND THE IDEA WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM, UM, BUT THOSE POWER LINES ARE A PUBLIC UTILITY AND WE, WE CAN'T DICTATE ANY CHANGE TO THAT.
WELL, LET ME PUT SOLAR PANELS ON THE ROOF OF THE NEW BUILDING SO THAT WE RELIEVE THE GRID FOR THE AREA AND WE ARE CREATING A, A PRETTY LARGE BUILDING HERE THAT WILL HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE LOCAL GRID.
UM, ALSO BECAUSE IN THAT SAME LANE, UM, MYSELF AND SOME OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WANTED TO DISCUSS, UM, PERMEABLE PARKING AND PERMEABLE CONCRETE AS ONE OF THOSE ENERGY SAVING MEASURES THAT I WOULD WANT TO PUT IN THE CONDITIONS, WHICH IS WHY I PREFERENCE THAT QUESTION.
UM, AND THEN SO LASTLY, UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE STUDENTS THAT ARE EXISTING ON THE CAMPUS WILL STILL BE THERE WHILE THIS OTHER STRUCTURE IS BEING THAT'S CORRECT.
THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THAT APPLICANT, YES.
COULD WE OR HAS THERE BEEN A DISCUSSION ABOUT A CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT REGULATES THE INGRESS AND EGRESS OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL EQUIPMENT, UM, IN LINE WITH OPERATIONS OF A SCHOOL? UH, NOT AS PART OF THE ZONING CASE? UM, I'M SURE THAT THEY CAN, UM, EXPAND UPON THIS A LITTLE BIT.
UM, BUT I DO KNOW, UH, JUST EARLIER THIS WEEK WENT TO A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING IN PREPARATION FOR ANOTHER SCHOOL THAT HAS ALREADY COME THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS.
UM, AND WHEN IT GETS TO THAT POINT, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY CONTINUE THE OUTREACH AND THEY HAVE THOSE CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC PLANS, UM, THAT THEY DISCUSS THOSE WITH PARENTS.
UM, THAT, THAT, THAT'S AN ONGOING PART OF THE DISCUSSION, BUT IT WAS NOT PART OF THE ZONING
[01:15:01]
CASE THAT, THAT WE DISCUSSED.COUNSEL, IS IT PRUDENT TO REQUIRE A CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN IN ADDITION TO THE TM TYPICAL TMP? THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS REGULATED BY CHAPTER 52 ALREADY.
UH, THAT CONCLUDES MY QUESTION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
WE WILL BRIEF THE REST OF THE CASES, COMMISSIONERS THE CERTIFICATES OR PROGRAMS BEFORE WE HEAR THEM.
SO WE'LL GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING OF THE, THE DOCKET.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THIS IS THE, UH, PUBLIC HEARING PORTION.
WE'LL BEGIN WITH PAGE NUMBER ONE.
CASE NUMBER TWO, MINOR AMENDMENT M TWO 12.
CAN I, UH, LET'S TAKE, UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES? COMMISSIONER, MR. CHAIR, PLEASE.
I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 16TH, 2023 MEETING AS REVISED.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER YOUNG FOR YOUR MOTION.
AND COMMISSIONER, BE BLAIR FOR YOUR SECOND TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS REVISED.
LAWS IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER YOUNG MS. UH,
UM, M TWO 12 DASH 49 AN APPLICATION FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR A RETIREMENT HOUSING COMMUNITY USE ON A PORTION OF PROPERTY ZONED ZONE A WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6 95 AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF FRANKFORD ROAD, ENCO ROAD.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. ROCO.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
UH, MR CHAIR PLAN COMMISSIONERS, UH, ANDREW ROIG, 2201 MAIN STREET.
I DO HAVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION, UH, IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, BUT JUST GIVE YOU A QUICK OVERVIEW.
THIS IS A MINOR AMENDMENT FOR HIGHLAND SPRINGS RETIREMENT COMMUNITY UP IN, UH, FAR, UH, NORTHEAST DALLAS, AND THIS MINOR AMENDMENT, UH, THE IMPETUS OF IT IS TO ADD SOME ADDITIONAL FLOOR AREA FOR BUILDING ENTRY CANOPIES.
UM, SOME ADDITIONAL FLOOR AREA TO, UH, ACCOUNT FOR AN EXPANDED BUILDING FOOTPRINT, UH, REVISING SOME INTERNAL SIDEWALKS AND SHADE STRUCTURES, AND ALSO, UM, UPDATING THE, UM, TREE PLANTINGS, UH, FOR THE SITE JUST TO ACCOUNT FOR KIND OF A ONGOING LOOK AT THE PROPERTY AND AS WELL, UM, ACCOUNTING FOR THE, THE, THE, THE PD CONDITIONS AND TRYING TO MAKE THE SITE ONE COMPLIANT AND TWO, UH, VERY PLEASANT FOR THE EXISTING OR FOR THE PER THE FUTURE RESIDENTS OF THE PROPERTY.
SO, UH, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS SHOULD THERE BE ANY.
THANK YOU, MR. WE, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? OKAY.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY, COMMISSIONER HAWK, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO IN THE MATTER OF M 2 12 0 4 9, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAWK FOR YOUR MOTION.
VICE CHAIR ROOM FOR YOUR SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
WE'LL NOW MOVE TO OUR ZONING CASES UNDER ADVISEMENT, BEGINNING WITH CASE NUMBER THREE Z 223 22.
SO ITEM THREE IS Z 2 1 2 3 2 2.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A TOWER SLASH INCENTIVE FOR A CELLULAR COMMUNICATION ON PROPERTY ZONE SUBDISTRICT THREE WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT NUMBER 317, THE SPECIAL CEDARS AREA SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE WEST LINE OF CADE STREET, NORTH OF BATUM JOHN BOULEVARD.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL 10 YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO A SITE SLASH ELEVATION PLANNING CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. PEPPI.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES, SIR.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, UM, ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER 'EM.
I I WANNA LET YOU KNOW THAT COMMISSIONER HAMPTON REALLY REACHED OUT QUITE A BIT.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YOU JUST PLEASE BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS
[01:20:01]
WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.VINCENT HUBINGER WITH VINCENT GERARD AND ASSOCIATES REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.
THANK, UM, SO I JUST, I JUST HEAR IT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
I BELIEVE MS. HEMPTON HAS SOME THINGS TO SAY.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
UM, WE'VE HELD THIS AT OUR LAST MEETING.
WERE YOU ABLE TO, UH, BE IN CONTACT WITH SOME OF THE SURROUNDING STAKEHOLDERS AND COMMUNITY, UM, ASSOCIATIONS? YES, MA'AM.
AND, UM, I THINK YOU'RE AWARE THAT THERE WAS OUTREACH, UM, TO BOTH PROPERTY OWNERS, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, AND IN THAT TIME, WERE YOU ABLE TO ALSO RESEARCH THE, UM, EXISTING COVERAGE AREAS AND, UM, ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES THAT YOU ALL HAD INVESTIGATED, UH, BEFORE, UM, ARRIVING AT THIS SITE AND THE REQUEST BEFORE US TODAY? YES, MA'AM.
QUITE EXTENSIVELY, WE, UH, PROVIDED A CANDIDATE, SOMEBODY SEARCH, UM, OVER 12 CANDIDATES.
WE, WE LOOKED AT, UH, INCLUDING THREE CITY PROPERTIES AND, AND NONE OF 'EM CAME TO FRUITION.
AND THEN THE REQUEST BEFORE IT'S TODAY, UM, AND THANK YOU FOR SUBMITTING THE RI REVISED, UM, SITE PLAN.
I KNOW MR. PEPE HAS, UM, SEEN IT BRIEFLY AND I HAD RECEIVED IT.
THE HEIGHT THAT IS PROPOSED IS REDUCING FROM 120 FEET TO A HUNDRED FEET, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, MA'AM.
AND THEN HAVE YOU ADDED ADDITIONAL, UM, PLANTING AREAS AROUND THE ENCLOSURE AND CHANGED THE ENCLOSURE FROM THE CHAIN LINK AND BARBED WIRE TO BE AN EIGHT FOOT, UM, PAINTED? WE HAVE, WE'VE, UH, PROPOSED ROD IRON STEEL TYPE FENCING, UM, EIGHT FEET FOR SECURITY, UM, WITH A LOT OF NATIVE, UH, DROUGHT TOLERANT PLANTS SURROUNDING THAT AREA.
UH, DRESSED IT UP QUITE NICELY.
I BELIEVE THOSE WERE MY QUESTIONS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE? COMMISSIONER HERBERT? SO I'M, I'M KIND OF FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA.
UH, THERE'S A PROBATION AND PAROLE PLACED THERE AND THEN LIFE CENTER IS THERE.
HAVE WE CONSIDERED THAT POPULATION OF PEOPLE AND HOW THEY WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS? YES.
THEY BASICALLY, THIS COVERS THAT WHOLE AREA.
THIS SITE, JUST MOVING 400 FEET ACROSS THE HIGHWAY IS AN INTEGRAL PIECE OF COMMUNICATIONS FOR THAT CEDARS AREA.
UM, AND THE GOVERNMENTAL INSTITUTION AREAS OVER THERE WERE CONTACTED AS WELL.
AND THEY, THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH HEIGHT, HEIGHT ON THE ROOFTOP.
THEY DON'T HAVE SPACE FOR A SITE LIKE THIS AT 40 BY 60.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? THANK YOU.
UM, MR. PEPPI, JUST ONE QUESTION FOR YOU.
UM, I NEGLECT TO ASK DURING THE BRIEFING, UM, REGARDING THE, UM, SUGGESTED PLANTING AREAS, WAS THAT REVIEWED, UM, WITH MR. IRWIN AND DID HE HAVE ANY, UM, COMMENTS ON THAT? YES, IT, IT WAS REVIEWED WITH, I'M GETTING THAT, I'M SORRY.
IT WAS REVIEWED, UH, BY, BY MR. IRWIN.
AND, UM, I THINK THE MAIN, THE MAIN QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THAT JUST, I THINK THESE HAVE BEEN RESOLVED, BUT THE MAIN QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS WERE REGARDING, UM, SO AT THAT POINT IT WOULD BE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, THEY WOULD JUST FILE FOR THEIR REGULAR, THE TYPICAL RIGHT OF WAY LANDSCAPING PERMITS THROUGH, UM, THE PERMITTING PROCESS.
UM, HE HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT THE IRRIGATION AND THEY SAID IT WOULD, UM, IT WOULD NOT REQUIRE AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION.
UM, SO THAT KIND OF MITIGATED THOSE, UM, QUESTIONS.
SO, UM, IN TERMS OF THAT PART OF THE REVIEW, IT, IT CAME TO A RESOLUTION AND HE WAS GOOD AS, AS I RECALL.
AND AT OUR LAST MEETING, I THINK WE ALSO DISCUSSED THERE'S A NUMBER OF, UM, PLANNING INITIATIVES UNDERWAY, INCLUDING THE REDESIGN OF THE I 30 RIGHT OF WAY.
I THINK THE CITY CONVENTION CENTER, UM, IS AN ONGOING, UM, EVALUATION AND THE BOTH OF THOSE ARE NEARBY TO THIS SITE.
UM, WERE THOSE EVALUATED BY STAFF? YES, THEY, THEY WERE.
SO THE ROADWAYS WILL BE, YOU KNOW, REWORKED OVER TIME AND AS WE'VE DISCUSSED, THE, THE CONCEPTS THAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US ARE JUST THAT THEY'RE CONCEPTUAL.
UM, TEXT HOT MIGHT BE TWEAKING THEM TO SOME DEGREE, BUT GENERALLY THE VISION IS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO RECONNECT THE NORTH SIDE OF THE FREEWAY AND THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE FREEWAY BETTER THROUGH BETTER CROSSOVERS, BETTER SIDEWALKS, UM, GENERALLY LESS, UH, FREEWAY VISIBLE.
UM, SO THAT IS VETTED PLAY INTO THE, UH, REVIEW.
AND I, I THINK THAT, UH, WHAT THE AMENDED CHANGES, UM, IN, IN THE REVIEW THAT WE'VE HAD, THE ABILITY TO DO THEM ARE, ARE ACCEPTABLE IN, IN FURTHERING THOSE, THOSE GOALS WHILE ALLOWING FOR A DEGREE OF THE, THE UTILITY TO EXIST.
[01:25:01]
THANK YOU.ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SCENE? NONE.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE MARSHALL? I DO.
AND I HAVE BRIEF COMMENTS IF I HAVE A SECOND IN THE MATTER OF Z 212 DASH 3 32, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REQUEST PER STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD WITHOUT AUTOMATIC RENEWAL WITH THE FOLLOWING, ADDITIONAL, UM, U CONDITIONS AND CHANGE ONE HEIGHT REVISED TO 100 FEET.
ADD PLANTING LANDSCAPE, PLANTING AREAS TO BE PROVIDED AS SHOWN ON THE SITE.
PLANT SPECIES SHALL BE NATIVE DROUGHT TOLERANT PLANTINGS AS APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR.
ALL PLANT MATERIALS MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A HEALTHY GROWING CONDITION AT ALL TIMES.
AND ADD ENCLOSURE, AN EIGHT FOOT PAINTED STEEL OR ROT IRON FENCE WITH SOLID GATE TO BE PROVIDED AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
COMMISSIONER RUBEN COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
I JUST WANTED TO THANK MR. HUBINGER FOR HIS TIME, UM, ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMUNITY.
UM, I WAS ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN ONE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETING AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL OUTREACH TO PROPERTY OWNERS AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS IN THE AREA.
UM, THERE WAS EXTENSIVE OUTREACH IN INCLUDING TO, UM, DALLAS LIFE AND SOME OF THE OTHER, UM, FACILITIES IN THE AREA, UM, TO SEE IF WE COULD FIND A SITE FOR THIS.
UM, MR. HUBINGER WAS ABLE TO PROVIDE EXTENSIVE DETAIL ON THEIR OUTREACH EFFORTS, UH, FROM CITY OWNED FACILITIES TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
THIS IS THE BEST LOCATION AT THIS TIME.
HOWEVER, I FULLY ANTICIPATE 10 YEARS FROM NOW THAT THIS AREA IS GONNA LOOK DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT.
AND THAT'S WHY I WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THIS TO COME BACK, UM, AND BE REVIEWED AT THAT TIME.
AND IF THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY WITH THAT FOR A, A MORE INTEGRATED LOCATION.
OR IT MAY BE THAT, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT HAS OCCURRED AROUND THIS SITE, BUT THAT, UM, I HOPE MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION.
UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
NO MATTER OF Z 2 1 2 322, HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
SECOND, MY COMMISSIONER, VICE CHAIR RUBEN, TO CLOSE UP OF HEARING AND FALSE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR A1 YEAR PERIOD WITH NO AUTOMATIC RENEWALS SUBJECT TO A SITE IN ALLEGATION PLANNING CONDITIONS, AS WELL AS THE THREE ADDITIONAL, UH, ADJUSTMENTS AS READ INTO RECORD BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON IN REGARDS TO THE HEIGHT SET AT 100 FEET LANDSCAPING AND AN ENCLOSURE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS Z 2 1 2 3 26.
THAT IS AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER ON PROPERTY ZONED PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 76 5.
IT'S LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MAPLE SHADE LANE IN HOX OXFORD DRIVE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A 10-YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL 10-YEAR PERIODS, SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CARL CRAWLEY, 2201 MAIN STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS, REPRESENTING THE, AND I'LL CATCH MYSELF.
UM, I'M, I KNOW THERE ARE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS, SO I'M JUST GONNA GIVE YOU A QUICK SORT OF IDEA AND THEN I'LL BET YOU THAT I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS.
UM, THIS IS ONE OF THREE TO FOUR, UH, PLANO, I S D, THEY CALL THEM WRAPAROUND SERVICE CENTERS IN THE, IN THE, THE WRAPAROUND IS MUCH LIKE I'VE EQUATED TO LIKE A HUG IN THAT SENSE.
AND THEY PROVIDE SERVICES TO STAFF, FAMILIES, STUDENTS OF PLANO IS D UM, AND THE REASON WE'RE HERE AS A COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER USE, WHICH WAS WHAT SORT OF MICHAEL IN THAT DEFINITION IS JUST A WONDERFUL DEFINITION, ISN'T IT? IT LISTS MORE THINGS YOU'RE NOT THAN YOU ARE.
UH, AND WHAT WE ARE IN THIS CASE, AND THE REASON FOR THE U REQUEST IS BECAUSE WE HAVE TWO ROOMS INSIDE OF OUR STRUCTURE, APPROXIMATELY 200 SQUARE FEET EACH, THAT WILL HAVE A CLOTHING AND FOOD PANTRY.
10,000 SQUARE FEET, 400 SQUARE FEET.
NOW, IF YOU DROVE AROUND YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT NOW, PROBABLY A MAJORITY OF THE CHURCHES IN THE CITY OF DALLAS OFFER CLOTHING AND FOOD PANTRIES TODAY JUST BECAUSE THEY DO AND THERE'S A NEED FOR IT.
WELL, UM, WE, UH, GOT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED AS AN OFFICE USE AND THAT CAME UP AS A QUESTION, WHY DID WE DO THAT? WELL, IT TAKES NINE PLUS MONTHS NOW TO GET A BUILDING PERMIT, DOESN'T IT? YES, IT DOES.
AND SIX PLUS MONTHS TO GET A ZONING CASE.
SO WITH THE 400 SQUARE FEET NOW CALLED A STORAGE ROOM, WE CAME IN FOR AN OFFICE USE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD BE OFFICE COUNSELING AND OTHER USES SO THAT WE COULD BEGIN THE PROCESS OF GETTING A BUILDING PERMIT SO WE CAN OPEN THIS FACILITY FOR OUR STUDENTS FAMILY AND
[01:30:01]
OUR STAFF.UH, THE QUESTION CAME UP ABOUT PARKING.
WHY DO WE HAVE, AND, AND MICHAEL SAID EVENTS, I WOULDN'T CALL IT EVENTS AS MUCH AS WE OFFER, UH, COUNSELING, OBVIOUSLY, UH, WE HAVE OFFICES FOR THE DISTRICT TO USE.
WE ALSO OFFER, UH, IN-SERVICE GUIDANCE IN-SERVICE, UH, LEARNING FOR TEACHERS ON IN-SERVICE DAYS, WE MAY HAVE 40 OR 50 TEACHERS THERE TAKING SEMINARS OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE.
WOULD WE, DO WE OFFER G E D CLASSES? SURE, WE DO.
DO WE OCCASIONALLY, MAYBE ONCE A SEMESTER OR TWICE A YEAR, OFFER OUR VACCINATION CLINIC FOR OUR STUDENTS? SURE WE DO.
UM, THE EXTRA PARKING IS FOR THOSE REASONS, YES, THEY'RE PROBABLY, MAYBE ONLY 10 TO 15 OF THOSE DAYS A YEAR.
BUT THERE'S A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD TO OUR WEST.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE, AND I'VE HAD MUCH CONVERSATION WITH, AND I THINK MICHAEL AND I ARE PROBABLY THE ONLY TWO PEOPLE WHO KNOW WHO ANNE MURPHY IS, BUT ANNE MURPHY AND I HAVE HAD MANY CONVERSATIONS IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS ABOUT THIS.
AND I THINK THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE VERY CONCERNED IF WE HAD, UH, PARKING OF OUR EVENTS IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WE'VE TAKEN THAT INTO ACCOUNT WHEN WE'VE ADDED THOSE EXTRA PARKING SPACES.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERED ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS.
WE'D LIKE TO BUILD A WRAPAROUND CENTER, WHICH IS AGAIN, ABOUT 400 SQUARE FEET OF COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER.
AND THE REST WOULD BE ALLOWED BY WRIGHT IN THAT, UH, THE COUNSELING, THE GUIDANCE, THE EDUCATION, THE OFFICE USES ARE ALL ALLOWED BY.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO, UH, SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER TREIT? YES.
SO, JUST SO I'M CLEAR, WHEN YOU WERE IN FRONT OF US IN DECEMBER, YOU ONLY ASKED FOR AN OFFICE USE.
WHEN DID IT BECOME CLEAR THAT YOU WANTED, UM, ALSO A USE FOR A COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER BEFORE THAT? CUZ IF YOU'LL SEE, OUR APPLICATION FOR THE ZONING WAS IN AUGUST, BUT IF I, IF I COULD GET THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND LANDSCAPE PLAN APPROVED, THEY WOULD START MY REVIEW OF BUILDING PERMITS.
SO, AND MAYBE THIS IS JUST CUZ I'M STILL RELATIVELY NEW.
WHY DIDN'T YOU ALSO ASK FOR THE COMMUNITY SERVICE? BECAUSE THAT'S NOT ALLOWED, RIGHT? THAT'S THE REASON FOR THE U IT'S THE SAME BUILDING.
IT ALL LOOKS THE SAME IF YOU, IF YOU DIDN'T SEE THE FLOOR PLAN AND OH, IT'S THE SAME.
SO, SO WITH THE, THE NINE MONTHS IT TAKES TO GET A BUILDING PERMIT, IF, IF I WERE TO WAIT TILL NOW OR ACTUALLY A MONTH OR SO FROM NOW TO GET TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AN U, THEN I WOULD BE, WHAT, A YEAR BEHIND IN THE WAY OF GETTING A BUILDING PERMIT AND STARTING CONSTRUCTION.
NOW OBVIOUSLY IF THE U IS DENIED, UM, I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO USE THOSE TWO ROOMS FOR A CLOTHING AND FOOD PANTRY.
BUT THE DISTRICT IS STILL GONNA BUILD THEIR BUILDING THERE CUZ THEY HAVE OTHER SERVICES THEY NEED TO OFFER.
SO I, I DID IT FOR, FOR ALL THE PROBABLY WRONG REASONS, IS THERE'S A VERY LONG DELAY IN BUILDING INSPECTION TO GET A BUILDING PERMIT.
AND WE NEED TO START THE REVIEW OF THAT.
I'LL JUST SAY FOR ME PERSONALLY, IT WOULD'VE BEEN NICE TO HAVE KNOWN THIS TWO MONTHS AGO.
NOT THAT IT WOULD CHANGE A WHOLE LOT, BUT IT WOULD JUST GIVE US A FULLER PICTURE.
NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A USE THAT WAS NOT DISCUSSED TO MY MEMORY BACK IN DECEMBER.
WELL, IT, IT COULDN'T BE DISCUSSED BECAUSE YOU COULDN'T APPROVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER BECAUSE IT'S NOT ALLOWED.
BUT WE WERE APPROVING SOMETHING, A DEVELOPMENTAL PLAN AND A LANDSCAPE FOR AN OFFICE.
AND, AND ALL BUT 400 SQUARE FEET WOULD BE THAT USE AGAIN, I WILL JUST SAY PERSONALLY, I WOULD'VE APPRECIATED THAT.
BUT I THINK YOU UNDERSTAND WITH THE DELAY OF GETTING MR. CHAIR.
SO WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, IT'S ABOUT THE USE, RIGHT? NOT THE BUILDING, IT'S ABOUT THE USE.
YEAH, I, I KNOW, BUT IF YOU PUT OFFICE USE IN WHAT WE SAW IN DECEMBER, YOU COULD HAVE PUT COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER USE.
ACTUALLY, THE STAFF MADE ME REMOVE THAT AS ON MY USE.
I HAD THAT ON MY USE AND THEY MADE ME REMOVE IT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
SO PARKING, IF WE CAN TALK ABOUT PARKING, UM, I, AGAIN, THERE'S A LOT OF PARKING SPACES HERE AND I HEARD WHAT YOU SAID, BUT JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR, THERE'S, UM, 54 SPACES WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THIS TYPE BUILDING.
AND I JUST WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION NOT USING STREET PARKING, NOT USING NEIGHBORHOOD PARKING.
I'M NOT GOING THERE, BUT, YOU KNOW, WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, OTHER PARKING AREAS AROUND HERE? BECAUSE YOU'RE USING, YOU'RE ASKING FOR THREE TIMES THE AMOUNT OF PARKING SPACE AND THAT'S JUST A LOT OF CONCRETE.
THAT DOESN'T SEEM, SEEM LIKE IT'S GONNA BE USED MUCH.
[01:35:01]
I WERE, UH, UH, AN OFFICE USED, IF I DIDN'T HAVE THINGS WHERE I'M GIVING IN-SERVICE INSTRUCTION TO TEACHERS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.SO I, I'D AGREE WITH YOU IF I WAS, WHAT WOULD BE A, IF THERE IS SUCH A THING AS A TYPICAL OFFICE USE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS, BUT IF THERE WERE A TYPICAL OFFICE USE AND A TYPICAL COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER, THE DIFFERENCE IS COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER IN OUR CASE, WHICH WOULD BE THE HIGHEST PARKING RATIO, WAS 400 SQUARE FEET.
SO THAT'S NOT WHAT'S TRIGGERING IT.
IT'S THE FACT THAT WE OFFER ON A FAIRLY REGULAR BASIS THAT INSERVICE TRAINING AND, AND OTHER STUFF THAT, THAT THERE IS NO ADJACENT PARKING TO GO TO.
AND I'M SURE THEY REALLY WOULDN'T WANT US TO PARK OR WE'D PARK ON THE STREETS.
YOU CAN'T PARK ON MAPLE, MAPLE SHADE.
I WOULDN'T SUGGEST THAT IT'S A THOROUGHFARE.
SO THAT LEAVES YOU OXFORD AND THE OTHER STREETS SURROUNDING IT.
AND I DON'T, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY EXTRA PARKING.
THEY'RE PROBABLY ACTUALLY ON THE WEEKENDS FLOOD ONTO THE STREETS.
AND SO I DON'T HAVE ANY, A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER OPTIONS.
IS THERE A PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION NEARBY? WERE THERE OTHER POSSIBLE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION THAT WERE LOOKED AT? THERE IS PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ON PRESTON ROAD, I'M SURE, BUT THAT'S NOT THAT CLOSE.
AND AND A LOT OF THIS IS STUDENTS AND, AND OBVIOUSLY WE'RE SERVING AN UNDERSERVED POPULATION HERE TO, TO HELP THEM.
SO A LOT OF THEM WOULD BE COMING ON PRIVATE VEHICLES TO GET HERE.
UM, IF, IF A PARENT MIGHT COME WITH COUNSELING FOR A CHILD, UM, WHATEVER KIND OF COUNSELING THERE MIGHT BE, THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT COUNSELING OFFERED.
UM, BUT THEY'RE GONNA NEED A PLACE TO PARK.
AND THE, AND SO THERE'S A LOT OF VISITORS SITUATION WHEN IT COMES TO THAT TOO.
I DEFINITELY THINK YOU NEED MORE THAN, YOU KNOW, THE MINIMUM.
BUT I JUST WISH THAT THERE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A BRAND NEW DEVELOPMENT AND IN 2023 I WISH WE WERE FARTHER ALONG AND NOT JUST LOOKING AT HAVING A LOT OF CONCRETE NO, NO, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE DISTRICT, BUT IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THOSE SORT OF THINGS WERE REALLY FULLY VETTED.
BUT I UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE, WHERE WE ARE IN THIS PROCESS, SO I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
UM, YES, UH, WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO, UM, YOU SAID THERE WOULD BE FOOD DISTRICT, I MEAN A PANTRY, WOULD THAT PANTRY USE BE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'VE SEEN THROUGH THE COVID, UH, ERA WHERE PEOPLE COULDN'T, THERE COULD BE A DISTRIBUTION OF FOOD FOR RESIDENTS OR, UH, OR PEOPLE OF THAT NATURE? YEAH.
UH, WHEN I THINK OF THE COVID FOOD DISTRIBUTION, I THINK OF LIKE DRIVE-THROUGH.
NO, IT WOULDN'T BE THAT SORT OF SCENARIO.
UM, AND, AND IT WOULD JUST BE IF, IF YOU COULD COME AND THEY'LL HAVE HOURS OF OPERATION, JUST LIKE, UH, A LOT OF FOOD BANKS, UH, I KNOW WHERE I LIVE, THERE'S A CHURCH NEXT TO ME AND THEY HAVE A, AN HOURS OF OPERATION THAT THEY OPEN THEIR FOOD PANTRY IN THIS CASE AS OPPOSED TO A DRIVE-THROUGH.
AND YOU COME IN AND, AND, AND IN THIS CASE IT WOULD BE LIMITED TO P I S D FAMILY AND, AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, NOT JUST TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
SO IF THIS IS, SO YOU'RE SAYING IT WOULD BE LIMIT.
SO WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M ENVISIONING, JUST SO I DON'T GET IN TROUBLE WITH LAND USE NO, THIS IS, THIS IS THE LAND USE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ACTUALLY FOOD PANTRY AND, BUT WHAT I, WHAT I'M TRYING TO ASCERTAIN IS WHETHER, AND YOU SAID VACCINATION SERVICES AS WELL, THAT THAT MAY, THEY MAY OFFER THAT AS A VACCINATION CLINIC.
THEY, THEY MAY, AGAIN, FOR STUDENTS AND THEIR FAMILIES.
SO, AND PLANO IS, S D HAS MORE THAN A HUNDRED OR 200 OR MORE THAN 300 STUDENTS, CORRECT? OH, YES, YES.
SO THE POINT I'M MAKING IS, IS IT A DR IS WHAT IS THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE FOOD PANTRY AND OR THE VACCINATION PORTION? WOULD THAT BE LIKE AN APPOINTMENT? YOU CUT, YOU MAKE AN APPOINTMENT, YOU GO IN, YOU PICK UP THE FOOD, YOU GET THE VACCINATION AND YOU GO OUT? OR WOULD THAT BE A DISTRIBUTION AND A VACCINATION? UM, DISTRIBUTION WHERE BETWEEN THE HOURS OF THIS AND THIS YOU IN WHICH SURE I UNDERSTAND.
IN WHICH, IF THAT IS INDEED THE CASE, COULD YOU NOT HAVE OVERFLOW? MEANING IF YOU HAVE A GREATER NEED AND A NUMBER OF VACCINATION SERVICES AT THE SAME TIME, COULD IT NOT BE THAT THERE WOULD BE AN OVERFLOW THAT COULD OVERFLOW ONTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD? UM, WELL, AS I, AS I MENTIONED, I, I BELIEVE I DID, UH, MAYBE I DIDN'T.
THIS IS ONE OF THREE OR FOUR OF THESE CENTERS, UH, THAT ARE EITHER EXISTING OR TO BE PLANNED IN THE PLANO
[01:40:01]
IS S D AND THE DISTRICT OBVIOUSLY IS A LARGE DISTRICT, BUT COMPARED TO THE D I S D, IT'S MUCH SMALLER.OBVIOUSLY DISTRICT, THE, THE DISTRICT WOULD BE DIVIDED INTO YEAH.
SO I, AND, AND IF FOR A VACCINATION CLINIC, IT MAY BE THIS SCHOOL, YOUR STUDENTS CAN COME AND HAVE AVAC, YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE IN THAT ATTENDANCE ZONE, YOU KNOW, SO THEY, SO THAT, THAT HOPEFULLY THEY WOULD NOT HAVE THAT SITUATION.
NOW, OBVIOUSLY WITH A LOT OF EXTRA PARKING SPACES AND A VACCINATION CLINIC WOULD PROBABLY BE NOT DURING OFFICE HOURS, YOU WOULD LIKELY BE ON A WEEKEND.
UM, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE EXTRA SPACES IN THE SENSE THE EMPLOYEES AREN'T THERE.
SO COULD IT HAPPEN? SURE, IT COULD HAPPEN.
YOU COULD HAVE SPILL OVER, BUT, BUT THE IDEA IS WITH THE EXTRA PARKING AND STUFF THAT WE HOPE NOT TO HAVE THAT SITUATION.
SO BASICALLY THIS IS A, THIS IS A NEW USE THAT WE ARE, THAT THEY MAY HAVE, THEY MAY HAVE IT SOMEWHERE IN PLANO.
PLANO, BUT THIS IS A U A NEW USE THAT WE ARE SEEING IN DALLAS FOR THE USE OF PLANO SERVICES.
UM, NOW I WOULD EQUATE THIS TO, IN THE D I S D, A LOT OF THE HIGH SCHOOLS, IF NOT MOST OF THEM, AND ACTUALLY ON TODAY'S AGENDA, THE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL HAS A, AN AREA SET ASIDE WHAT DALLAS CALLS OR WHEN I WAS DOING WHAT WE CALLED YOUTH AND FAMILY CENTERS, NOT AS BIG A SCALE, BUT IT WOULD OFFER COUNSELING AND THINGS LIKE THAT FOR THE, FOR THE, THE AREA.
SO IT'D BE IN THAT FEEDER ZONE.
UH, PINKSTON, THEY BUILT ONE INSIDE OF THE SCHOOL.
UM, BRIAN ADAMS THAT Y'ALL LOOKED AT, SIEG, EAGLEVILLE, OTHER HIGH SCHOOLS HAVE THEM AS, THEY'LL ADD A PORTABLE, A QUAD BUILDING OUT THERE.
THE AS THAT PLANO ISD JUST COMBINED THERE, FOUR AND, UH, THREE OR FOUR ACROSS THE DISTRICT.
THEY'RE A, A GOOD PART OF PLANO IS SD IS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
UM, THERE ARE A PLANO, UH, MIDDLE SCHOOL NOT TOO FAR AWAY FROM HERE IN SOME ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS EVEN FURTHER SOUTH, THAT THIS WAS A CENTRAL LOCATION.
THEY'VE HAD THIS SITE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.
UH, AT ONE POINT THEY WERE GOING TO BUILD AN EARLY LEARNING CENTER, AND THEY MAY STILL ON THE REMAINDER OF THE SITE.
UM, BUT AT THIS POINT, TH THIS IS A HOUSTON, THIS IS, OKAY, SO TO ENCAPSULATE ALL THAT, THIS IS A NEW USE IN DALLAS FOR D I S D.
AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT DI THAT DA THAT PLANO IS, IS, IT'S A NEW USE IN DALLAS FOR PLANO I S D THAT WE ARE SEEING COME TO US FOR A REQUEST FOR S U P FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD WITH AUTOMATIC RENEWALS.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT, YES.
SO THE, IN DECEMBER, YOU ALL HAD SOME INTENTION, BUT THE REASON THAT YOU, IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE THOSE TWO ITEMS, BECAUSE THE CITY OF DALLAS IS VERY PARTICULAR WHEN IT COMES TO, UM, UM, UH, MY BRAIN JUST WENT BLANK.
AND, AND, AND IF ONE THING THAT YOU ARE SUPPLYING ARE OFFERING GET IS IN THAT, IS IN THAT, UM, THAT USE, THEY WANT YOU TO GET THAT S U P.
SO EVEN IF THE MAJORITY OF THE BUILDING, IS THAT THE REASONING BECAUSE THE MAJORITY OF THE BUILDING, MORE THAN THE MAJORITY OF THE BUILDING IS A OFFICE, OFFICE, MEDICAL OFFICE.
BUT BECAUSE THOSE TWO ROOMS, YES, BECAUSE THE, AGAIN, DALLAS IS VERY, WHEN YOU GET TO JEFFERSON, THEY'RE VERY PARTICULAR.
IF YOU MENTION IT ONE TIME, IT'S A U IF IT'S, IF IT'S NOT ALLOWED BY.
AM I RIGHT? IS THAT THE REASONING THAT YES, Y'ALL COME BACK? YES.
YOU KNOW, I, I HAD MENTIONED THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THOSE HAD BEEN LABELED SOMETHING ELSE, BUT THAT'S NOT THE WAY YOU SHOULD DO THINGS.
SO ARE ALSO, IS IT VA ARE YOU ALSO, UM, VACCINES OR ARE YOU, ARE YOU, ARE YOU ALSO OFFERING, UM, PHYSICALS? YEAH.
AND THAT, SO IS IT THE PHYSICALS OR THE VACCINES? SURE.
THAT THAT COULD BE SOME OF THE THINGS THEY OFFER.
LIKE, WELL, DALLAS SCHOOLS, YOU KNOW, UM, OFFER THEM ON OCCASION PHYSICALS AND OTHER PLACES OFFER FOR A, FOR ATHLETICS, FOR BAND, ALL THOSE EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES.
SO THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE THINGS THEY'D CONSIDER OFFERING.
SO I DO KNOW THAT D I S D HAS FOR QUITE SOME TIME OFFER WRAPAROUND SERVICES AND MOST OF THE NEW SCHOOLS MM-HMM.
UM, DID YOU ALL CONSULT WITH THE COMMUNITY ABOUT IN, UM, THE OVERFLOW AT OTHER, I MEAN AT OTHER PLANO SCHOOLS THAT MAYBE SOME OVERFLOW AND THAT'S THE REASONING THAT YOU HAVE SO MUCH PARKING AT
[01:45:01]
THIS LOCATION? WELL, YEAH, TH THEY'VE LEARNED FROM EXPERIENCE PROBABLY MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE, THAT, THAT THIS IS THE PARKING THEY NEED.CAUSE OBVIOUSLY THEY DON'T WANT CONCRETE AND PARKING COSTS MONEY AND EVERYTHING ELSE ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
SO THAT'S HOW THEY, THEY'VE HAD EXPERIENCE ON THESE SITUATIONS AND THAT'S COME UP.
UM, AND THEN, YES, WE DID TALK TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S BIGGEST CONCERN WAS, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, ARE THERE GONNA BE LARGE DELIVERIES OF THINGS? AND, AND I SAID, NO, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, AND THEN THIS LAST WEEK, UM, UH, UM, MS. MURPHY, WHO, WHO, LIKE I SAY, I THINK, UH, MICHAEL KNOWS, AND I'VE KNOWN FOR 25 PLUS YEARS, UM, SHE CALLED ME OUT OF, OUT OF THE BLUE AND SAID, BECAUSE SHE SAW MY NAME ON IT AND SAID THIS LAST WEEK, HER QUESTION WAS, ARE THEY GONNA HAVE DROP OFF BINS THAT WE SEE IN RETAIL AND STUFF LIKE THAT? AND THE DISTRICT SAID, NO, NO, THEY WILL NOT DO THAT.
THEY WILL ALL GET THEM EITHER BE DROPPED OFF AT SCHOOLS AND THEY'LL CONSOLIDATE IT TO THIS LOCATION OR THE FOOD PANTRY STUFF WOULD LIKELY COME FROM A FOOD BANK OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE.
AND THE, THE SIZE OF THE VEHICLE IS A, IS A SMALL BOX TRUCK OR VAN OR SOMETHING.
SO SHE SAID, SO WAS THE COMMUNITY, WHAT WAS THE COMMUNITY? WAS THERE COMMUNITY MEETINGS CONCERNING? WERE THEY, UH, HOW, HOW WERE, HOW WAS THE COMMUNITY FEELING ABOUT HAVING, UM, WERE THEY RECEPTIVE TO IT? DID THE COMMUNITY NEED IT IN THAT AREA? DID YOU HAVE PUBLIC MEETINGS ABOUT EVEN, WELL, THE DISTRICT REACHED OUT TO 'EM IN, IN THEIR CONSOLIDATING AND, AND PLANNING ALL THESE.
BUT, UM, AND, AND THE COMMISSIONER AND ACTUALLY THE COUNCIL MEMBER HAVE TALKED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD OUT THERE AND THEY, THEY LIKE THE IDEA, THEY UNDERSTAND IT'S A NEED.
UM, THEIR CONCERNS WERE, UH, THE ARCHITECTURE AND, AND Y'ALL DON'T TALK ABOUT THAT, BUT WE SEND 'EM SOME RENDERINGS AND STUFF.
AND THEN AGAIN, UM, WOULD THERE BE, THEIR CONCERN IS LIKE THAT DROP OFF BIN AND STUFF AND CONCERNED ABOUT THAT AND, AND THE CLEANLINESS OF IT.
THEY HAD NO CONCERN ABOUT THE USE.
THEY UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THAT USE.
AND, AND MENTIONED THERE'S CHURCHES IN THE AREA THAT, AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED, THAT PRETTY MUCH OFFER THAT USE ALREADY TODAY.
SO, UM, WHAT IS THE CLOSEST SCHOOL PLANO SCHOOL TO THAT? UM, THERE'S AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SOUTH OF THAT, UM, PROBABLY A MILE OR SO, MAYBE A LITTLE MORE SOUTH OF THAT.
PROBABLY MORE TOWARDS BETWEEN ARAPAHOE AND BELTLINE.
UM, AND THEN THERE IS A MIDDLE SCHOOL.
IF YOU GO TO THE WEST, UM, IN THE COT, COIT AND FRANKFURT AREA.
THERE'S A MIDDLE SCHOOL OVER THERE.
UM, AND I, I DON'T, TO BE HONEST, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THERE IS IN THE WAY OF PLANO SCHOOL IS IN PLANO BECAUSE THEY'RE ALIVE BY RIGHT IN PLANO.
I WANTED TO ADD SOMETHING IF I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY, JUST SO WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.
MEDICAL CLINIC AND MEDICAL FACILITIES, UM, ARE A BY RIGHT USE.
AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE ONE OF THOSE USES AT THE LONG DEFINITION OF COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER THAT IT REMOVES.
IT'S PART OF ABBU WHERE THEY REMOVE A BUNCH OF ACTIVITIES, MEDICAL SERVICES LIKE VACCINE IS GONNA BE REMOVED FROM THAT.
SO THAT'S A BY RIGHT USE, JUST PUTTING IT OUT THERE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HARBERT.
UM, YOU MENTIONED THE, THE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY, UM, WOULD, SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS PLANO, I S D, IT'S ON THE DALLAS SIDE OR DALLAS CITIZENS WHO AREN'T PLANO IS SD STUDENTS IN THAT AREA, WILL THEY HAVE ACCESS TO SOME OF THESE RESOURCES? DO YOU KNOW WILL DALLAS? NO, THIS IS, IS LIMITED TO PLANO, ISDS FAMILY, STUDENTS AND FAMILIES.
SO THE COMMUNITY YOU SPOKE TO, WERE THEY AWARE OF THAT? YES.
AND, AND IT'S A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THE MAPLE SHADE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS TO THE WEST OF THAT.
THERE ARE SOME HOMES OUT THERE THAT WERE BUILT.
THIS AREA WAS ORIGINALLY PLANNED AND DEVELOPED IN THE EIGHTIES MM-HMM.
AND THERE WERE A LOT OF SOME HOMES BUILT THERE TO THE WEST.
AND THEN BASICALLY IT'S SORT OF BEEN COMMERCIAL GOBBLED UP BY NON-RESIDENTIAL, SHALL WE SAY.
AND THE LAST QUESTION IS ON LOCATION.
WAS THERE, UH, RESEARCH ON THE NEED IN THAT AREA SPECIFICALLY, OR IS JUST EVERYBODY NEEDS IT.
WE'RE JUST GONNA PUT IT THERE AND PEOPLE WILL COME IF WE BUILD IT, THEY WILL COME.
PROBABLY, PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT OF BOTH.
OBVIOUSLY THIS IS AN AREA OF, OF IF THEY DIVIDE THIS, THEIR DISTRICT AND THE QUADRANTS.
THIS IS AN AREA THAT DOESN'T, THAT JUST HAPPENS TO BE IN DALLAS.
UM, THEY OBVIOUSLY OWN THE LAND, WHICH MADE IT CONVENIENT.
AS I MENTIONED, THEY WERE GOING TO DO PROBABLY FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AGO, THEY WERE GONNA BUILD AN EARLY LEARNING CENTER, AND WE WERE, HAD SUBMITTED A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THEY DECIDED NOT TO, TO DO IT THERE.
UM, SO I THINK IT WAS A LOT OF THAT.
THERE IS A NEED PROBABLY, UM, THE, THE AREA.
THERE ARE, THERE ARE, THERE IS A NEED IN, IN THOSE SCHOOLS SOUTH OF THERE EVEN.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON,
[01:50:01]
I'M GONNA JUMP IN HERE.ONE QUICK FOLLOW UP TO, UH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT'S QUESTION.
UH, MR. CROWLEY, ISN'T IT, TH THIS PD IN FACT, UNIQUE IN THAT IT REQUIRES A NOTIFICATION OF THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION, IN FACT, THE SPECIFIC ONE.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, HOW MANY EV PARKING SPOTS ARE YOU PROPOSING FOR THIS MASSIVE PARKING LOT YOU WANT? UM, WE HAD NOT PLANNED ON E, BUT I GUESS, UM, MUCH LIKE THE SCHOOL HERE IN A MINUTE WE'LL PROBABLY GET SOME, UH, ADDED TO IT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY.
C I, COMMISSIONER HAWK, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO IN THE MATTER OF, IT'S V 2 12 26.
I BELIEVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE, UM, APPROVE THE FOLLOWING THE SITE POINT.
I'M GETTING A REALLY BAD ECHO.
I WE'RE, I THINK WE GOT ABOUT HALF OF THE MOTION.
CAN YOU PLEASE REPEAT IT? MY APOLOGIES.
IN THE MATTER OF Z 212 3 26, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR AN S U P.
AND HERE ARE THE RECOMMENDED, UH, CONDITIONS.
UM, ONE, THE USE IS, UH, FOR A COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER.
NUMBER TWO, THE COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER IS LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA OF 11,000 SQUARE FEET.
THE S U P IS APPROVED FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS HOURS OF OPERATION.
IT'S LIMITED TO 7:00 AM TO 7:00 PM THE PROPERTY MUST BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED IN STATE OF GOOD REPAIR AND NEAT APPEARANCE.
THERE WILL BE ONE EV PARKING SPACE, AND THE USE OF THE PROPERTY MUST COMPLY WITH ALL FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS, REGULATIONS AND WITH ALL ORDINANCES, RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF DALLAS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAWK FOR YOUR MOTION.
WOULD THAT INCLUDE, UH, SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OUTSIDE OF THE, UH, EIGHT CONDITIONS THAT YOU READ INTO THE RECORD? YES, I MENTIONED TO A SITE PLAN.
I'M NOT SURE IF YOU CAN HEAR ME.
SO YES, ONLY THE EV'S DIFFERENT.
UH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAWK FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER BLAIR? CAN I MAKE A RECOMMENDATION? PLEASE? CAN I, CAN I, UH, DO A FRIENDLY, UM, AMENDMENT, COMMEN AMENDMENT, UM, EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS, TENURE PERIOD WITH NO, NO AUTOMATIC RENEWALS AT THIS TIME.
WHAT'S THE REASONING? THIS IS A BRAND NEW USE.
THIS IS A USE THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN.
WE DON'T KNOW WITH THE BEHAVIOR.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE.
WE DON'T, WE CAN'T, WE DON'T KNOW THE OPERATION.
AND, AND INSTEAD OF COMING IN AT A SHORTER PERIOD OF TIME, UM, I WOULD JUST THINK THAT IF AFTER THAT TIME PERIOD THEY COME AND THERE IS NO, UM, ADVERSE USE, THERE IS NO NOTHING THAT IS, UM, ADVERSE TO THE COMMUNITY THAN AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME, THEY COULD COME BACK FOR ANOTHER 10 YEARS WITH AUTOMATIC RENEWALS AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME.
SO JUST A QUICK QUESTION FOR CLARIFICATION.
IF THIS WERE D I S D, WOULD WE HAVE THAT SAME ORIENTATION? YES, I WOULD, I WOULD MAKE THAT SAME RECOMMENDATION.
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO IT WAS, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO, WHO IS THE USER? IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE USE AND THAT THIS IS AN APPLICANT WHO'S DOING SOMETHING FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE OR HOW IT'S GOING TO FEEL, OR HOW IT'S WILL POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY IMPACT THAT COMMUNITY.
SO EVEN IF IT WAS, UH, A D ONE LIQUOR OVERLAY OR IF IT WAS AN, OR SOMETHING OF THAT PARTICULAR NATURE, I WOULD MAKE THE SAME RECOMMENDATION.
WELL, WE DO KIND OF FAVOR SCHOOLS BECAUSE OF JUST THE RELATIONSHIP, AND WE'VE ACTUALLY TALKED QUITE A BIT OF MAKING SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE SCHOOLS COME IN FRONT OF US BECAUSE WE WANT TO HONOR THEM AND THEIR OPERATIONS.
UM, AND ALSO, THIS IS THE FIRST IN THIS AREA, BUT NOT THE FIRST FOR PLANO.
[01:55:03]
COMMISSIONER HAWK, YOU'RE, UH, WELCOME TO, UM, ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OR YOU'RE WELCOME NOT TO, UM, IT'S UP TO YOU.I WOULD BE IF, IF IT DEPENDS ON HOW MY OTHER FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ARE FEELING.
SO CAN WE HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT OR, OR NOT? I, WHAT, WHAT YOU, YOU DIDN'T MAKE AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION.
YOU MADE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
SO YOU CAN CHANGE IT TO AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION.
I DO A YOU WITHDRAW YOUR FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
I I RE WITHDRAW THE FRIENDLY MO, UH, AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT AND MAKE A FRIENDLY ALTERNATES MOTION TO ACCEPT ALL OF THE CHANGES.
YEAH, IT CAN JUST BE AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION.
AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION TO FOLLOW ALL THE CONDITIONS IS RIGHT INTO THE RECORD EXCEPT FOR STRIP OUT THE AUTO-RENEWAL.
AND WHO SECONDED THAT? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
OKAY, LET'S DIS SO THAT IS THE, UH, THE NEW MOTION ON THE TABLE.
WE'LL VOTE THAT ONE UP OR DOWN, AND THEN WE'LL GO BACK.
IF ITS DENIED, WE'LL GO BACK TO THE FIRST MOTION.
SO NOW DISCUSSION ON STRIPPING OUT THE 10 YEAR, UH, THE AUTO RENEWAL PORTION.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG, I'LL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE AMENDED MOTION.
UH, I THINK THE STAFF ITSELF RECOGNIZES THAT THERE IS A POTENTIAL FOR OVER 10 YEARS, A CHANGE IN THE CHARACTER OF THIS AREA THAT MAY REQUIRE REVISITATION OF THE S U P.
UM, I, UNLIKE STAFF DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE PROCESS OF HAVING PEOPLE SUBMIT OBJECTIONS TO THE AUTOMATIC RENEWAL WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMMODATE THAT.
UM, I THINK THIS IS LIKELY TO WORK OUT WELL, BUT IT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO WORK OUT BADLY.
LET'S SAY WE HAVE A DOWNTURN IN THE ECONOMY AND A VERY SHARP INCREASE IN THE DEMAND FOR THE SERVICES THAT THIS, UH, CENTER IS GOING TO PROVIDE.
I CAN ENVISION 10 YEARS FROM NOW IT CAUSING PROBLEMS FOR THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY, UH, THAT WE AT LEAST OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO TAKE A LOOK AT AND ADDRESS.
I SECOND THE MOTION SO THAT I COULD ALSO, UM, HEAR THE DISCUSSION AS I BELIEVE, UH, COMMISSIONER HAWK WANTED TO AS WELL.
UM, I DO SUPPORT THE MOTION, UM, FOR MANY OF THE REASONS THAT, UM, COMMISSIONER YOUNG OUTLINED NEW REQUESTS LIKE THIS.
SOMETIMES THERE MAY JUST BE SOME MINOR ADJUSTMENTS AND THAT GIVES AN AM PERIOD FOR IT TO BE EVALUATED AND THEN THE OPPORTUNITY, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THERE ARE ANY REVISIONS THAT MAY BE NEEDED TO MAINTAIN COMPATIBILITY.
YES, I SUPPORT THE MOTION AS WELL.
AND WE'LL BACK THAT UP TOO BY THE FACT THAT I HAVE OFTEN WITH D I S D SCHOOLS WHEN THEY ARE BRAND NEW AND WE DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, WE'VE NEVER SEEN THE OPERATION OF TMPS AND HOW THINGS ARE GONNA DO.
I HAVE ADDED TO SOME OF MY CASES THAT IT, THE FIRST 10 YEARS YOU WOULD HAVE TO STOP AND LOOK AT IT AND GIVE THE PUBLIC A CHANCE TO HAVE A VOICE AT A PUBLIC HEARING THAT IT'S WORKING.
SO I DON'T THINK THIS IS TRYING TO PENALIZE IN ANY WAY PLANO.
I THINK IT'S JUST THE NEW USE AND SEEING HOW IT OPERATES.
AND AGAIN, GIVING THE PUBLIC AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING 10 YEARS FROM NOW DOESN'T SEEM UNREASONABLE ANY RIGHT.
WAIT, SO I HAVE A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT SPIN.
I WAS SURPRISED THAT THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE THIS USE CASE FOR THE ENTIRE BUILDING.
IT'S NOT RESTRICTED TO JUST WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR.
SO I SUPPORT LOOKING AT THIS AFTER 10 YEARS BECAUSE THEY EITHER WE HAVE A SEPARATE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT RESTRICTS THE COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER PORTION TO SOME PORTION OF THE BUILDING AND NOT PERMIT THEM TO GO ALL THE WAY UP TO THE ENTIRE SQUARE FOOTAGE, WHICH IS, I THINK WHAT COMMISSIONER HAWK'S MOTION DID.
UM, SO I THINK WE CAN ADDRESS IT BOTH WAYS, BUT I I, I DEFINITELY HAVE CONCERNS WITH THIS POTENTIAL USE CASE NOT EVER BEING REEVALUATED.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? ONE LAST COMMENT.
UM, SO I'M A FAN OF EDUCATION AND TYPICALLY WOULD BE A FAN OF ALLOWING THE SCHOOL TO COME IN AND BEGIN TO MAKE ITS WAY IN THIS NEW LOCATION.
HOWEVER, I AM ALSO, UM, THINKING IN CONCERT WITH THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS ABOUT THIS BEING THE INITIAL USE.
[02:00:01]
IT STILL MAY BE PRUDENT FOR THEM TO COME BACK BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY MAY OR MAY NOT APPROVE OF THIS USE, OR IT MAY CHANGE IN THE FUTURE.AND I THINK AT LEAST TO COME BACK AFTER ONE YEAR OF ONE, ONE PERIOD OF RENEWALS WOULD BE GOOD SO THAT WE COULD EVALUATE IT AND THEN PASS THAT.
I MAY HAVE SOMETHING DIFFERENT TO SAY, BUT, UM, I'M, I'M FOR A, A LIMIT ON THE S U P AT LEAST INITIALLY.
I'LL ALSO BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION THAT STRIPS OUT THE AUTO RENEWALS, UM, FOR MOST OF THE REASONS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED.
BUT, YOU KNOW, THE AUTO-RENEWAL PROCESS SETS A VERY HIGH BAR TO TAKE NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT INTO CONSIDERATION.
YOU KNOW, STAFF HAS TO GRANT THE AUTO-RENEWAL IF THE, UM, IF, IF AT THE TIME AUTO-RENEWAL IS IS TRIGGERED, UM, THE SITE PLAN IS, UM, WHAT WHAT'S GOING ON ON THE GROUND IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SITE PLAN AND THE CONDITIONS.
THERE'S REALLY NO CHANCE TO, UM, CHANGE CONDITIONS AT THAT POINT.
I THINK 10 YEARS, 10 YEAR INITIAL PERIOD IS VERY GENEROUS.
AND SO I DON'T THINK IT'S ONEROUS TO, UM, HAVE THEM COME BACK AND BE REEVALUATED.
AND I ALSO FIND IT, UH, TROUBLESOME.
I DON'T EVEN THINK IT SEEMS TO BE NECESSARY BASED ON WHAT MR. CROWLEY SAID, THAT THE COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER USE IS LIMITED TO 11,000 SQUARE FEET BECAUSE THAT, THAT IS THE ENTIRE BUILDING.
BUT I WILL DEFINITELY BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION WITHOUT THE AUTO RENEWAL.
UM, WELL, I GUESS I'LL BE THE LOAN VOTE THAT DOES NOT SUPPORT THE MOTION.
I THINK THIS IS A GREAT USE ON A GREAT SITE.
I THINK IT'S ADEQUATELY BUFFERED FROM OTHER USES.
UH, IT'S A REGIONAL LOCATION JUST OFF THE HIGHWAY AND IT'S PLANO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT TRYING TO SERVE ITS CONSTITUENTS.
AND, UH, I DON'T SEE THAT WE NEED TO, UM, MISTRUST THAT.
AND I DON'T SEE THAT WE NEED TO ERECT MORE, UH, HIGHER BARRIERS FOR THEM TO GO, UH, DO THEIR JOB IN A VERY, VERY, UH, DIFFICULT SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES WITH THE, THE CULTURE AND THE, AND THE, THE, UH, THE, THE CITIES THAT WE HAVE TODAY.
SO, UH, I WILL NOT SUPPORT THE MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HAUSER WRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT? YES, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION BECAUSE, UM, AS COMMISSIONER BLAIR POINTED OUT, I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO FIND A TRUE WRAPAROUND SERVICE IN PLANO I S D IN MY RESEARCH.
UM, LIKE THIS JUST SEEMS LIKE A PHASED APPROACH TO THE PROCESS.
AND THIS BUILDING LOOKS LIKE THE FIRST SEPARATE BUILDING FROM A SCHOOL THAT THEY'VE DONE, WHICH IS LIKE COMMISSIONER BLAIR SAID NEW.
UM, SO I AGREE WITH THE SERVICES.
TRUST ME, I, I TOTALLY THINK THE SERVICES ARE NEEDED, WHICH SHOULD MAKE THIS A EASY 10 YEAR RENEWAL.
WELL, IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE A DIRECTION HERE.
SO I, I'VE JUST, UM, UH, I GUESS I'M CONFLICTED ON THIS ONE A LITTLE BIT.
UM, I THINK I, I COULD SUPPORT THE, THE NO AUTOMATIC RENEWAL EFFECT ONLY BECAUSE IT'S NOT A SCHOOL.
UM, THIS ONE IS, UH, A COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER THAT I THINK IS GONNA BE AN ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY.
IT'S GONNA SERVICE THE KIDS OF PLANO, I S D UM, I, I KIND OF FOLLOW THE RATIONALE OF, YOU KNOW, LET'S GIVE FOLKS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK, BUT WHERE IT TRIPS ME UP AND IT TRIPS ME UP EVEN MORE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SCHOOLS IS, SO THIS IS A 10 YEAR PERIOD, SO WE'RE GONNA HOPE THAT THE ISSUES AND WHATEVER IT'S GONNA, YOU KNOW, BE DETRIMENTAL.
THE COMMUNITY'S GONNA HAPPEN NINE AND A HALF YEARS FROM NOW, RIGHT? BECAUSE OTHERWISE, WHICH IS GONNA SIT AROUND FOR NINE YEARS WAITING FOR THEM TO COME BACK.
SO THAT'S WHERE IT JUST SEEMS A LITTLE BIT IRRATIONAL TO ME.
UM, BUT I, I SEE THE WAY OUR COLLEAGUES ARE GOING.
SO, WE'LL, UM, WE'LL TAKE A VOTE UNLESS THERE'S ANY OTHER COMMENTS.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY, UH, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON TO CLOSE UP OF THE HEARING AND FALSE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD, NO AUTOMATIC RENEWALS, UH, SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN.
AND THEN THE EIGHT CONDITIONS IS READ INTO THE RECORD BY, UH, COMMISSIONER HAWK IN REGARDS TO THE CENTER, THE MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE, UM, THE HOURS OF OPERATION, UH, AND THE EV PARKING.
YEAH, THIS IS, THIS IS A VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT.
ON JUST THE AMENDMENT OF, OH, JUST THE AMENDMENT OF NO AUTO.
THIS IS JUST PERFECT, COMMISSIONER.
SO THEN JUST THE AMENDMENT OF NO AUTOMATIC WIN.
ALL, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[02:05:01]
NOW WE GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION WITHOUT THE AUTOMATIC RENEWAL.ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT PLEASE? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YEAH.
UH, WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO LIMITING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER TO SMALLER THAN THE, THE ENTIRE SIZE OF THE BUILDING? CUZ LIKE THAT WOULD ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE CONCERNS IF, IF THERE WEREN'T THE POSSIBILITY THAT THIS ENTIRE BUILDING COULD BE A COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER IF IT WERE INDEED LIMITED TO, I DON'T KNOW WHAT SQUARE FOOTAGE, UH, MR. CROWLEY WAS SAYING.
UH, ANYWAY, THAT'S, THAT'S THE QUESTION.
I HAVE A QUESTION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY BASED ON WHAT HE, I THINK WE HAVE ASKED ONE QUICK QUESTION ALREADY ON THE FLOOR HERE.
IS THAT COMMISSION, YOUR QUESTION WAS QUESTION.
I'M JUST ASKING THE PLANNER OR MR. CROWLEY, IF THERE WAS ANY, IF THEY WOULD CONSIDER, PLEASE, IF THERE WAS ANY DISCUSSION OF LIMITING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE POTENTIAL COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER? CUZ RIGHT NOW IT SAYS 11,000 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS THE ENTIRE BUILDING.
PLEASE, I CAN, I CAN SPEAK TO THAT YOU'D LIKE.
UM, WELL WE'RE FORTUNATE THAT THE PERSON SITTING BEHIND ME IS THE ARCHITECT.
HE'S HERE FOR THE OTHER SCHOOL, BUT, UM, HE SAID, UM, 1200 SQUARE FEET WOULD BE THE MOST THEY WOULD EVER CONSIDER PUTTING THAT USE IN THERE.
SO, UM, IF HE FEELS CONFIDENT, I FEEL CONFIDENT OF 1200 SQUARE FEET, IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION YOU WANT TO GO TO, THE REST OF THE USE, OBVIOUSLY THE BUILDING IS GONNA BE OTHER USES ALLOWED BY RIGHT, OF COURSE.
UNLIKE A CLARIFICATION THAT GOES WITH COMMISSIONER CARPENTER'S QUESTION, BECAUSE WHEN I DID THE S U P ON HEART HOUSE, WHICH WAS FOR A CHILDCARE CENTER IN A MULTI-FAMILY, UH, I WAS TOLD THAT THE U P WENT FOR THE WHOLE SITE REGARDLESS IF IT WAS ONLY GOING TO BE 800 SQUARE FEET, IT WAS ASSIGNED TO THE ENTIRE SITE.
IS THAT CORRECT OR NOT? THAT IS, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE AREA OF REQUEST.
IT DEPENDS ON THE AREA OF REQUEST.
DID YOU GET THE ANSWER? WHAT DID HE, YOU SAID THAT YOU WERE CORRECT.
OKAY, SO IF, IF THAT'S CORRECT, THEN I BELIEVE THIS S U P IS ASSIGNED TO IS WHY IT'S ASSIGNED TO THE WHOLE BUILDING.
NOT PARTICULARLY SAYING THAT THAT'S WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN MY DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
I DON'T REM RECALL HOW THIS WAS DONE, WHERE IT SHOWED, I'VE SEEN SOME HATCHED OUT.
IT'S, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER YOUNG, UH, QUESTION FOR THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
IT NA STANDING, THE FACT THAT THE S U P IS FOR THE ENTIRE SITE, COULD WE IMPOSE A LIMITATION THAT NO MORE THAT, THAT THE S U P USE, THE COMMUNITY CENTER USE, UH, CAN OCCUPY NO MORE THAN 1200 SQUARE FEET OF THAT SITE? YES, YES.
I WOULD JUST, I JUST WANNA CHIME IN HERE AND SAY THAT COMMISSIONER HOT THINK THAT WE, WE'VE GOTTA BE CAUTIOUS ABOUT WHAT PLANS ARE AND HOW THINGS ACTUALLY GET EXECUTED, WHICH IS WHY WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD, YOU KNOW, SOME TIME TO LOOK AT THE S U P AND TO REALLY REEVALUATE IT.
SO IF WE SAY, IF THE ARCHITECT IS SAYING, WELL, HEY, WOULD THEY ONLY NEED 1200 SQUARE FEET? BUT THEN BUSINESS OPERATION SAYS, YOU KNOW WHAT, IN TWO YEARS WE ACTUALLY NEED 1500 SQUARE FEET.
I THINK THAT IT'S REALLY, UH, LIMITING TO PUT SUCH A SMALL AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE ON SOMETHING, MAYBE WE COULD SAY UP TO 50% TO REALLY ALLOW THE, THE APPLICANT AND THE, THE PER THE PEOPLE WHO ARE DOING THE WORK TO EXPAND IF THEY NEED TO.
UM, COMMISSIONER HAWK, IS THERE ANY SENTIMENT THAT YOU'VE HEARD WHERE THE COMMUNITY IS NOT IN FAVOR OF A COMMUNITY CENTER OR A, THE RESOURCE CENTER THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE? SO, NO, I ACTUALLY SPOKE WITH ANNE AS WELL AND SHE WAS VERY SUPPORTIVE AND SHE WOULD'VE BEEN HERE EXCEPT SHE HAD A DOCTOR'S APPOINTMENT.
SO THERE'S SUPPORT FOR THIS, FOR THIS USE.
DO YOU KNOW IF THERE IS, UM, IF, IF THE ENTIRE BUILDING NEEDED TO BE PROGRAMMED, THE ENTIRE 11,000 SQUARE FEET THAT YOU'VE QUOTED, IF IT NEEDED TO BE A COMMUNITY CENTER TO MEET THE RESOURCES IN THAT AREA, DO YOU THINK THE SENTIMENT WOULD BE BAD TOWARDS THAT NOTION? I
[02:10:01]
DON'T GET THAT SENSE.YOU KNOW, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER HAWK ON THIS.
MY FEELING IS BECAUSE I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH, FOR INSTANCE, THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER, WHICH HAS BOTH A FOOD BANK AND HAS MANY OTHER SERVICES THERE.
AND CLEARLY YOU, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT HAS NOT EXPRESSED WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE 11,000 SQUARE FEET OF A FOOD BANK.
THAT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT RIDICULOUS.
SO I DON'T THINK, THINK WE SHOULD PUT CONSTRAINTS ON THEM BEING ABLE TO OFFER WHATEVER SERVICES THEY THINK AND HOW MUCH SQUARE FOOTAGE SHOULD BE DEVOTED TO THOSE IN THEIR PLANNING.
SO I DO SUPPORT, UH, COMMISSIONER HAWK ON THAT.
I DON'T THINK THAT WE ARE THE ONES THAT SHOULD IMPOSE ON THEM.
IT SHOULD BE 1200 SQUARE FEET OR THIS, THAT AND THE OTHER.
I MEAN, IT WOULD BE LIKE MY SAYING TO MY CHILDCARE CENTER, THEY'RE NOT GONNA TURN THE WHOLE MULTI-FAMILY PLACE INTO A CHILDCARE CENTER.
SO I DO FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO GIVE THAT TO THE APPLICANT TO MAKE THE DECISION WHAT'S BEST FOR THEIR POPULATION.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.
I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER STANDARD.
THIS IS A I S D FACILITY PROVIDING A MYRIAD OF SERVICES THAT ARE MUCH NEEDED.
AND WE ALREADY SAID THAT WE'RE IN FAVOR OF THE 10 YEAR, UM, LOOK ON THIS FACILITY AND ITS USE, I THINK THAT MORE THAN PROTECTS THE COMMUNITY AND, AND AS SOMEBODY WHO LIVES IN WALKING DISTANCE FROM A FACILITY THAT IS AT LEAST AS LARGE AS THIS, THAT PROVIDES THESE TYPE OF SERVICES, YOU WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW AT WALKING PAST IT.
SO I, I JUST DON'T HAVE THE SAME LEVEL OF CONCERN ABOUT HOW MUCH OF THIS IS USED TO PROVIDE, UM, FOOD AND CLOTHING.
I'M, I'M ALSO IN AGREEANCE WITH THEM, UM, KNOWING HOW FINICKY IT IS AT THE CITY OF DALLAS, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO THE WORD COMMUNITY CENTER, UM, COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER, IF IT'S BY S U P AND IT COULD JUST BE ONE THING THAT THEY'RE OFFERING.
SO I THINK THAT WE'RE GETTING WRAPPED AROUND JUST THE WORDS COMMUNITY, UM, SERVICE CENTER.
AND IT'S BECAUSE SOMEONE PUT IT IN, IN, IN, IN THAT PARTICULAR PD SAYING THAT WE, THAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO GET THIS BY S U P AND, AND IT WAS A PROTECTION FACTOR.
MOST OF THE TIME WHEN IT'S BY S U IT'S BECAUSE IT'S PROTECTING THE COMMUNITY FROM BEING OVERSATURATED WITH SOMEONE JUST SAYING THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE OFFERING.
AND IN, IN MY EXPERIENCE WITH D I S D DOING THE SAME THING THAT THE WRAPAROUND SERVICES HELPED THE COMMUNITY IN FOR A LONG TIME, COMMUNITIES HAVE ASKED THE SCHOOLS TO DO MORE IN SOME KIND OF WAY.
SO THE WRAPAROUND SERVICES, UM, UM, I, I DO, I, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I DID KINDA HAD A QUESTION ABOUT IS THE SEVEN TO SEVEN AND IS THAT BEING THE, THEY HAVE TO BE OFFERED THE PROPERTY BY SEVEN BECAUSE IF THEY'RE OFFERING SOME OF THESE WRAPAROUND SERVICES IN THE SUMMERTIME WHEN THERE'S MORE, UM, LIGHT, UM, I, I I, I WANTED TO POSSIBLY SAY TO NINE, UM, JUST TO GIVE THAT CUSHION.
UM, BECAUSE IN THE SUMMER WE, THEY USE MORE RESOURCES CUZ CHILDREN ARE OUTTA SCHOOL.
SO NINE O'CLOCK KIND OF BUFFER CUZ IT'S STILL PRETTY MUCH NIGHTTIME AT NINE.
I KNOW MAYBE IF THAT COULD BE A, A CONSIDERATION OR AME, UH, AMENDMENT.
TELL ME HOW TO SAY IT AND I'LL SAY IT.
COMMISSIONER HAWK, I THINK, UH, YOU HAVE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
IS IT TO EXPAND THE HOURS OF OPERATION FROM SEVEN TO NINE? YES.
UM, WHEN WE HAVE MORE LIGHT OUTSIDE, I UNDERSTAND IT'S SEVEN IN THE WINTER, BUT, UH, MOST OF THE, IF THEY'RE GONNA BE DOING WRAPAROUND SERVICES, THEY'RE GONNA BE A SUMMERTIME IS WHEN IT'S GONNA PROBABLY HIT THE BUCK OF ACCEPT IT.
WE DO HAVE ACCEPTED THE, UH, FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO EXPAND THE HOURS ALL OPERATION FROM SEVEN TO NINE.
UM, I ALSO SUPPORT THE USE THAT PLANO ISD HAS FOR THIS FACILITY.
UM, BOTH MY KIDS ARE A D I S D WRAPAROUND SERVICES ARE CRITICALLY NEEDED FOR SCHOOLS.
IF WE'RE GONNA EXTEND THE HOURS LATER, I'M JUST WORRIED THAT THE KIDS DON'T HAVE A GREEN SPACE TO PLAY ON.
MAYBE THERE'S A PLAYGROUND THAT GOES IN OR SOMETHING ELSE, BUT AGAIN, I WILL, I WILL SUPPORT THE USE CASE, UH, FOR, FOR THIS BUILDING.
WELL, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SUPPORT, UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELERS BECAUSE I THINK WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT REC CENTERS, FOR INSTANCE, THEY STAY OPEN.
I MEAN, YOU MENTIONED NINE, BUT THEY SORT OF SHUT DOWN AT EIGHT.
AT LEAST THAT'S LONGER WITH DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME.
AND A LOT OF KIDS, YOU KNOW, WORK IN THE AFTERNOONS
[02:15:01]
AND THEY MIGHT NEED THE COUNSELING IN THE EVENING, IN THE SUMMERS, PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY CAN GO.SO I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA.
IF COMMISSIONER HAWK IS IN AGREEMENT, CHARITY AND CHARITY GREEN.
COMMISSIONER BELAIR, MY APOLOGIES.
I AGREE WITH THE WHOLE FACILITY BEING A COMMUNITY SERVICES CENTER.
UM, WE NEED THEM ALL OVER THE PLACE WITH, IN THE ENVIRONMENT WE LIVE IN TODAY.
UM, SO I, AND I AM ALSO IN AGREEMENT IN EXTENDING THE HOURS OF OPERATION, WHETHER IT BE EIGHT, A 8:00 PM OR 9:00 PM IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME.
UM, I THINK THAT WHETHER THIS IS LIMITED TO JUST PLANO, I S D OR THE COMMUNITY IN WHICH IT SITS, IT'S GIVING SERVICES MUCH NEEDED SERVICES THAT WE DON'T HAVE TODAY.
SO I AM TOTALLY IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT, WITH, WITH IT BEING, UM, EXTENDED TO ALL OF THE BUILDING.
UH, ALIGNED WITH COMMISSIONER TREAD WADE'S QUESTION ABOUT GREEN SPACE OR A PLAYGROUND OR WHATNOT, IF THAT WAS CONSIDERED, UM, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME SORT OF DEC DECIDUOUS TREE ON THE SOUTH SIDE FACING THAT PARK SO THAT, THAT THE KIDS DON'T GET BURNED UP IN THE HEAT.
UH, I GUESS I JUST A AGREE WITH ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES, UH, AND SAY, UH, I THINK THIS IS GONNA BE AN ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY FOR MORE THAN JUST PLANO ASD STUDENTS.
UH, THESE SERVICES THAT, UH, PLANO ASD STUDENTS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF, BENEFIT ALL OF US, FRANKLY.
SO I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE CURRENT MOTION, AND I, I, I THINK I DON'T HEAR ANY FURTHER FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS IN TERMS OF LIVING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
OR, OR DO WE HAVE ONE? SO DO WE HAVE THE, THE CURRENT MOTION STANDS ON THE FLOOR EXCEPT WITH THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, UH, THAT WAS ACCEPTED BY COMMISSIONER HAWK IN REGARDS TO ADJUSTING THE HOURS OF OPERATION FROM 7:00 AM TO 9:00 PM SO THAT IS A MOTION ON THE TABLE NOW, COMMISSIONERS.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALTHOUGH IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANDERSON? IT WAS, YES, IT WAS COM MOTION.
I GOT MY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
LET'S TAKE OUR FIRST 10 MINUTE BREAK COMMISSIONERS.
WE'RE GETTING BACK ON THE RECORD.
WE'RE MOVING ON TO CASE NUMBER FIVE Z 212.
ITEM FIVE, CASE C 212 DASH 3 54.
AN APPLICATION FOR A DA DUPLEX SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED IN R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 95, THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF SYDNEY STREET, NORTHEAST OF SECOND AVENUE STAFF'S.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. MULESI, THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
MY NAME IS ANISH THARA, UH, 32 0 8 COLE AVENUE, 75 204.
UM, I AM THE APPLICANT AND THE BUILDER, UH, SORRY.
CAN I PAUSE MY TIE,
WE'LL, JUST THE STRUCTURE, WE'LL PAUSE UNTIL WE GET THAT GOING.
[02:20:52]
OKAY.UM, TO START WITH, I'D LIKE TO OFFER A DEED RESTRICTION ON, UH, 20 FOOT SETBACK.
I KNOW THAT WAS A BIG, BIG, UH, ITEM IN THE DISCUSSION PRIOR TO THAT.
SO HERE IS, UH, WHAT WE'VE DESIGNED FOR THIS, THIS LOT.
UM, AT COMMISSIONER WHEELER, REGAN'S SUGGESTION, UH, WE DESIGNED IT WITH BOTH DOORS FACING FORWARD.
SO THE, THE, THE, BOTH, THE, THIS TWO DUPLEX, I MEAN A DUPLEX, SO BOTH FOUR DOORS ARE FACING THE STREET, WHICH REALLY GIVES IT A FEEL OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE ON, ON THE STREET.
SO WE ALSO DID A BRICK FACADE AND A PITCH ROOF, UNLIKE A LOT OF THE HOUSES GOING IN RIGHT NOW THERE WITH THE FLAT ROOF, WHICH REALLY DOESN'T FIT IN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WE, IT, I FEEL IT, UM, I FEEL IT, UH, REALLY FITS IN WITH THE REST OF THE HOUSES ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WE'RE ALSO SELLING BOTH UNITS AND WE'RE TARGETING 80 TO ONE 20% AMI BUYERS.
SO WE'RE GONNA KEEP IT AT AN AFFORDABLE RATE FOR BOTH UNITS.
NEITHER OF 'EM GONNA BE A RENTAL RENTALS.
UM, CAN YOU, UH, OH, HERE WE GO.
SO HERE'S KIND OF AN OVERVIEW.
I KNOW THIS WAS INCLUDED IN, UH, THE PACKET, UH, FROM STAFF.
UM, SO AS YOU CAN SEE ACROSS THE STREET, UM, EVERYTHING'S UNDEVELOPED.
65% OF THIS STREET IS UNDEVELOPED, SO IT'S NOT REALLY, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S REALLY SET ON MULTI, UH, SINGLE FAMILY AT THE MOMENT.
UM, FI LESS THAN 500 FEET AWAY ON HANCOCK.
THERE'S A WHOLE STREET OF DUPLEXES.
AND WHEN, WHEN, UH, THE QUESTION OF BLOCK FACE, I KNOW IF IT'S REALLY SMALL RIGHT HERE, BUT THERE'S THE HOUSE RIGHT NEXT TO MY, THE LOT, UM, IS SET FORWARD FROM THE REST OF THE STREET.
SO THE BLOCK FACE IS ALREADY, UH, NON-CONFORMING BECAUSE THAT'S, THAT THAT HOUSE IS FORWARD VERSUS THE HOUSE IS ON THE LEFT OF MY LOT ON THE RIGHT.
ALL THOSE HOUSES ARE SET BACK, SO THE BLOCK FACE IS ALREADY NONCONFORMING.
UM, UM, LIKE I SAID BEFORE, I'M OPEN TO DE RESTRICTIONS AND, UH, CONSIDERING DESIGN AND, UM, UH, THE PRICING AND OBVIOUSLY A 20 FOOT SETBACK.
AND, UM, I'M OPEN TO QUESTIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR APPLICANT COMMISSIONER YOUNG, PLEASE.
UH, COULD YOU ELABORATE ON WHAT DEED RESTRICTION YOU'RE OFFERING AS THE SETBACK? SURE.
UM, ANOTHER, WHAT I WAS SITTING IN ON THE PRIOR DISCUSSION, AND, BUT, AND, AND, SORRY, GO AHEAD.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE BIG THING WAS 25 FEET VERSUS 20.
WELL, BUT HERE'S WHAT I'M GETTING AT.
SO, SO WHAT ARE YOU OFFERING THAT YOU WILL SET BACK AT LEAST 20 FEET? UH, WITH THE REST OF THE HOUSE? YEAH.
BUT IN LINE WITH THE REST OF THE HOUSES.
BUT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOU CAN'T BUILD A HOUSE WITH A 20 FOOT SETBACK UNDER THE ZONING THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR? THAT'S, WELL, I WASN'T AWARE.
THE ZONING YOU'RE ASKING FOR HAS A 25 FOOT SETBACK.
SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WOULD BE TRUE, THAT THE DEEP RESTRICTION THAT YOU'LL BE AT LEAST 20 FEET BACK DOESN'T OKAY.
UM, ONE FOLLOW, YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE ARE DUPLEXES, UM, IN A NEARBY BLOCK.
ARE THOSE ZONED AS DUPLEX OR ARE THEY ZONED AS MULTI-FAMILY? OR, EXCUSE ME, SINGLE FAMILY.
CURRENTLY, SOME THEY ARE ZONED AS, UH, DUPLEX.
SOME OF 'EM, SOME OF THEM HAVE VOLUNTARILY.
WHEN YOU DRIVE THE STREET, YOU CAN SEE HOW ONE SIDE HAS BEEN, UH, CLOSED OFF.
BUT YOU CAN SEE AT ONE POINT THERE WERE DUPLEXES.
BUT ON HANCOCK, ON THAT STREET, THERE ARE DUPLEXES.
[02:25:01]
I'M GONNA LOOK OVER HERE FIRST.ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER? WHAT? UH, THINK SHE GOT ME FIRST.
SO CAN YOU NOT DO THE DEED RESTRICTION BECAUSE IT'S NOT MORE RESTRICTIVE, IT'S ACTUALLY LESS RESTRICTIVE.
IS THAT'S WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? YEAH, THAT'S KIND OF A QUESTION FOR ME.
UM, YOU, YOU CAN ONLY GO MORE RESTRICTIVE WITH DEED RESTRICTIONS.
SO HE COULD INCREASE THE 25 FOOT SETBACK TO 30 FEET, 50 FEET, WHATEVER.
UM, BUT AS COMMISSIONER YOUNG NOTED, UM, A 20 FOOT SETBACK WOULD BE LESS RESTRICTIVE THAN WHAT BASE CODE REQUIRES.
THAT'S, SORRY FOR THAT CONFUSION.
THAT'S, THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT COMMISSION YOUNG HAD SAID.
SO FOR THE APPLICANT, WHAT, CAN YOU PUT BACK UP A PICTURE AND JUST WALK US THROUGH MAYBE WHAT ARE THE EXISTING SETBACKS ALONGSIDE, YOU KNOW, THIS, I MEAN, I HAVEN'T, I DIDN'T, I HAVEN'T MEASURED IT, BUT WAIT, SORRY.
BECAUSE CAUSE SO, I MEAN, UH, SORRY, GO AHEAD.
SO THE, WHERE THE LINE IS, THAT'S WHERE THE SUBJECT LOT IS.
SO ON THE LEFT SIDE, THAT HOUSE THERE, YOU CAN, YOU CAN KIND OF TELL THE LEFT, THE HOUSE ON THE LEFT IS SET FORWARD.
I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY THE, THE FOOTAGE THERE, BUT THAT'S SET WAY FORWARD THEN COMPARED TO THE HOUSES ON THE, ON THE RIGHT.
SORRY, CAN YOU, CAN YOU ORIENT ME A LITTLE BIT BETTER? WHERE'S THE PLACE, DO YOU SEE THE CIRCLE? IT SAYS UNDEVELOPED, CORRECT? ACROSS THE STREET THERE'S A LINE THAT SAYS WITH THE ADDRESS, CORRECT.
SO ON THE LEFT SIDE, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE LOT IS, IS A HOUSE.
AND THAT'S SITTING A LOT MORE FORWARD THAN THE HOUSE IS ON THE RIGHT OF THE LOT.
SO IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT THERE'S NOT ALREADY A CONTINUOUS LOT LINE, CORRECT.
THAT'S KIND OF THE, THE, THE POINTHOUSE MAN.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, THEN COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, PLEASE.
SO, SO THE LOT LINE, UM, SO THE MAJORITY OF THE HOUSES, THAT ONE PARTICULAR HOUSE DOES NOT SIT BACK, BUT THE, THE MINOR HOUSES DO SIT BACK IN THAT 20%.
UM, AND THE DUPLEXES IS, BUT ISN'T THE DUPLEXES NOT IN ON THAT STREET? IT IS CORRECT.
IT'S NOT ABOUT 500 AND THOSE, AND THAT'S A LINE OF DUPLEXES IN THAT, IN, IN THAT AREA.
BUT IN THE MAJORITY OF THAT AREA, THEY DO.
AND THOSE DUPLEXES ARE CONTINUANCE.
THEY'RE NOT, THERE'S NOT A BREAK EXCEPT FOR THOSE THAT, UH, MAYBE THE OWNERS HAD TRANS TRANSFERRED BACK OVER TO SINGLE FAMILY.
BUT IN, IN, IN THE AREA YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
IT'S ABOUT WHO THE, THE, THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE STREET WHERE HANCOCK WITH THE STREET WITH THE DUPLEX IS ABOUT 500 FEET, BUT IT'S NOT 500 FEET FROM THE DISTANCE WHERE THE DUPLEX IS STARTED.
IT'S NOT 500 FEET FROM WHERE THE DUPLEX IS STARTED.
AM I CORRECT? IT'S NOT WHERE, WHERE THE, IT'S NOT SO FROM YOUR PROPERTY LYING TO WHERE YOU'RE TALKING, WHERE THERE'S DUPLEXES IN THE AREA THERE, IT IS NOT 500, WITHIN 500 FEET.
UH, UH, I MEAN, I MEASURED IT ON GOOGLE, SO I DON'T KNOW.
I MEAN, THAT WAS, THAT PULLED OFF FROM GOOGLE, GOOGLE EARTH.
SO, BUT IN THAT PARTICULAR, YOU KNOW, BUT EVEN WITH THAT SETBACK, IF YOU PUT THE DUPLEX, IT MAKES ALL, EVEN THE HOUSES THAT SIT BACK FURTHER, THAT'S CLOSER TO THE END OF THE STREET, UM, IT MAKES THOSE BECOME NONCONFORMING.
SO EVEN THOUGH THE ONE THAT SITS UP FURTHER, YOU WILL, YOU ARE FURTHER MAKE THE ONES THAT THAT SIT BACK, UM, THAT DO SIT BACK 20 FEET NONCONFORMING IF YOU ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE A DUPLEX.
AM I CORRECT? MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I NEED TO ASK STAFF.
SO EVEN WITH THAT ONE HOUSE THAT SITS NEXT TO THE LOT BEING CLOSER, UH, WHEN I CAN'T TELL YOU IF IT'S 20 FEET AND THE OTHER ONE SITTING, ARE WE THE STAFF QUESTIONS OR ARE WE STILL QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? WE'RE STILL ONLY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
SO, SO JUST BASED OFF OF GOOGLE, BUT THE DUPLEXES ARE NOT IN THAT PART.
IT'S, YEAH, IT'S NOT DIRECTLY NEXT.
I JUST WANNA POINT OUT JUST IT'S MORE THAN 500 FEET AND THEY'RE CONTINUING.
WE'LL COME BACK TO, UH, QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
AND THIS IS MAY BE FOR STAFF FOR, FOR, FOR YOU MR. MULKEY, THE HOUSE THAT'S SITTING UP FRONT, I GUESS OUT OF COMPLIANCE.
IS THERE A WAY TO SEE IF THAT ONE
[02:30:01]
WAS ZONED THAT WAY OR IF THEY GOT A VARIANCE OR DID THEY JUST BUILD THE HOUSE AND NOBODY CAUGHT 'EM AND THEY'RE LIVING IN IT? I'D PREFER TO HOLD ALL STAFF QUESTIONS TILL THE STAFF WE'RE KIND OF SKIPPING AROUND AND I, I DIDN'T FOLLOW MY OWN RULE THAT I'M SETTING.SO I'M SORRY YOU GUYS, IF YOU COULD JUST, YEAH, LET, LET'S, UH, LET'S COME BACK TO, TO RYAN AND LET'S HAVE JUST QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT AT THE MOMENT AND THEN WE'LL CIRCLE BACK.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I'M LOOKING AT YOUR PICTURE HERE, YOUR SITE PLAN.
AND, UM, SO THIS IS ACTUALLY AN, AN INTERESTING PART OF TOWN IN THAT, UH, SYDNEY THERE.
IN FACT, IF YOU, UH, WHAT IS THAT STREET RIGHT THERE? THE STREET THERE ON, ON YOUR SLIDE, ON THE RIGHT SIDE, UH, THAT'S NOT HIGGINS.
RIGHT THERE ON THE RIGHT SIDE.
SO IF YOU, IF YOU, IF YOU TURN ON FROM HUEY ONTO YOUR STREET ON SYDNEY STREET, AND YOU CAN'T SEE IT HERE ACTUALLY, BUT YOU CAN'T DRIVE SYDNEY'S STREET ALL THE WAY THROUGH.
IN FACT, THERE'S A, THERE'S LIKE A, A GREEN EASEMENT THERE, RIGHT? ISN'T THAT CORRECT? THAT I DON'T KNOW.
I CAN'T, I MEAN, WHAT'S THAT? I DON'T HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF OF EASEMENT? YEAH.
IF YOU, IF YOU GET ON SYDNEY RIGHT? AND YOU DRIVE THROUGH IT ACTUALLY DEAD ENDS.
SO LIKE, IT SEEMS LIKE A GREEN EASEMENT OR SOMETHING THERE.
AND THEN YOU HAVE TO GO AROUND TO GET BACK ON SYDNEY TURN AND THEN YOU'LL HIT HANCOCK, RIGHT.
YOU HAVE TO GO, COME, COME BACK AROUND AND ACTUALLY SYDNEY PICKS UP AGAIN.
WHERE THE, WHERE THE CLUB IS? YEAH.
IN FACT, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SAME STREET.
SEPARATED BY THIS GREEN EASEMENT.
I THINK THERE'S A MULTI-FAMILY OVER THERE.
WELL, THERE'S A, THE INFAMOUS CLUB.
AND MULTI-FAMILY ON SYDNEY ON THAT OTHER SIDE.
SO I'M, I'M TRYING TO GET CONTEXT HERE WHERE THAT'S WHERE THE WAY EL C FEY IS ON THAT WHERE, WHERE IT MEETS, UM, THE, WHERE, WHERE THE DART RAIL IS OVER THERE, RIGHT? YEAH.
BUT ON, ON THIS PORTION, BEFORE YOU GET TO THAT GREEN EASEMENT, IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S, IT'S PRETTY UNIFORM ON BOTH SIDES.
THERE'S, THEY'RE JUST THOSE, THE SMALLER LOTS.
IN FACT, I BELIEVE THERE'S ALREADY SOME, SOME CONSTRUCTION THERE ON THAT STREET.
WELL, THEY'RE ALL ABOUT 6,007 TIMES SQUARE FEET, RIGHT? YEAH.
AND SO THE, THE DUPLEX THERE IS NOT ON THE OTHER, IT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT GREEN EASEMENT, BUT IT'S ON ANOTHER STREET.
YEAH, THE ONES THAT ARE ON YOUR SIDE.
IT'S ON, IT'S ACTUALLY ON HANCOCK.
I JUST WANT TO, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST SOMETHING I THREW OUT THERE.
NO, I, I SEE THERE, THERE, THERE IS SOME IN THE AREA TO SUPPORT MY CASE.
I JUST PUTTING IT INTO CONTEXT, I APPRECIATE IT.
UM, SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING UP THE HANCOCK STREET.
I THINK ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS SPOKE UP EARLIER ABOUT WHEN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS WERE DESIGNED.
THE INTERIOR WERE FOR SINGLE FAMILY AND THOSE OUTER SKIRTS WERE FOR, UH, DUPLEXES.
AND THAT KIND OF LOOKS LIKE WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE ON HANCOCK.
UM, HAVE YOU CONSIDERED, UM, SINGLE FAMILY AND IF NOT, WHY? YEAH, I, I BUILD OTHER SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES WHERE WE ARE BUILDING LAND TRANSFER PROPERTIES, ALL SINGLE FAMILY.
I HAVE, UM, I BOUGHT THIS LOT FROM THE SHARE SALE.
I THINK I OVERPAID FOR IT A LITTLE BIT.
OFF FROM SHARE OF SALE AND, YOU KNOW, SO YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO TELL ME NONE OF MY BUSINESS, I'M SORRY, BUT NO, NO.
AND THE ONLY WAY TO REALLY, A GOOD WAY TO EASE THAT IS TO SPREAD THAT PRICE OUT OVER TWO HOU TWO, TWO UNITS.
SO YOU CAN BRING DOWN THE HOU THE, THE COST OF THE HOUSES, UM, A LOT MORE.
THAT'S WHY I CAN, I CAN SPREAD THAT OVER TWO UNITS AND BRING IT DOWN TO TWO 50 OR UNDER.
SO THAT'S KIND OF THE THOUGHT PROCESS THERE.
AND MY FOLLOW UP IS, DO YOU HAVE PLANS FOR FUTURE BUILDING AROUND THAT AREA? YEAH.
YOU'LL PROBABLY BE SEEING ME ALONG MORE MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY.
UH, THAT'S BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS SPECIFIC, UH, REQUEST.
UM, SO EVEN THOUGH THAT YOU, THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT THERE IS, UM, SOME OLDER MULTI-FAMILY, WHICH IS APARTMENT COMPLEX.
IT'S A COUPLE OF APARTMENT COMPLEXES.
WHAT IS BEING, WHAT IS THE, UH, IN THAT AREA? DID YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE ACTUAL PLAN FOR THAT AREA? DID YOU LOOK AT THE HATCH STREET PLAN? HATCHER PLAN? YES.
I, I READ IT, UM, ONCE I GOT THE STAFF REPORT AND, YOU KNOW, UM, MR.
[02:35:01]
MOKI MENTIONED THAT I DID, AND ONE OF THE ITEMS IN THERE IS, UM, MENTIONED WAS, UH, YOU KNOW, SOME, UH, SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT OF, YOU KNOW, MORE FLEXIBLE ZONING TO BRING IN MORE DIFFERENT TYPES OF HOUSING.SO I THINK THAT KIND OF SUPPORTS MY REQUEST.
UM, LET ME GIMME A SECOND CUZ I DON'T RECALL.
WE JUST WENT OVER THAT WITH ANOTHER, JUST HAD TO DO THAT WITH ANOTHER CASE.
LET ME RE OF COURSE COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
LET'S GIVE IT A SHOT TO THE APPLICANT.
WHY NOT COMMISSIONER STANDARD
I'M SURE DANIEL WILL BE JUMPING ON ME.
SO YOU SAID, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY SOMETHING.
WAS YOUR THINKING, CUZ I HEARD YOU SAY YOU WERE GOING TO, YOU WERE DEVELOPING IT, YOU WANTED TO SELL BOTH SIDES.
AND THAT YOU WERE GOING TO SELL THEM AT AM FFI RATES AT 80 TO ONE 20 AMMI, UH, INCOME BAN.
SO WE'LL QUALIFY THE, THE, OKAY.
IT'S, IT'S SIMILAR TO, HERE'S MY QUESTION.
WOULD A SINGLE FAMILY NOT QUALIFY FOR AM FI WELL, THE, I'M JUST CURIOUS, CAN I ASK THAT QUESTION? DANIEL
I MIGHT, I'LL, I'LL LET YOU, I MEAN, I GUESS THE, WHAT I'M GETTING TO BY MY QUESTION IS THIS, WAS HE BUILDING A DUPLEX BECAUSE THAT WAS THE ONLY WAY HE COULD QUALIFY FOR THE AM F I CONDITIONS? NO, LET'S SAY THAT ONE FIRST.
IS THAT A STAFF QUESTION? THAT'S WHAT I WANTED.
YES, I CAN THAT, BUT THANK YOU.
SORRY, UNNO, IF I'M ALLOWED TO ANSWER THAT.
SORRY, BUT I CAN'T ANSWER THAT IF YOU'D LIKE.
SO THE HE STREET PLAN IS NOT SO MUCH ABOUT THAT TYPE OF HOUSING.
IT IS MORE ABOUT A DEVELOPMENT IN A T O D AROUND THAT AREA.
SO, UM, IT WAS, IT WAS, IT WAS TO DEVELOP A WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WITH DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF IT.
THE MAJORITY OF THE BUILDERS THAT ARE BUILDING IN THAT NA NOT THE MAJORITY, ALL THE BUILDERS THAT ARE BUILDING THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ARE ALL BUILDING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES RIGHT NOW.
AND SO THE CONSIDERATION IS THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY, UM, COULD TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION AND HAVING A COMMUNITY MEETING, UM, TO FIND OUT WHETHER THEY WOULD SUPPORT IT ALSO.
AND AFTER TALKING WITH STAFF, I DID ASK STAFF, BUT STAFF SAID THEY DON'T NECESSARILY TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATE RATE.
THEY COULD, THEY LOOK AT, BUT THAT IS NOT THE DECIDING FACTOR, RIGHT.
AND, UM, THAT PARTICULAR AREA NOW IS, UM, IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS, THE HATCHER STREET STATION PLAN HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP BY STAFF IN SEVERAL COMMUNITY MEETINGS.
AND I, THEY BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE VERY SERIOUS NOW AND TAKING CONSIDERATION THAT PLAN.
UM, PERSONALLY I HAVE NEVER PAID MUCH ATTENTION TO THAT PLAN UNTIL THE LAST TWO WEEKS.
I'VE ALWAYS WATCHED PD 5 95 AS A WHOLE, BUT THERE'S A PLAN FOR THAT AREA.
AND, AND, AND SO HAVE YOU, DID YOU TALK TO ANY OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORS SURROUNDING THAT HOUSE? I MEAN THAT PROPERTY, THAT PARTICULAR PLANT? SO, SO I DID TRY TO LOOK FOR COMMUNITY AND I THINK WE SPOKE ABOUT IT, UM, IS IT CAN BE DIFFICULT UNLESS IT'S MILL CITY OR BEAND TO FIND PEOPLE TO, OTHER THAN KNOCKING ON INDIVIDUAL DOORS, WHICH I DID NOT DO UNDERSTANDABLY.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, I KNOW WHERE MILL CITY COMMUNITY MEETING IS BERTRAN, BUT I WAS NOT SURE, TO BE HONEST.
BUT THE ROSE GARDEN COMMUNITY IS, EXCUSE ME, IT'S THE ROSE GARDEN COMMUNITY.
THEY'VE BEEN ACTIVE FOR THE LAST TWO, ESPECIALLY THE LAST TWO MONTHS THEY'VE, THEY'VE BEEN TO, IT'S A BUNCH OF MEETINGS.
SO MY CONSIDERATION IS BECAUSE OF, OF THERE IS, EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE OLDER DUPLEXES IN THE AREA, DID YOU KNOCK ON THE DOORS OF THOSE WHO ARE DIRECTLY AROUND THERE? THERE'S ONLY ABOUT FIVE HOUSES ON THAT BECAUSE THERE'S SUCH A SMALL STREET, IT'S ABOUT FIVE HOUSES.
I DID NOT, THEY WOULD BE DIRECTLY IMPACTED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONERS? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER WHEELER? NO.
[02:40:01]
IN, SO DURING THE COURSE OF YOU, UM, UM, LOOKING AT DENIAL OF WHETHER TO APPROVE, DID YOU, YOU, DID YOU ALSO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THOSE MULTI-FAMILY, THEY ARE IN THE AREA THAT HAS BEEN THERE AND ALSO THAT THERE WAS DUPLEXES IN PROXIMITY, UM, MAYBE A STREET OVER.DID YOU TAKE THAT INTO PROXIMITY AND STILL, UM, BUT THE, AND ALSO DID YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE, THE HATCHER STREET, UH, THE HATCH HATCHER STATION PLAN AND WHAT IS BEING BUILT, WHAT IS CURRENTLY BEING BUILT IN THE AREA? OR DID YOU, UM, CAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT ALL YOU TAKING CONSIDERATION, BUT I DO KNOW THAT STAFF HAS BEEN MAKING RECOMMENDATION JUST NOT IN THIS, IN OTHER CASES LATELY.
AND IT'S ALL BEEN GOING BACK TO THAT HATCHER STREET PLAN, THE HATCHER STATION PLAN, AND THEN THE HATCHER STATION PLAN.
I THINK IT WAS MORE ABOUT THE WALKABILITY AND NOT, AND NOT SO MUCH MIXED USE HOUSING.
SO I WANTED TO, UM, PULL UP THE ZONING MAP.
UM, THIS ORANGE, UH, RECTANGLE RIGHT HERE IS THIS REQUEST.
UM, SHE DID HAVE POINTED OUT SOME PROPERTIES THAT HAVE SOME MULTI-FAMILY USES ON ITEM.
I THINK THEY'RE AT THIS INTERSECTION.
THIS IS STILL SYDNEY OVER HERE, UM, OLDER HOUSE.
THERE MAY BE MULTI-FAMILY USES THERE TODAY.
UM, THIS IS ZONED A NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD 5 95.
UM, SO IT'S PROBABLE THAT THEY, THOSE USES THAT EXIST ARE NON-CONFORMING WITH THE CURRENT ZONING.
UM, AND THEN THE APPLICANT ALSO POINTED OUT, I THINK IN THIS GENERAL VICINITY, PERHAPS ON THIS STREET, UM, THERE WERE SOME EXISTING DUPLEX USES.
THAT AREA IS ZONED IN R FIVE A SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD 5 95.
SO THOSE USES MAY EXIST, BUT IT'S PROBABLE THAT THEY ARE NONCONFORMING UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING JUST TO KIND OF CLARIFY THOSE THINGS.
UM, AND THEN AS FAR AS, UM, STAFF'S REVIEW, UM, LIKE I SAID THIS MORNING, THE, THE BASIS OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS ZONING AND LAND USE ONLY.
UM, SO YOU KNOW, WE'RE RECOMMENDING DENIAL BECAUSE THE DUPLEX DISTRICT AND THE DUPLEX USE WE FEEL ARE NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY USES AND THE SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT AND THE AREA.
UM, AND, AND AS YOU MENTIONED, UM, AREA PLANS, COMP PLANS AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF CAN SUPPORT THAT RECOMMENDATION.
THEY CAN'T BE THE BASIS OF THAT.
THE HATCHER STATION AREA PLAN ACTUALLY DOES SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL BECAUSE THIS PORTION OF THE STUDY AREA OF THAT PLAN ON THAT LAND USE CONCEPT PLAN I SHOWED THIS MORNING IS RECOMMENDED FOR ESSENTIALLY SINGLE FAMILY USES.
UM, AND THEN THE APPLICANT HIMSELF MENTIONED SOME OTHER, UM, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE CASE REPORT.
THOSE DON'T COME FROM THE HATCHER STATION AREA PLAN.
THOSE ARE FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLUS PLAN, WHICH ARE CITYWIDE.
COMMISSIONER STANDARD HAD A QUESTION ABOUT IN COMBATANT.
I HAVE A QUE I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.
I WAS GONNA ASK ABOUT THE DUPLEXES, HOW THEY GOT THERE.
AND SO THEY'RE THERE FOR WHATEVER REASONS, BUT THE ZONING HASN'T CHANGED.
MY NEXT QUESTION IS, I NOTICED ON THE STREET WHERE THE NEAREST COMMERCIAL IS ON SECOND AVENUE.
THAT FRONT SECOND AVENUE, AND THEN THERE'S A LOT NEXT TO SYDNEY AND SECOND AVENUE.
HOW IS THAT LOT ZONED? LET ME PUT ON THE AERIAL IMAGE IMAGERY, YOU KNOW WHERE I'M TALKING ABOUT? YEAH.
OUR MAP RIGHT NOW DOESN'T HAVE STREET LABELS AND IT CAN MAKE THINGS CONFUSING.
UH, THIS WHITE LINE HERE IS SYDNEY STREET.
THIS IS SECOND AVENUE, UHHUH
AND UM, AND THERE'S EXISTING STUFF, BUT AT THE CORNER OF SYDNEY YOU'LL SEE IT'S UNDEVELOPED, I BELIEVE SYDNEY AND SECOND SYDNEY.
AND SECOND, WHAT IS THAT ZONE THERE? I'M JUST CURIOUS.
THAT IS ZONED A COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD 5 95.
SO A COMMUNITY, I'M, I'M BEING THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE HERE, A COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL IS 1, 2, 3, 4 DOORS DOWN IN A SINGLE FAMILY.
HERE GOES TO MY NEXT QUESTION, WHICH IS CONTROVERSIAL.
I KNOW IT'S YOUR FAVORITE BUZZWORD MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'VE TALKED, I I GET IT, I GET THE LAND USE, I GET THIS IS A SINGLE FAMILY THING.
IT'S ENCROACHING I UNDERSTAND ON FOUR SIDES.
BUT I ALSO REMEMBER WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, UH, THE WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN, WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT AND STAFF DID PUTTING IN QUADROPLEX AND DUPLEXES, NOT JUST ON THE CORNERS, BUT A LOT OF PLACES.
[02:45:01]
I GUESS I'M GOING WITH KIND OF WHERE THIS FITS IN ON THAT.I KNOW THAT'S A ROUNDABOUT QUESTION.
SO, UM, YEAH, LIKE I KIND OF EXPOUNDED ON THIS MORNING.
THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH THAT OUR TEAM, THE ZONING TEAM CAN DO WITH SOME OF THAT, I'LL CALL IT THOUGHT LEADERSHIP.
UM, BECAUSE WHAT WE DO IS CASE BY CASE INCREMENTAL, UM, THE DIRECTION.
SO I THINK THERE WAS GONNA BE ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT THIS LATER, BUT I'M NOT THE INTERIM PLANNING MANAGER ANYMORE.
SO LET ME TAKE OFF MY, YEAH, THANK YOU.
MY SENIOR PLANNER CAP ON AND PUT MY PLANNING MANAGER CAP ON.
UM, THE DIRECTION THAT WE AS A GROUP WOULD LIKE TO BE HEADED NOW THAT WE ARE WITHIN THE PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN DEPARTMENT IS TO USE OUR INCREMENTAL WORK AND OUR CASES THAT WE DO TO HOPEFULLY TIE MORE INTO LONGER RANGE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS AND SOME OF THAT THOUGHT LEADERSHIP PROVIDED THAT, YOU KNOW, WE STILL STAY IN OUR LANE, UM, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A LOT OF LEGAL RESTRICTIONS, UM, PUT ON US.
UM, SO THERE'S LIKE, BACK TO MY POINT, THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH WE CAN DO WITH A SINGLE ZONING CASE FOR A SINGLE LOT TO REALLY INFLUENCE SOME OF THOSE BIGGER DECISIONS.
WE HAVE TO GO WITH THE TOOLS WE HAVE AVAILABLE TODAY, UM, WHICH DO LEAD US TO THIS RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL.
UM, BUT I DID DO SOME CONSIDERATION IN THE CASE REPORT TO JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME BIGGER GOALS POSSIBLY AT PLAY HERE THAT DON'T COINCIDE WITH THE, THE LIMITED PURVIEW THAT OUR TEAM CAN HAVE.
ONE LAST QUESTION, AND IT'S A QUICK ONE.
IF THIS PARTICULAR LOT, AND I AM BEING THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE HERE, WE'RE RIGHT NEXT TO THAT COMMERCIAL SPOT, WOULD IT BE A DIFFERENT DETERMINATION OR WOULD IT STILL BE IF THAT ZONE SINGLE FAMILY, ITS OWN SINGLE FAMILY POTENTIALLY? UM, BECAUSE IT IS ON THE EDGE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, THERE MAY STILL BE SOME OF THAT BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY STUFF, UM, THAT, THAT, UH, INTERFERES.
UM, BUT THAT COULD BE A PRETTY COMPELLING REASON.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS ALL HYPOTHETICAL, BUT, BUT YEAH, BECAUSE I DO UNDERSTAND THIS ONE IS SURROUNDED BY FOUR SINGLE, THIS IS MID BLOCK.
AND DID YOU WANNA ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ON THE, UH, THE INCOME BANS? INCOME BANS AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF? OKAY.
UM, SO I'M GONNA SAY THAT MY ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS THAT WE PROBABLY CAN'T DISCUSS THAT.
UM, BECAUSE THE ONLY, UM, TOOL THAT ZONING HAS THE CITY OF DALLAS TODAY TO DISCUSS THOSE INCOME BANS IS THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, WHICH CURRENTLY ONLY APPLIES TO MULTI-FAMILY.
UM, THERE ARE FINANCING OPTIONS AVAILABLE FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOME OWNERSHIP, UM, THAT ARE DONE THROUGH THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT.
UM, BUT I'M GONNA DECLINE TO COMMENT ON THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOT TIED TO ZONING AS OF TODAY.
UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER STANDARD BRINGS UP A VERY IMPORTANT POINT, UM, AND I'D JUST LIKE TO GO BACK AND ADDRESS IT REAL QUICK WITH YOU.
UH, AND THAT'S IN TERMS OF THE, THE WORD THAT SHE USED, THE MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING AND FACT, SHE MENTIONED ROCA, AND THERE'S SOME AREA PLANS HERE THAT YOU REFERENCED IN YOUR, IN YOUR CASE REPORT, AND IT'S JUST, ISN'T THAT ALMOST THE PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE DISCUSSED AT LENGTH HERE? UH, OVER SEVERAL VERY LENGTHY MEETINGS ABOUT HOW THOSE PLANS IN FACT ARE 30,000 FOOT, 20,000 FOOT, 10,000 FOOT.
AND WHAT THEY DON'T SAY IS, WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO THE INDIVIDUAL LOT LEVEL, YOU SHOULD DO X.
IT'S, IT, WHAT THEY SAY IS WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO THE LOT LEVEL WHERE THE CURB CUTS ARE, YOU SHOULD CONSIDER THIS 30,000 SQUARE FOOT, 30,000 FOOT LEVEL THING.
AND WHEN THIS CASE IN PARTICULAR, YOU KNOW, THE, IF YOU READ MAYBE SOME OF THE PLANTS SURROUNDING IT, THEY MIGHT LEAD YOU TO THE MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING.
BUT WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO THE LOT LEVEL WHERE THE CURB CUTS ARE, STAFF TOOK A LOOK AND SAID, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T QUITE MAKE SENSE HERE.
SO YOUR QUESTION REALLY HIGHLIGHTS THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHAT'S USUALLY CALLED CURRENT PLANNING AND LONG RANGE PLANNING.
UH, LONG RANGE PLANNING FOR THE MOST PART IS GUIDELINES, WHEREAS CURRENT PLANNING IS REGULATIONS LIKE WRITTEN IN BLACK AND WHITE ON PAPER.
THIS IS HOW WE REGULATE THIS PROPERTY.
UM, REGULATIONS ARE A LOT MORE BLACK AND WHITE THAN GUIDELINES.
SO THANK YOU COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
UH, YES, I WANT TO ASK ABOUT THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR, WHICH IS, UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE AERIAL IT DOES INDEED, IT IS INDEED CLOSER TO THE FRONT LOT LINE THAN 20 FEET.
UM, LOOKING AT DECA, THAT HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1978 AND LOOKING AT PD 5 95 THAT WAS PASSED IN 2001.
UM, MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT PRIOR TO PD 5 95, MOST OF THIS AREA WAS OWNED INDUSTRIAL, WHICH, UH, PRIOR TO 1987 WAS CUMULATIVE.
[02:50:01]
CORRECT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.AND IT HAS LITTLE OR NOTHING IN THE WAY OF FRONT SET, FRONT YARD SETBACKS.
SO THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE AN EXPLANATION FOR HOW THAT HOUSE CAME TO BE AS CLOSE TO THE STREET AS IT IS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER YOUNG, COMMISSIONER BLAIR.
PIGGYBACKING OFF OF WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER YOUNG HAS SAID, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE TYPE OF AREAS FOR DEVELOPMENT AND WE HAVE NONCONFORMANCE ISSUES, UM, AND I DON'T WANNA SAY ISSUES, I WANNA SAY NONCONFORMANCE CONCERNS, CONCERNS,
IT DEPENDS, YOU KNOW, UM, I, A MORE GENERAL ANSWER I CAN GIVE YOU IS WE TYPICALLY WOULDN'T RECOMMEND CREATING NONCONFORMITIES.
UM, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE WENT FURTHER.
IF THEY, IF LIKE COMMISSIONER YOUNG SAID THAT WAY BACK WHEN THIS WAS ALL INDUSTRIAL MM-HMM.
AND THEN THAT'S DEVELOPMENTS THAT'S ALWAYS GOING TO HAPPEN ANYTIME YOU, UM, YOU KNOW, DO A MAJOR OVERHAUL OF YOUR CODE LIKE WAS DONE IN 1987 OR YOU ESTABLISH A SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT FOR AN ENTIRE AREA LIKE WAS DONE WITH PD 5 95, ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
THERE IS, THERE ARE MORE THAN OFTEN THAN NOT GOING TO BE SOME NONCONFORMITIES THAT ARE CREATED.
THAT'S WHY WE HAVE LANGUAGE FOR NON-CONFORMING USES IN OUR CODE, UM, IS TO DEAL WITH THOSE SITUATIONS AS THEY ARISE.
UM, MOST OF NON-CONFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES AND EVERYTHING IS, IS REALLY DETERMINED THROUGH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
SO I CAN'T SPEAK TO IT IN TWO GREAT DETAIL, BUT FOR OUR TEAM, UM, WE HAVE A VERY NARROW LANE THAT WE NEED TO STAY IN AND WE CAN REALLY ONLY CONSIDER THE CURRENT ZONING OF A PROPERTY CURRENT USES, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF.
THOSE ARE THE, WE HAVE A VERY LIMITED SET OF TOOLS IN OUR TOOL BELT AND THOSE ARE THE TOOLS THAT WE HAVE TO USE.
SO WHEN WE'RE NOW TALKING ABOUT, UM, I WAS GONNA GET THERE, BRING IT, BRING IT ALL BACK.
UM, WHEN WE ARE LOOKING AT THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT, WHEN YOU LOOK AT PD NINE, UH, 5 95 AND THE, AND THE DUPLEX DEVELOPMENT, IT STILL STATES THAT IT SHOULD HAVE A 25 FOOT SETBACK.
AND IT WENT AND WHEN YOU, BECAUSE IT SAYS THAT IT DEFERS BACK TO THE, THE, THE, UM, THE, THE 51 51 A RULES FOR, FOR, UH, FOR A DUPLEX DISTRICT.
SO TO ASK FOR A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS, UM, THAT HAS IT HA THAT HAS A SETBACK LESS THAN THAT 25, IT, WOULD THAT NOT MEAN YOU'D HAVE TO OPEN UP THE PD AND, AND MAKE ALTERATIONS TO THE PD TO ACCOMMODATE THAT? WOULD THAT NOT BE THE, THE CORRECT WAY TO DO THAT? RIGHT.
SO IF, IF IT WAS ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT CODE IS TODAY, UM, AND BEING THAT IT'S IN A PD, YOU WOULD HAVE TO AMEND THE PD OR IF YOU'RE REQUESTING A DISTRICT THAT'S JUST IN CHAPTER 51 A, IT'S NOT WITHIN A PD, YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO OR LOOK INTO SOME SORT OF CODE AMENDMENT TO MAKE THAT CHANGE.
BUT EITHER OF THOSE THINGS WOULD BE MUCH BIGGER THAN JUST THIS ONE ZONING CASE ON THIS ONE LOT.
SO BASED ON, ON THAT, YOU GOT TO THAT, THAT'S
[02:55:01]
HOW YOU CAME WITH THE UP WITH THE, THE RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL BECAUSE YOU LOOKED AT ALL THESE THINGS AND YOU SAID, BECAUSE OF THIS, BECAUSE OF THAT, THIS AND THAT AND THE OTHER, IN ORDER TO, TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT MM-HMM.THERE WOULD BE A CITY INITIATED AUTHORIZED HEARING OR, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IT COULD, IT COULD, IT COULD COME FROM DIFFERENT SOURCES.
UM, BUT EITHER WAY IT WOULD BE BIGGER THAN JUST THIS ONE CASE.
UM, SO I UNDERSTAND WHY STAFF, UM, INITIALLY I DO UNDERSTAND THE MIDDLE, I UNDERSTAND THAT QUITE WELL, UM, BECAUSE SOUTH DALLAS IS NEEDING A LOT, A COMBINATION OF THINGS, BUT IT ALSO IS THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS DONE EXTENSIVE RESEARCH.
THEY'VE DONE, UH, EXTENSIVE THINGS TO PUT IN PLACE SAFEGUARDS.
IT IS A IS IT FLAWED IN THIS DAY AND AGE? IT IS, BUT IT DO STILL, IT DOES STILL HAVE SAFEGUARDS.
AND ONE OF THOSE SAFEGUARDS IS PROTECTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN AREAS.
I AM VERY MUCH A ADVOCATE FOR MULTI-FAMILY, UM, FOR THAT MIDDLE HOUSING.
UM, THERE IS PROPERTIES THAT'S IN THAT SAME AREA THAT I, I WILL, UM, WILLFULLY SAY THAT THEY, THEY, THEY QUALIFY FOR A MULTI-FAMILY.
I MEAN, THEY'RE QUALIFIED FOR DUPLEXES, BUT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, UM, AFTER TALKING WITH RYAN, I BELIEVE THAT HIM GIVING ME TO THE NONCONFORM AND KNOWING HOW THAT, UM, CAN AFFECT THOSE NEIGHBORS AND I'M AN ADVOCATE FOR REACHING OUT TO THE NEIGHBORS AND SPEAKING WITH THEM.
IF THOSE NEIGHBORS SAID YES, WE WOULD SAY YES.
AND I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE REASONING THAT HE, THAT THE DUPLEX IS, THAT IS A LARGE LOT, THAT IS A VERY LARGE LOT.
UM, BUT THIS PARTICULAR BOX, MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY, I JUST WANNA REMIND COMMISSIONER WHEELER THAT WE'RE STILL ON STAFF QUESTIONS.
SO THE, THE, THE REASON THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT IS BECAUSE IT JUST, RIGHT NOW IT'S NOT A CONFORMING USE AND IT'S IN THE WRONG, REALLY IN THE WRONG PLACE.
BASED ON CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES AND IT'S IN THE WRONG PLACE.
AND I WILL SAY TOO, THE LAST SENTENCE OF MY, OF THE MAIN PART OF THE CASE REPORT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE SAYING WE RECOMMEND DENIAL AND THEN I SAY NONETHELESS, STAFF RECOGNIZES THE CONFLICT BETWEEN PROTECTING EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY AREAS AND ELIMINATING BARRIERS TO PROVIDING MORE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
THAT'S TRUE AT THE CITY OF DALLAS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER HERBERT, PLEASE.
SO, AND THIS IS, I'M LEARNING, UM, MY QUESTION WOULD BE THE AREA THAT STREET IN PARTICULAR, THERE'S A LOT OF EMPTY LOTS, A LOT OF OVERGROWN TREES, GRASS, SO ON AND SO FORTH.
UM, IF WE PUT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THAT LOT, THAT'S A BIG LOT COMPARED TO THE OTHER ONES WHO HAVE A LOT OF GREEN SPACE AROUND THEIR HOUSES, COMPLETELY SURROUNDING THEIR HOUSES, SIDE, BACKYARD, FRONT YARD, SO ON.
RIGHT? HOW, HOW DO WE ATTRACT A BUILDER TO BUILD A PIECE OF PROPERTY, EVEN SINGLE FAMILY THAT CONFORMS THAT WON'T DISTRACT THE OTHER NEIGHBORS OR HURT THE OTHER NEIGHBORS EITHER HEIGHT, SIZE, WIDTH, UM, WITHOUT BASICALLY PROVIDING MORE OF A PROBLEM, UM, IN MAINTAINING YARD SPACE AND HOUSING SPACE AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
UM, MY QUESTION IS HOW COULD WE HAVE MADE THIS WORK FOR THE APPLICANT? YEAH, SO, UM, PUTTING ON MY PLANNING MANAGER HAT AGAIN, A DIRECTION THAT WE'VE BEEN MOVING IN, AT LEAST WHILE I'VE BEEN HERE, AND THIS IS MY PERSONAL APPROACH AND I HOPE TO APPLY IT TO THE TEAM MORE.
UM, I'M VERY SOLUTIONS ORIENTED AND I'M ALWAYS TRYING, COMMISSIONER BLAIR KNOWS THIS ABOUT ME.
UM, I'M ALWAYS TRYING TO WORK WITH ALL OF MY CASES, BE THEY BIG, SMALL, WHATEVER TOWARDS THE SOLUTION THAT IS CONDUCIVE FOR THE CITY, FOR THE PUBLIC, FOR THE COMMISSIONERS, FOR THE COMMUNITY, FOR THE DEVELOPER, EVERYONE.
UM, THAT'S ALWAYS THE GOAL THAT I'M AIMING FOR AND THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS TEAM AIMS FOR.
UM, SOMETIMES THOUGH THE SOLUTION IS DENIAL, YOU KNOW, THERE'S JUST, THERE'S JUST NOT A, A SOLUTION THAT'S MORE OPTIMAL THAN THAT, YOU KNOW.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? JUST ONE VERY BRIEF FOLLOW UP ON, I KNOW I'M SURE YOU SAW ON YOUR SIDE VISIT THERE THAT THERE IS SOME, SOME REDEVELOPMENT GOING ON THERE.
THERE'S, UM, THIS SIDE OF THE STREET, THIS AREA IS OUT OF DATE, BUT THESE LOTS RIGHT HERE, UM,
[03:00:01]
ARE BEING DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY HOMES UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING.UM, SO THERE IS SOME GROWTH IN THE AREA.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
UM, DO I SAY SOMETHING BEFORE OR AFTER THE MOTION? PARDON ME? THE, THE COMMENTS AFTER? YEAH.
UM, IN THE MATTER OF Z TWO 12 DASH 3 54, I MOVED TO FOLLOW, UM, CLOSE THIS PUBLIC ME HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THE REASONING FOR THE DUPLEX.
SECOND WE HAVE IT, WE DO HAVE A SECOND.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR MOTION.
UH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAKE FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE DO NEED, UM, DUPLEXES, WE NEED, UH, MULTI-FAMILY IN THE AREA.
I UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN LOOKING AT IT, YOU LOOK AT IT AND SEE THAT THERE'S DUPLEXES HERE, THERE THERE'S A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT.
THERE IS SOME, UM, OLDER MULTI-FAMILY.
UM, BUT IN THIS INSTANCE, THE NEIGHBORS, I DO BELIEVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WAS TRUE, THAT IT WILL BECOME, IT WILL ALSO MAKE THE OTHER HOUSES BECOME NONCONFORMING AND THAT THERE ARE OTHER CHANCES OTHER IN THE AREA THAT, THAT PROPERTIES THAT YOU HAVE THAT CAN FIT THAT.
BUT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, I, I DEFINITELY WILL HAVE TO SAY A DENIAL ON, UM, YOU.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER BLAIR? OF COURSE, I SECOND IT.
SO I, I AGREE, BUT I I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SAY THAT NOT ALL AREAS NEED THE MISSING MILL.
THE ONE OF THE THINGS WE LOOK AT WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT WOKE CAP WAS, UM, AT ELM THICKE WAS, DOES, IS IT CLOSE TO TRANSIT? IS IT, IS IT NEAR TRANSIT ORIENTED ORIENTED LOCATION IN WHICH THE MISSING MIDDLE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE? THIS IS JUST A SINGLE LOT IN A PD THAT SPECIFICALLY STATES THIS IS WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO.
UM, THAT'S WHY I ASKED, UH, UH, PLANNING MANAGER MULKEY THAT, UM, WHEN WOULD, WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO, TO MAKE THOSE ALTERATIONS? IT WOULD MEAN IT WOULD TAKE A LONG, EXTENSIVE PROCESS, NOT JUST ONE LOT.
YOU WOULD HAVE TO REDEFINE THE PD IN ORDER TO PUT, UH, A, A, A DUPLEX OR ANYTHING OTHER THAN SINGLE FAMILY IN THIS SPOT.
AND IF YOU DO THAT, IT WOULD BE AN ARDUOUS PROCESS TO DO IT FOR EVERY TIME A DEVELOPER WOULD WANT TO COME IN AND DO SOMETHING OTHER THAN WHAT IS PLANNED FOR THIS PARTICULAR PD.
IT'S NOT SAYING WE ARE JUST NOT WANTING YOU TO HAVE A DUPLEX, WE'RE JUST SAYING THAT THIS, IT DOES NOT FIT FOR WHAT THE AREA IT CALLS FOR TODAY.
WE'RE GONNA COME BACK SECOND ROUND TO YOU.
YOU ALREADY MADE YOUR COMMENTS, RIGHT? YOU, YOU ALREADY MADE THE FIRST ROUND OF COMMENTS, CORRECT.
YEAH, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE MOTION TODAY, BUT ONLY FOR THE VERY NARROW REASON THAT THE BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY CREATES NON-CONFORMANCE ISSUES ON THIS STREET.
I THINK WE'VE HAD SOME VERY IMPORTANT DISCUSSIONS TODAY ABOUT MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING, BUT BECAUSE OF THE NON-CONFORMANCE ISSUE, WE DON'T NEED TO ULTIMATELY GET THERE.
AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE ASK WHAT ARE WE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE STAFF'S GOALS IN THE REPORT IS TO PROTECT SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF THINKING TO DO ABOUT WHAT EXACTLY ARE WE PROTECTING SINGLE NA FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS FROM AND WHEN AND IN WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES, YOU KNOW, MIGHT A DUPLEX BE, YOU KNOW, IN CONFORMANCE AND, AND FIT WITHIN, YOU KNOW, A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ALSO CONTAINS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
I'LL DEFINITELY BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION.
I THINK THIS CASE IS A NO-BRAINER.
I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP ON PAGE FIVE 12 AND YOU SEE AN ISLAND OF PROPOSED DUPLEX ZONING SURROUNDED BY
[03:05:01]
A BROAD AREA OF SINGLE FAMILY ZONING, THAT IN GENERAL I IS EITHER VACANT OR OCCUPIED BY SINGLE FAMILY USES.UH, I'M GONNA GO RIGHT OUT AND SAY IT.
I THINK TO GRANT THIS CASE WOULD BE SPOT ZONING.
I ALSO SUPPORT THE MOTION AND I, UM, APPRECIATE, UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER.
REAGAN'S SHARING SORT OF THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH WOULD'VE BEEN KEY IF THIS, YOU KNOW, THE COMMUNITY HAS DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE.
THEY HAVE A PD IN PLACE, THEY HAVE AN AREA PLAN IN PLACE, THEY HAVE PUT IN THEIR TIME AND WITHOUT HEARING FROM THEM THAT THERE IS OTHER CONSIDERATIONS.
UM, I CAN'T SUPPORT REMOVING THIS FROM WHAT IS A CLEARLY ESTABLISHED PATTERN FOR THE AREA.
UM, I TOO SUPPORT, UM, MY PARTNER HERE IN THE DENIAL, BUT I DO WANT TO, UM, STEP ON THE SOAPBOX JUST A LITTLE WHILE.
UM, SO I, I READ THE HATCHER AREA.
I REVIEWED IT QUITE WHEN IT CAME OUT.
I WAS KIND OF AT A COMMUNITY MEETING.
UM, BUT ONE OF THE BOLD STATEMENTS WAS A SAFE, WALKABLE, MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT PROVIDES A RANGE OF NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING RETAIL HOUSING OPTIONS AND VOCATIONAL ENRICHMENT OPPORTUNITIES.
SO AS WE MOVE FORWARD, AS A TEAM, AS A, AS A COMMUNITY, UM, ON THAT LONGER PROCESS, I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER WHAT MIXED, I'M SORRY, WHAT, WHAT HOUSING OPTIONS LOOK LIKE, RIGHT? AND WHERE DUPLEXES IN SINGLE FAMILY WORK AND HOW WOULD THAT HINDER NEIGHBORHOODS, RIGHT? THESE ARE THINGS THAT AS A, AS A TEAM, I THINK WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
SO THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY.
COMMISSIONER WHEELER STUCK AROUND PLEASE.
I, I WANT TO TAKE SOMETHING FROM, UH, WHAT RYAN SAYS OFTEN.
I'M NOT GONNA GET THE WORDS RIGHT, JUST BE THAT, UM, I'M GONNA PARAPHRASE IT.
I THINK IT'S, HE ALWAYS SAYS THAT J THIS ONE PROPERTY DOES NOT DEFINE THIS ONE.
THIS ONE CASE DOES NOT DEFINE ALL CASES IN THE AREA.
SO THIS ONE CASE DOES NOT DEFINE ANOTHER CASE IN THE SAME AREA IF IT FITS AND, AND OTHER CASES IN THE AREA COULD FIT.
BUT THIS PARTICULAR, IF IT, AGAIN, IF IT DID SIT WHERE, UM, I WANT THAT COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DID YOU SAY AT THE, UH, AT THE END OF THIS ROW, THAT COULD BE A POSSIBILITY AT THE END OF A A BY A ALLEY.
MAYBE THAT'S A POSSIBILITY AT A CORNER STREET THAT CHANGES THE DYNAMICS, BUT IT'S CASE BY CASE.
THIS IS NOT FOR THAT WHOLE AREA BECAUSE THERE ARE DUPLEXES IN THAT AREA.
AND IF THERE'S A PROPERTY IN THAT AREA THAT FITS THAT, THEN THAT'S A DIFFERENT SITUATION.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I WILL ALSO BE SUPPORTING THE MO OH, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, PLEASE.
UM, I REALLY, REALLY WANTED TO SUPPORT THE APPLICANT ON THIS ONE, AND I JUST CAN'T GET THERE FOR THE REASONS THAT COMMISSIONER YOUNG, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON AND OTHERS HAVE, HAVE MENTIONED.
UM, I, I REALLY WANT OUR COMMISSION TO, UH, ENCOURAGE, UH, CREATIVITY AND SOLVING OUR HOUSING PROBLEMS. THIS ONE JUST A, AS COMMISSIONER, UH, YOUNG SAID, IT JUST FEELS LIKE SPOT ZONING.
IT'S NOT COMPREHENSIVE ENOUGH.
IT DIDN'T INVOLVE ENOUGH NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT.
SO, UM, I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION OF DENIAL.
I WILL ALSO BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION FOR ALL THE REASONS ALREADY STATED.
UH, JUST LIKE TO ADD THAT, UH, THE, THE INTERESTING THING ABOUT THE AREA IS THAT MAYBE, MAYBE WHAT SOME OF THE AREA PLANES CALL FOR DON'T FIT ON THIS PARTICULAR SPECIFIC LOT WE WILL SEE IN THE FUTURE WITH OTHER, OTHER CASES TO SEE IF, IF IT WORKS OUT.
UH, BUT, UH, THE INTERESTING THING TO ME, WHEN I DID A SITE PLAN AND DROVE AROUND THE AREA, THERE'S MORE THAN A HANDFUL OF LOTS THERE ALREADY GETTING REDEVELOPED.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT, WHAT KIND OF INCOME BAN ARE GONNA BE WITHIN THOSE LOTS, BUT I WOULD BET IT IT'S EXACTLY THE MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING THAT WE ALL KEEP TALKING ABOUT.
EXACTLY WHAT THOSE ARE LOTS ARE GONNA BE.
SO I WILL BE AN INTERESTING THING TO WATCH.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO, UH, FALSE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL, KEEPING THE PUBLIC, UH, CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
UH, IT WAS JUST A, IT WAS A STREET DENIAL.
A STRAIGHT DENIAL NUMBER SIX, SAL GARY, GOOD AFTERNOON.
[03:10:01]
NUMBER SIX.CASE NUMBER SIX IS Z 2 23 DASH 1 0 7.
AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A PUBLIC SCHOOL OTHER THAN AN OPEN ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL ON PROPERTY ZONED IN R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE NORTHWEST LINE OF EAST EAST BOULEVARD BETWEEN KELLOGG AVENUE AND SUNNYVALE STREET STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? GOOD AFTERNOON.
HEY, WELL JUST GIVE US ONE MOMENT.
READY? ELSIE THURMAN, 94 6 BIS KANE BOULEVARD, DALLAS, TEXAS 75,218.
I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A WRITE UP.
I THINK WE'LL ANSWER A LOT OF YOUR QUESTIONS.
I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A WRITE UP.
I THINK WE'LL ANSWER A LOT OF YOUR QUESTIONS.
IT'S A LITTLE OVER THREE MINUTES, SO WHEN I GET CUT OFF, IF YOU WANT ME TO CONTINUE, JUST LET ME KNOW.
ON ZONING CASE C 20 23 107, THE APPLICANT DALLAS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT REQUESTS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT OVERLAY OVER AN R FIVE A ZONING FOR THE NEW JOHN LEWIS SOCIAL JUSTICE ACADEMY PUBLIC SCHOOL.
THIS IS THE RENDERING OF THE FRONT OF OUR, OUR NEW JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL THAT HAS BEEN IN THE PLANNING STATE SINCE 2021.
I IMAGINE MOST OF YOU WERE THERE THEN WHEN THE THEN SUPERINTENDENT OSA ANNOUNCED THE NEW SCHOOL, WHILE THE COMMUNITY AND THE COMMUNITY LEADERS WERE PRESENT.
THIS NEW SCHOOL ALSO PROVIDES A COMMUNITY OF HOPE, A SYMBOL OF THE COMMUNITY.
WE ARE SEEKING A PERMANENT SPECIFIC USE PERMIT AND ADDING THE 20 PARKING SPACES PREVIOUSLY REMOVED FROM THE FACULTY PARKING LOT.
THAT WAS IN OUR ORIGINAL REQUEST.
IN THE COMMENTS I RECEIVED FROM STAFF, THEY WANTED ME TO CONSIDER 35% OF COMPACT PARKING, WHICH THIS COMMUNITY DOES NOT WANT OR HAVE THE CAR SUITABLE FOR COMPACT.
SO WE TOOK 20 SPACES OFF, BUT THIS WAS NOT WHAT THE COMMUNITY OR THE COMMISSIONER WANTED.
THIS COMMUNITY DRIVES MORE OF A CLASSIC CAR, OLD SCHOOL CARS, TRUCKS, SUVS, MID-SIZE.
THIS CAMPUS OF HOPE WILL HOST COMMUNITY HEALTH FAIRS, JOB FAIRS, BACK TO SCHOOL, HAIRCUTS AND BACKPACKS.
AND I'M LOOKING AT A THOUSAND SEAT GYM.
SO THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING IS THERE.
EV PARKING AND CHARGING STATIONS WILL BE A CONDITION OF THE U WE'RE JUST WAITING ON THE LANGUAGE HEIGHT OF THE NEW SCHOOL FACING KEITH IS 38 FEET WITH SCREENS OF 42 FEET IN THE FRONT, THEN IT DROPS OFF TO 20 FEET ON MOST OF THE BUILDINGS.
I THINK WHEN YOU SEE THE FRONT OF THE SCHOOL, IT EXPLAINS THE NEED FOR THE HEIGHT AND THE PRESENTATION THAT IT MAKES TO THE COMMUNITY.
ATHLETIC FIELD LIGHTING IS NOT PART OF THIS REQUEST, BUT WE DO PLAN ON ADDRESSING IT IN THE FUTURE.
THE HOURS OF OF THE PRACTICE FIELDS ARE BETWEEN FOUR AND SIX.
THERE WILL BE NO QUEUING IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
APPEARANCE WILL STILL COME IN OFF EAST.
THERE WILL BE FOUR LANES, ONE AS A PASSING LANE WITH SEVEN STAFF.
ATTENDANCE FOR QUEUING 98 CARS MAY FIT IN THE QUEUE AT ONE TIME.
WE'RE HOPING YOU WILL CONSIDER APPROVING OUR NEW JOHN LEWIS SOCIAL JUSTICE ACADEMY TODAY, AND THANK YOU FOR THE TIME TO LISTEN.
[03:15:01]
28 36 WOODMERE DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 52 33.I WANNA THANK YOU ALL THIS MORNING FOR YOUR SERVICE.
I SERVED THIS CAMPUS AS ITS PRINCIPAL AND I'M ONE PROUD PRINCIPAL CUZ IT'S THE SCHOOL I ATTENDED AS WELL.
SO I'VE LIVED IN THIS COMMUNITY AND I'M EXCITED TO JUST FEEL THIS WHOLE PROCESS.
IT'S THE STORY I'LL TELL THE FAMILIES THAT ATTEND JOHN LEWIS SOCIAL JUSTICE ACADEMY, UM, ARE DESERVING OF A COMMUNITY.
THEY NEED YOUR SUPPORT IN APPROVING THIS PROJECT.
AND YES, YOU'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THE ATHLETIC FACILITIES AND PARK AND, UM, I'M PROBABLY THE MOST WINNING PRINCIPAL IN THE DISTRICT, RIGHT? WE WIN CITY AFTER CITY CHAMPIONSHIPS AND FOOTBALL.
I PROMISE YOU THE SPACE IS NEEDED WHERE EVERYONE'S RIVAL.
AND IF YOU KNOW THIS COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT EXAGGERATING, I'M SEEKING YOUR APPROVAL FOR EVENTS AND ACTIVITIES AS WELL, UM, THAT SERVE THE SOCIAL JUSTICE TENANTS.
THIS COMMUNITY WILL INVITE PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO THAT BRAND NEW EQUITY OFFICE THAT, UM, THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS.
WE'RE ALREADY REACHING OUT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS THE HUB OF WHERE 75,216 WILL KNOW THAT THEY'RE LOVED BY THE CITY.
THIS IS SERIOUS TO ME BECAUSE I KNOW PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY.
WE HAVE GARDENS FOR OUR SENIORS.
I PROMISE YOU, IF I COULD OPEN IT UP 24 HOURS IN SOME CAPACITY, WE DO THAT TOO.
BUT I PROMISE YOU THAT IT'S GOING TO DO SOMETHING FOR THIS COMMUNITY.
UM, IN ADDITION TO THE JOB FAIRS WE WANT TO OFFER PARENTS, WE WANTED TO BE JUST AS BUSY FROM SIX TO 8:00 PM AS IT IS FROM EIGHT O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING TO 6:00 PM SO I KNOW I'M LIMITED IN TIME.
I'M NOT TOO PROUD TO BEG, I BEG YOU TO APPROVE THIS PROJECT.
KATIE LENAHAN, 9,400 NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY.
I, UM, WORK IN THE BOND OFFICE AND I JUST WANTED TO COME OUT AND AGAIN, ADVOCATE FOR THE JOHN LEWIS SOCIAL JUSTICE ACADEMY THAT WE'RE BUILDING, UH, AND GIVE YOU SOME FEEDBACK AND ANSWER MAYBE SOME QUESTIONS THAT I, THAT I'M WE'RE HEARING.
FIRST AND FOREMOST, I WANNA LET YOU KNOW THAT, UH, D I S D HAS A SUSTAINABILITY MANAGER.
HE IS DEDICATED TO SETTING BENCHMARKS AND MONITORING PROGRESS ON SUSTAINABILITY WITHIN THE DISTRICT.
D I S D IS THE LARGEST URBAN SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT USES ALL 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY FROM WIND.
SO WE HAVE A, UM, A COMMITTEE THAT MEETS AND REPORTS TO OUR BOARD OF TRUSTEES QUARTERLY.
THEY SET BENCHMARKS, THEY HAVE TASKS AND GOALS, AND THEY'RE WORKING TOWARDS THOSE TO MAKE US A SUSTAINABLE DISTRICT.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO THE DISTRICT AND IT'S A MANDATE THAT'S SUPPORTED BY OUR TRUSTEES.
UM, WE FOLLOW THE, UH, TEXAS COLLABORATION FOR HIGH PERFORMANCE SCHOOLS.
SO THIS IS THE K-12, UH, EQUAL TO LEAD CERTIFICATION.
WE GO IN AND WE PROVIDE, UM, FOR EACH PROJECT WE MEET THE CHIP STANDARDS FOR HIGH PERFORMING SCHOOL.
THAT INCLUDES, UM, INTEGRATION AND INNOVATION, INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, PARTICIPATION IN ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAMS, WATER MANAGEMENT, LOW EMITTING MATERIALS, EDUCATION DISPLAYS, MIRF 13 FILTERS, OPTIMIZING DAYLIGHT REDUCING, UM, WATER, REDUCING PLUMBING FIXTURES.
SO AGAIN, I JUST WANNA, I, WE, I KNOW EVERYBODY'S INTERESTED AND WE'D LIKE TO, IF POSSIBLE, COME BACK AND BRING OUR SUSTAINABILITY MANAGER WHO CAN TELL YOU MORE ABOUT WHAT THE DISTRICT'S DOING.
BUT I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO US.
I'VE HEARD ANOTHER COUPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ATHLETIC FIELDS.
OUR EDUCATION DESIGN STANDARDS FOR A MIDDLE SCHOOL CALL FOR A FOOTBALL FIELD, BASEBALL FIELD, SOFT SOFTBALL FIELD.
AS MANY FIELDS AS WE CAN PUT ON THAT SITE CUZ WE WANT OUR KIDS TO PLAY AND HAVE FUN.
THAT'S REALLY PART, AN IMPORTANT PART OF OUR CURRICULUM
[03:20:01]
FOR EDUCATION.UH, THERE IS A QUESTION REGARDING PERMEABLE PARKING.
WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING THAT INTERNALLY, THE DISTRICT IS NOT FOND OF GRAVEL AS ANY TYPE OF PERMEABLE SURFACE.
KIDS PICK UP ROCKS AND THROW ROCKS AND GRAVEL WHEN WE'RE, UM, IT'S A MAINTENANCE ISSUE.
IT CAN DAMAGE PROPERTY WITH A MOWER AND SOMETHING RUNS OVER IT.
IT'S ALSO AN ISSUE IF YOU DO THE PERMEABLE SURFACES WHERE GRASS GROWS THROUGH IT.
AGAIN, IT'S A MAINTENANCE ISSUE LONG TERM.
IF PEOPLE ARE PARKING IN A PARKING LOT, THEY CAN'T COME IN AND MOW IT.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S OVERGROWN.
SO THE PERMEABLE SURFACES, UM, WHILE WE WANNA BE SUSTAINABLE, IS A LITTLE BIT CHALLENGING FOR US.
I WANTED TO ALSO LET YOU KNOW THAT WE HAVE A SAFETY DIRECTOR AT THE BOND OFFICE.
AND TO FOLLOW UP TO MS. AYER'S COMMENT, WE DO HAVE OUTREACH CONTINUING THROUGH CONSTRUCTION.
AS PART OF THAT, WE HAVE A SAFETY MANUAL.
I'M GONNA PUT THE TMP ON HERE THAT I AM.
CHRISTIE LAMBETH AT 63 0 1 GASTON AVENUE AND DALLAS LAMBETH.
I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA PUT IT UP ON THIS COMPUTER AND YOU CAN JUST, UH, LET US KNOW WHEN YOU NEED TO GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
UNLESS IT'S A DIFFERENT POWERPOINT THAN, THAN WHAT, UH, MS. AGUIRE HAS.
I WAS GONNA PUT IT UP HERE AND I WAS GONNA PUT IT UP HERE AND SHARE A SCREEN.
I DUNNO, WHERE'S HELP IS ON THE WAY.
NO, BUT I HAD COME HELP THOUGH.
I, THE MOUSE IS NOT, IT WAS ON.
SO, UM, WE WERE ABLE TO GET ALL THE CUE SPACE ON SITE YOU WANT TO SHARE? THANK YOU.
YOU CAN DO THIS IN YOUR SLEEP WHEN YOU'RE SITTING AT YOUR OWN DESK, YOU KNOW, UP HERE.
UM, SO WE DID THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR JOHN LEWIS SOCIAL JUSTICE ACADEMY.
WE WERE ABLE TO, UM, THE ARCHITECT AND WE WORK ON THE SITE PLAN DESIGN.
WE WERE ABLE TO GET ALL THE QUEUING ON SITE, AS WAS MENTIONED IN THE BRIEFING.
THERE IS A SMALL DRIVEWAY IN THE FRONT.
THE BUSES PICK UP IN THAT DRIVEWAY IN THE FRONT, AND THE PARENTS PARK ON EAST, PARENTS PARK ON BOTH SIDES OF KEYS AND ALSO IN THE LIBRARY AND ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE STREETS.
SO WE DID SEVERAL OBSERVATIONS AND WE, UM, DOCUMENT EVERYTHING AND WE WERE ABLE TO GET ALL THESE PARENTS CUD ON THE SITE.
THEY KIND OF QUEUE AND WAIT, AND THEY, THEY SEPARATE OUT INTO TWO INDIVIDUAL.
THERE'S A BYPASS LANE BECAUSE FOR MIDDLE SCHOOL KIDS, UM, MS. TRA, PRINCIPAL JACKSON DID NOT WANT TO HAVE A SINGLE LOADING AREA.
KIDS HERE WILL WALK TO THEIR PARENTS' CARS WHERE THEY'RE PARKED THEIR SIDEWALKS, ALL THE, ALL THE WAY AROUND.
AND THEN IF SOMEBODY'S STUDENT GETS THERE BEFORE ANOTHER PARENT, THERE'S A BYPASS LANE, SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO WAIT.
SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR MY CHILD TO COME TO ME.
IF YOU'RE BEHIND ME, YOU CAN STILL GET OUTTA THE LINE AND YOU CAN LEAVE THE SITE.
SO THERE'S AN EXTRA LANE IN THERE FOR THAT.
UM, THIS IS A ZOOMED IN VERSION, SORRY, THAT'S WHY I DID THIS FOR Y'ALL.
SO YOU CAN SEE MORE CLEARLY THE TWO LANES ENTERING, AND THEN THEY'LL SEPARATE OUT TO TWO SEPARATE LANES, THE MERGE BACK AROUND TO ONE.
AND THERE'S, THERE'S ALWAYS A BYPASS ONCE YOU GET TO A CERTAIN POINT ON SITE.
UM, WE'VE MADE A NOTE HER PARENTS NOT TO PARK ON KEITH BOULEVARD AND NOT TO PARK ACROSS THE LIBRARY SO STUDENTS AREN'T CROSSING KEYS UNNECESSARILY.
THE PICKUP WILL TAKE ABOUT 15 MINUTES OR SO AT FIRST, AND WHEN BEFORE SCHOOL IS DISMISSED, THIS AREA WILL BE FULL, BUT THEN AS SOON AS DISMISSAL STARTS, IT'LL MOVE PRETTY QUICKLY.
UM, WE PARENTS DO NEED TO PULL UP TO THE BEGINNING BEFORE SCHOOL IS DISMISSED UNLESS WE HAVE STAFF THERE NOTED TO HELP REMIND THEM TO PULL FORWARD.
AND THIS IS THE, UM, NOT PART OF THE TMP.
TECHNICALLY THIS WILL BE ADDRESSED AT ENGINEERING, BUT WE WANTED TO SHOW WHERE WE WERE RESTRICTING SIGNS IN OUR ONE-WAY SIGNS, ET CETERA.
SO THIS IS GONNA BE APPENDIX OF THE TMP JUST FOR YOUR REFERENCE THAT IT WAS THOUGHT THROUGH.
AND THIS SHOWS THAT WE PROJECT, THERE'LL BE 98 VEHICLES ON SITE AT THE PEAK GIVEN TIME.
AND WE'VE, THE SITE PLAN HAS ROOM FOR 106 VEHICLES TO QUEUE
[03:25:01]
ON SITE.AND THERE'S EIGHT EXTRA SPACES FOR PARENTS.
THIS DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR THE SCHOOLS, HAS ADDED A, UM, D CELL LANE, LEFT TURN, DEC CELL LANE, AND A RIGHT TURN DEC LANE.
SO WE SHOW THEY CAN PARK ONSITE ON KEYS NOT BACKING UP, BUT EVEN IF THEY WERE TO BACK UP, THEY HAVE THEIR DCE LANES ARE BACKING UP IN TWO.
ONE LAST THING IS THEY HAVE, WE HAVE RIGHT TURN ONLY WHEN THEY'RE LEAVING THE SITE.
SO YOU CAN TURN LEFT OR RIGHT TURNING INTO THE SITE.
BUT SINCE WE ARE ENTERING, WHEN WE HAVE ONE DRIVEWAY THAT IS RIGHT TURN ONLY WHEN YOU'RE LEAVING TO REDUCE CONFLICT AND BUSES ARE HAVE THEIR OWN DRIVEWAY, THEY LOOP AROUND THE BACK.
UM, AND THEN THE APPENDIX OF THE TMP, IT SHOWED DIFFERENT BEST ROUTES PROFESSES CAN GO CUZ IT'S A RIGHT TURN ONLY NOW.
SO WE'VE SHOWN IF THE BEST IS TURNING LEFT TODAY, OTHER ROUTES THAT THEY CAN TAKE FOR THAT.
SO I AM HERE IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? YES, SIR.
ROSS RIVERS 69 0 6 BLAKE DRIVE, ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76,001.
I AM WITH V L K ARCHITECTS, UH, PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE OVER THERE, UM, FOR THIS PROJECT WITH D I S D.
AND JUST WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, UH, THE PROCESS SO FAR AND, AND WHERE WE ARE.
UH, WE HAVE, UM, HAD MANY, MANY CONVERSATIONS WITH, NOT JUST WITH THE, UH, CAMPUS STAFF, UM, BUT AS WELL AS WITH THE COMMUNITY ABOUT JUST WHAT THIS THIS FACILITY MEANS TO THE COMMUNITY.
UM, NOT ONLY THE SERVICES IT PROVIDES AS, AS A K UH, YOU KNOW, K-12 FACILITY, BUT ALSO THE COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT THAT'S ALREADY THERE THAT EXISTS.
AND, AND REALLY THIS FACILITY IS TO JUST CONTINUE THAT ON AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WORK WITH, WITH THE, UH, MS. JACKSON PRINCIPAL ON SITE AND, AND THE COMMUNITY.
UM, A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT, UH, HAVE, HAVE COME UP PRIOR TO, UM, I GUESS TO ADDRESS YOUR CONCERNS, UM, PARKING, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE IN THERE IS A THOUSAND SEAT GYMNASIUM THAT, UM, IF YOU CAN IMAGINE, THAT'S A LOT OF FOLKS AT ONE TIME.
AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT PARKING RATIOS FOR ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S HOW WE'VE ARRIVED AT, AT, UH, THE, THE TARGET.
WE PROBABLY STILL DON'T EVEN HAVE ENOUGH PARKING.
UM, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE, WE'VE KIND OF GOT A RULE OF THUMB OR, OR SOME GUIDELINES THAT WE USE TO ESTABLISH THOSE, THOSE NEEDS.
SO, UM, OTHER THAN THAT, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL TO SUPPORT THE TEAM HERE.
UM, WE'VE GOT A LOT OF, UM, FACTS AND, AND CALCULATIONS AND, AND THINGS THAT WE CAN PULL FOR YOU.
BUT, UH, UH, AGAIN, WE ARE ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF APPROVAL OF THIS, UM, SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.
AND, UH, WE THINK THIS, UH, FACILITY DEFINITELY IS GOING TO BE A GREAT ADDITION TO THIS COMMUNITY.
THE, THE FACILITY AND THE COMMUNITY ALREADY EXISTS.
THIS IS JUST A FACILITY THAT'S GONNA ENHANCE THAT.
COULD YOU PLEASE RESTATE YOUR NAME, SIR? ROSS RIVERS.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS.
HI, UM, MS. THURMAN, I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAY THAT Y'ALL HAD REDUCED THE AMOUNT OF PARKING THAT WAS BEING REQUESTED.
SO CAN YOU, THE ORIGINAL WAS 180 3.
COULD YOU LET US TELL? WELL, THEY REDUCED, IT WAS A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN THAT.
SO IF YOU COULD JUST SAY WHAT THE CURRENT NUMBER IS.
UM, THIS FACULTY PARKING IS 1 46.
CURRENTLY THERE WAS 20 MORE THAN THAT.
SO I'M SORRY, WHAT IS THE FINAL NUMBER? 1 1 46 RIGHT NOW.
YOU'D LIKE TO PUT THOSE 20 SPACES BACK IN.
AND DID YOU TAKE THEM OFF? I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A WAY TO PUT UP THE MAP.
THE, THE GRAPHIC, UM, PAGE TWO OF MY PRESENTATION HAS A SITE PLAN I CAN SHOW YOU BECAUSE I WAS ALSO GONNA ASK, IT LOOKS LIKE THE PARKING IS SORT OF THREE CIRCLES WITH SOMETHING DELINEATED IN BETWEEN.
WE TOOK A STRIP OUT ON THE LEFT SIDE.
SO, SO THE, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ABOUT TO ZOOM IN.
YOU SEE THAT WHITE STRIP ON THE LEFT SIDE? WE TOOK 20 SPACES OFF OF THERE.
SO THE, THE, THE PARKING'S IN GRAY, YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE WHITE THAT'S ABOVE MM-HMM.
20 SPACES AND WE TOOK IT OFF ON THE ROAD.
[03:30:05]
OKAY.SO THE CURRENT PROPOSAL THOUGH IS 146 SPACES AS SHOWN HERE? YES.
UM, SO YOU'RE REQUESTING, SO I THINK IT, CONSIDERING THE, THE, THE SPORTS FIELDS AND THE ACTIVITIES THAT'LL BE HAPPENING THERE, WOULD YOU NOT AGREE THAT IT WOULD BE MORE PRUDENT TO ADD THE 20 SPACES BACK? YES.
SO THAT YOU'LL END UP WITH A TOTAL OF, OF 1 66? YES.
WILL THEY BE ACCESSED TO STREET PARKING AFTER HOURS ADJACENT TO THE SPORTS FIELD ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SITE, OR IS THAT IN AN ALLEYWAY BEHIND HOUSES? IS THERE AN ACCESS ROAD THERE? BECAUSE I'M CONCERNED ABOUT, UM, WEEKENDS AND AFTER HOURS.
I KNOW THERE IS, UM, PARKING ONSITE PROPER, BUT ON THE WEEKENDS, WILL THEY BE ALLOWED TO THEN PARK ON THE STREETS AND THEN STILL USE THE FIELDS? I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN REALLY TOTALLY ANSWER THAT COMPLETELY BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE DO, AS PEOPLE, WE DO PARK AROUND THE COMMUNITY MM-HMM.
SO IF I LIVE BACK THERE OR NOT, I CAN PARK BACK THERE AND ENTER THE PLAYGROUND.
THAT'S WHAT WE KIND OF DO AS A COMMUNITY.
BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT IS AVAILABLE.
UM, I THINK IT'S JUST, I I CALL IT COMMUNITY TRAFFIC.
SO THE COMMUNITY, THE THE PRINCIPAL, WOULD YOU SAY THAT SHE HAS A GOOD GRASP ON, UM, BEING ABLE TO MANAGE THE COMMUNITY AND THEY'RE INGRESS OR EGRESS TO AND FROM THE SITE? YES.
UM, IN TERMS OF YOUR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, I NOTICED WHERE YOU HAVE THE S'S THAT SHOWED WHERE THE STAFF WOULD BE MM-HMM.
AND I KNOW WE'VE HAD GREAT CONVERSATIONS AND GOOD FAITH, AND I KNOW THEY WOULD ADDRESS THAT, BUT THAT IS ONE OF ONE OF MY CONCERNS.
UM, AND THEN LASTLY, DO YOU KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY CO GENERATING ENERGY SOURCES IN THE BUILDING? LIKE SOLAR PANELS OR ANYTHING? I DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY SOLAR PANELS.
BUT AS FAR AS THE ATTENDANCE, I MEAN, WE ALL HAVE UMBRELLAS.
THAT'S WHAT I SEE AT A LOT OF SCHOOLS.
THE UMBRELLAS BRING THE KIDS OUT IN, I MEAN, THAT'S FINE.
I JUST WANTED TO KNOW, MR. CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE A LITTLE BIT MORE, FOLKS ONLINE? OKAY.
SO AT OTHER SCHOOLS WE HAVE UMBRELLAS, SO I DON'T SEE THAT AS A ISSUE ENOUGH.
I DON'T SEE THAT ISSUE, BUT IF IT'S ICE, THEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY.
THEN WE PROBABLY, MAYBE WE SHOULDN'T BE THERE.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THOSE PEOPLE ARE CONSIDERED IN, IN OUR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT.
I MEAN, THEY'RE GONNA BE STANDING OUT THERE DOING THE SERVICE TO THESE KIDS.
UM, SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THEY'RE CONSIDERED AS WE DO WITH, WITH BUS STOPS AND COVERINGS AND THINGS LIKE THAT ALONG A WALKWAY.
SO, UM, AT THIS POINT, THAT IS, THOSE ARE ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE RIGHT NOW.
UM, I WOULD, I WOULD WANNA ASK THE QUESTION TOWARD, UM, THE PRINCIPAL.
UM, I KNOW THAT YOU GOT CUT OFF RIGHT WHEN YOU WAS GETTING READY TO GET TO THE, THE GOOD PART.
SO I KNOW THAT, UH, THIS SCHOOL IS, IS WAY MORE THAN JUST ATHLETICS.
I HAD, I KNOW GOOD PEOPLE THAT WENT TO THEIR, OVER THE YEARS I ATTENDED TOO.
I'M 46, SO I KNOW SOME 43 YEAR OLDS THAT WENT.
UM, WHAT ELSE IS, UH, JOHN LEWIS? UH, WHAT IS, YEAH, IT'S GONNA OFFER ATHLETICS IS COMES NATURALLY, BUT WHAT IS THE SCHOOL ONE OF? ACTUALLY, AS FAR AS, UM, FOR SOCIAL, ONE OF THE THINGS, UM, I WILL CONNECT THE SOCIAL JUSTICE COMPONENT WITH, IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
I LIVE RIGHT THERE IN THE BUTTER BEANS ON OVERTON AND BUN VIEW.
NOW, IF THEY LEARN THAT THERE'S A NEED FOR PROTESTS, THAT'S, THIS IS AN AGE WHERE YOU JUST WANT THEM TO LOVE THE PEOPLE THAT LOVE THEM AND NOT TURN ON, UM, THE NEIGHBORS.
YOU ASKED AT HOMES, WE HAVE A MANDATORY COMMUNITY SERVICE PROJECT WITH EVERY CLUB.
AN ORGANIZATION THAT FENCE YOU SAW WAS PUT UP BY THE MOTORCYCLE CLUB
[03:35:01]
BECAUSE FOR MONTHS AND YEARS IT JUST, IT WAS ALL OVER THE PLACE.UM, WE'RE FINDING THAT THESE TEENAGERS ARE CHANGING THEIR LIVES WHEN THEY'RE, THEY'RE ENGAGING IN THE GARDENS WITH THE SENIOR CITIZENS FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD GATHERING THE GREENS AND ALLOWING THEM TO COOK TOGETHER AND SHARE STORIES.
SO WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UM, THE CHILDREN AT JOHN LEWIS SOCIAL JUSTICE ACADEMY KNOW THAT THEY ARE LOVED AND IT IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO LOVE THEIR COMMUNITY.
SO TO SOME OF THEM ARE COMMISSIONER, UH, FELLOW COMMISSIONERS CONCERNED WAS GREEN SPACE.
SO YOU ALREADY HAVE STARTED THAT PROCESS AT THE CURRENT SCHOOL WITH, WITH, UH, COMMUNITY GARDEN, WOULD YOU SAY? YES, MA'AM.
AND, UM, AND WITH THAT BEING A SOCIAL JUSTICE SCHOOL, I'M AN ACTIVIST ALSO, SO DEFINITELY THAT.
AND SO WITH THAT, ALSO, WOULD, WOULD YOU ALSO INCLUDE OTHER GREEN SPACES AND THINGS SO THAT THE CHILDREN, SO THEY CAN, UH, AND I THINK ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT POSSIBLY TREES.
WAS IT THAT SCHOOL? OH, NO, THERE WAS OTHER, THERE WAS A, I MEAN, UH, MAKING SURE THAT THERE'S SOME SHADE IS SOME TYPE, WILL THAT BE SOME PART OF SOME TYPE OF SHADE? UM, SINCE IT'S A VERY ACTIVE SCHOOL AND, BUT THE MAJORITY IS IN THE SUN.
UM, ESPECIALLY ON THE OTHER FIELDS.
THERE WILL BE LANDSCAPERS THAT WILL ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
I'M CERTAIN, UM, WE'RE, YOU KNOW, THE BIG OAK TREE WE WE'RE, WE WANNA PRESERVE SOME OF IT.
UM, BUT I'LL ASSURE YOU THIS, WE HAVE A, CURRENTLY WE HAVE A PATIO AND WE ALSO HAVE A COURTYARD.
THE PATIO IS DESIGNATED AS OUR INTERIOR GARDENS.
AND WE ARE MAKING VERY, VERY PLAIN THAT WE WANNA MAINTAIN THAT.
SO YOU CAN'T JUST WALK INTO OUR GARDENS, THEY'RE THERE FOR OUR SENIOR CITIZENS.
SO THEY'RE KIND OF BUILT IN AND PROTECTED BY THE BUILDING.
DID I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YOU DID.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES, MS. JACKSON.
UH, MY QUE MY ONLY CONCERN ABOUT THIS CAMPUS IS, IS THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE USAGE OF THE ATHLETIC FIELDS WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS.
SO CAN YOU TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT'S PLANNED FOR THIS? IS IT JUST THE, THE STUDENTS WHO ARE ATTENDING THIS MIDDLE SCHOOL AND THEIR PHYSICAL EDUCATION CLASSES AND THEIR TEAMS, AND OR WILL IT BE, WILL IT BE PROGRAMMED FROM MORNING TO NIGHT WITH BAND PRACTICE AND GAMES AND LEAGUES AND COMMUNITY GROUPS? AND THAT WOULD MEAN MORE HOURS FOR ME, AND I GIVE PLENTY, BUT YOU DID SAY YOU'D LIKE TO SEE IT
BUT HERE'S THE, THE ATHLETIC, AS FAR AS THE ATHLETIC FACILITIES, PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE HAVE NOW IS A PART OF THE DISTRICT'S PROGRAM.
WE'RE A MIDDLE SCHOOL, SO WE DO NOT HAVE, UM, IT'S MOSTLY FOR PRACTICE.
SO THOSE ARE PRACTICE FACILITIES.
UM, AND WE DO HAVE WEEKEND, THERE'S SOME POP WARNER LEAGUES THAT USE THE FIELD, BUT THEY USE IT SO EARLY IN THE MORNING ON A SATURDAY MORNING.
UM, AND WE WANT TO CONTINUE THAT RELATIONSHIP BECAUSE IT GIVES OUR KIDS SOMETHING TO DO THAT'S POSITIVE AND PRODUCTIVE.
BUT NO, WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE, UM, MASSIVE TOURNAMENTS THERE.
IT WON'T BE THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE MONIES FOR THE EXTRA SECURITY THAT ALL OF THOSE THINGS WOULD ENCUMBER.
DID I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES, MA'AM.
I KNOW MS. THURMAN SAID THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME CONSIDERATION IN THE FUTURE OF PUTTING IN LIGHTING AT THE, AT THE PRACTICE FIELDS, RIGHT? THE ATHLETIC FIELDS.
WELL, LIKE ALL, YOU KNOW, I, I ASSUME THERE'S, MY VISION IS ALWAYS GROWING MM-HMM.
UM, I THINK FOR SAFETY REASONS, YOU'D WANT SOME LIGHTING.
UM, WE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE ANY.
SO I KNOW WHEN I LEAVE WORK AND IT'S LATE AT NIGHT, IT'S PRETTY DARK BACK THERE.
AND WHERE OUR CAMPUS SITS, IT CAN GET SCARY EVEN ON A SUNDAY IF I WANTED TO COME TO WORK.
YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST, UM, THE WAY IT SITS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BEING SO CLOSE TO IT, YOU CAN ALMOST JUMP FENCE.
THERE'S NOT EVEN AN ALLEY THAT SEPARATES US.
SO I THINK IT'S MORE ABOUT SAFETY.
I'LL ASK STAFF WHEN IT COMES TO THAT.
BECAUSE I WAS, BECAUSE THE SITE PLAN THAT WE HAVE DOES NOT SHOW ANY LIGHTING.
AND SO MY CONCERN WAS WE, NOT ONLY WHAT YOU WERE INTENDED, BUT WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE ALLOWED IF IT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO US TO, TO ALLOW LIGHTING.
UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERN? CAUSE I, WHAT I'M SEEING HERE IS, YOU KNOW, YOUR, UH, FOOTBALL, SOCCER FIELD, YOUR SOFTBALL FIELD ARE, ESPECIALLY THE FOOTBALL, SOCCER FIELD, ARE ABOUT 20 FEET FROM THE BACKYARDS OF SOME ADJACENT HOMES.
AND THERE'S ONLY A FOUR FOOT FENCE, YOU KNOW, AROUND THE FIELD.
ARE YOU, DO YOU HAVE CON SECURITY CONCERNS ABOUT, IS THAT AN ADEQUATE SEPARATION? ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT AFTER SCHOOL UTILIZATION OR SCHOOL HAS BEEN THERE 68 YEARS AND OUR FOOTBALL FIELD IS PROBABLY LESS THAN 20 FEET FROM, UM, THAT SHARED FENCE WITH THE NEIGHBORS.
[03:40:01]
ANY, UM, COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE LOCATION OF THE FIELDS.I'M VERY CLOSE TO THE COMMUNITY.
UM, I THINK THIS IS A QUESTION FROM THE LA FOR THE LADY FROM THE BOND OFFICE.
WHAT, WHAT WERE THE TOPIC, WHAT WERE THE OTHER TOPICS ON YOUR LIST OF THINGS YOU WANTED TO COMMUNICATE TO US? OH, THANK YOU.
UM, WE HAVE A BOND OFFICE SAFETY MANUAL.
I KNOW WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS.
SO WE HAVE, UH, CRITERIA THAT ALL OF OUR CONTRACTORS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MEETING.
THEY SUBMIT A SAFETY PLAN AS PART OF THEIR CONTRACT, WHICH IS REVIEWED BY OUR SAFETY DIRECTOR.
WE HAVE PROJECT MANAGERS THAT ARE ON SITE.
WE HAD THE DISTRICT BOND WEBSITE THAT PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY IN THE COM, UM, CONTACT INFORMATION.
AND FOR ALL OF THE PROJECTS, ESPECIALLY THIS ONE, FOR ANY, UH, PROJECTS THAT HAVE WORK IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY.
THE CITY OF DALLAS ACTUALLY REQUIRES A TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN FOR ANYTHING THAT, ANY WORK IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO BE SAFE TOO.
WOULD YOU JUST CONFIRM FOR THE RECORD OUR DISCUSSION THAT D I S D IS AGREEABLE TO A 38 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT FOR THE SCHOOL? YES.
BUT JUST REMEMBER THE SCREENS ARE AT 42 FEET.
I'M SORRY, JUST REMEMBER THE SCREENS, THEY SIT AT 42 FEET.
SO SINCE WE'RE HERE, MAYBE WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A DISCUSSION.
MAYBE WE MOVE IT TO 42 BECAUSE OF THE SCREENS.
MY MAIN CONCERN IS NOT WHETHER IT'S 38 OR 42, BUT IT'S SOME NUMBER VERSUS NO NUMBER.
BECAUSE IT DROPS OFF AFTER THAT.
UH, YES, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND I DON'T KNOW WHO I'LL, I'LL ASK YOU IF YOU CAN ANSWER 'EM.
THEY'RE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'RE ASKED TO MS. JACKSON.
AND GOING WITH WHAT COMMISSIONER CARPENTER SAID, I THINK THERE IS SOME CONCERN, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT SECURITY LIGHTS MS. JACKSON WAS TALKING ABOUT, WHICH I CERTAINLY HOPE YOU HAVE ENOUGH SECURITY LIGHTS WITH THE, THE NEW SCHOOL.
BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT WE, WE WERE CLEAR.
BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THE FIELDS MM-HMM.
BUT WHEN IT GETS DARK AT FIVE, ARE YOU INTENDING TO, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVING SORT OF SEMI STADIUM LIGHTS AROUND THERE, I NOTICE IT'S NOT ON HERE, BUT WHAT IS YOUR INTENTION ABOUT LIGHTING THOSE? AND WITH THAT QUESTION GOES A SECOND ONE BECAUSE I HEARD WHAT MS. JACKSON SAID, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR THIS.
ARE YOU HAVING COMPETITIVE GAMES THERE? I MEAN, TALKING ABOUT YOU PLAY ANOTHER SCHOOL IN BASEBALL OR YOU PLAY ANOTHER SCHOOL IN SOCCER? YES.
WE DON'T HAVE COMPETITION, I THINK SO THEY GO GO SOMEWHERE ELSE IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YES.
WHEN D I S D TO A STADIUM OF SOME SORT TO COMPETE.
BECAUSE I THINK WE WERE A LITTLE CONCERNED.
AND WHEN WE SAW THAT YOU HAD THE PRESS BOX AND THERE WAS ONE, WELL, THERE'S NOT A PRESS BOX THERE.
UH, NO PRESS BOX, IT'S ON'S ON.
IT SAYS ON THIS, THERE'S A PRESS BOX.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE WERE KIND OF LOOKING AT, WHICH IS GREAT.
BUT I MEAN, A COUPLE, THERE'S, THERE'S TWO PRESS BOXES IN THERE.
THOSE ARE REALLY SCORING BOXES AT THE BASEBALL SOFTBALL GOTCHA.
I GOT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AS FAR AS THE LIGHTING, IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THESE, THIS IS A PRACTICE FACILITY.
WE DO HAVE, ONE OF THE THINGS, A COUPLE OF COMMENTS HAVE COME UP ABOUT PLANTINGS AND THINGS.
THE LANDSCAPE STUFF DOES NOT SHOW UP ON WHAT WE'VE SUBMITTED FOR THESE PLANS AS, AS REQUESTED.
BUT THERE IS A, UM, LINE OF TREES ON THE NORTH AND WEST SIDES, UM, AT THAT 20 FOOT BUFFER TO HELP BUFFER THE FOOTBALL FIELD TO PRACTICE FIELDS FROM THOSE RESIDENTS.
THERE'S STILL THAT 20 FOOT SETBACK, BUT THERE'S ALSO A ROW OF TREES THAT WILL BE OVER THERE AS WELL.
UM, THE LIGHTING, UH, IT IS NOT INTENDED TO HAVE SPORTS LIGHTING IN IN ANY FORM.
IT WILL STRICTLY BE THAT SAFETY SECURITY LIGHTING.
[03:45:01]
IS, IS, WELL NUMBER ONE, VERY EXPENSIVE, BUT IT'S ALSO ATTRIBUTED TO WHEN YOU DO A COMPETITION FIELD.AND THESE ARE NOT COMPETITION FIELDS.
SO THEY ARE JUST THE PRACTICE.
AND THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW CUZ WE WERE GETTING CONCERNED.
A LOT OF SCHOOLS WHEN THEY'VE PUT IN, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY CALL IT A PRESS BOX, THEY'VE GOT THESE LOUD ANNOUNCER STUFF AND ALL OF THAT, THAT DOES IMPACT THE NEIGHBORS.
SO THAT WAS WHY I WAS ASKING THAT QUESTION.
AND WE WON'T EVEN HAVE BLEACHERS OUT HERE.
A LOT OF SCHOOLS HAVE BEEN DOING, PUTTING UP THAT SCREENING BY PUTTING MY FAVORITE THING THESE TREE SHRUBS OF THAT'S EVENTUALLY QUICKLY GROW TOGETHER.
AND I'D LIKE TO DO MS. LAMBETH, IF I MAY.
FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO SAY, HAVING DEALT WITH SO MANY SCHOOLS, THIS TRAFFIC PLAN IS EXCELLENT.
I I THINK YOU'VE DONE A PHENOMENAL JOB OF DEALING WITH THE TRAFFIC, HOW YOU'VE PLANNED IT OUT.
I I MEAN IT IS JUST AN EXAMPLE TO A LOT OF OTHER PLACES.
NOW, GIVEN YOU HAD A LOT OF SPACE TO DEAL WITH, SO
AND MY UNDERSTANDING, JUST TO BE CLEAR, WHEN THE BUSES GO, OKAY, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE BUSES.
THEY GO DOWN THAT LONG DRIVE AND THEN THERE'S THE PICKUP AND LET OFF.
AND SO THAT DRIVE IS ON YOUR CAMPUS.
HERE IS MY ONLY THING I WANT TO ASK ABOUT HOW MANY OF THOSE BUSES, BECAUSE I'M CONS, I'M THINKING IT'D BE A LOT, ARE GOING TO MAKE A LEFT TURN FROM EAST.
I'D HAVE TO LOOK IN THE APPENDIX OF THE, AND I DON'T HAVE THAT IN POWERPOINT.
UM, AND I DON'T REALLY NEED TO KNOW HOW MANY, BUT MY, LIKE, CONCERN IS, ARE YOU MAKING PROVISIONS BECAUSE THEY ARE CUTTING ACROSS A LOT OF TRAFFIC THERE TO GET INTO THAT DRIVE.
SO ACTUALLY THE DRIVEWAY DOES NOT HAVE A MEETING OPENING.
SO IT'S RIGHT AND RIGHT OUT ONLY AS BESTS AS WE'LL HAVE TO NAVIGATE AROUND THE STREETS TO TURN RIGHT INTO THE BUS BLOCK AND THEN TO TURN TO BUS DRIVEWAY AND THEN TURN RIGHT OUT.
THE BUS DRIVEWAY IS RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT ONLY.
SO THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO AND DO WHATEVER TURNAROUND AT A LIGHT THEY NEED TO DO.
BECAUSE WE'VE HAD, WE HAD THIS AT THE LONG FELLA SCHOOL TOO, THAT BUSES DON'T LIKE TO MAKE LEFT TURNS.
THAT'S NOT THE, THE SITE VISIBILITY IN GOOD AND WHEN THERE'S NO LIGHT, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
THAT WAS MY QUESTION THAT THEY ARE GOING TO ROUTE TO TURN IN FROM THE RIGHT AND COME OUT FROM THE RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR, YOU CAN STAY RIGHT THERE CUZ I AM GOING TO ACTUALLY SAY THANK YOU.
WELL, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU IF YOU WILL ACCEPT MY MANY THANKS.
LIKE FOR DOING THE PERFECT, THE ABSOLUTE PERFECT.
SO PLEASE, WILL YOU ACCEPT MY THANKS ON THAT? YES, I'D BE DELIGHTED.
I AND THE ARCHITECT THIS SITE WAS, I WILL SAY THE ARCHITECTS WORKED WELL.
I WOULD TELL 'EM ARCHITECTS, Y'ALL, THEY DON'T LIKE ME AT FIRST.
I MEAN LIKE, IT'S NO OFFENSE, BUT WE NEED MORE CUE SPACE.
AND WE MET TWICE WITH PRINCIPAL JACKSON ON SITE, TWO OR THREE TIMES, TIMES ACTUALLY.
AND SHE'S LIKE, NO, I DON'T WANT THIS.
AND SO WE'RE LIKE, WE NEED THIS, WE NEED THAT.
AND SO THE ARCHITECT, WE HAD SPACE ON THIS SITE.
WE DON'T, WE'RE NOT ALWAYS BLESSED TO HAVE THIS LONG AREA THAT WE CAN USE.
SORRY, IT'S A PARKING LOT IN FRONT OF THE SCHOOL, BUT WE ARE BLESSED WITH THIS SITE AND THE ARCHITECTS AND THE PRINCIPAL WAS INVOLVED.
SO IT WAS A LOT OF TEAM INVOLVEMENT.
UM, MS. JACKSON? CAN I, CAN I, WELL SHE'S COMING UP.
I JUST WANT TO ANNOUNCE THAT MS. LAMBATH IS GONNA STICK AROUND TO SIGN COPIES OF THE TMP AFTER THE SHOW.
SO, UH, MS. JACKSON, THANK YOU SO MUCH, UH, FOR YOUR, FOR BEING HERE TODAY.
UM, IS IT NOT CORRECT THAT ALL OF THE STUDENTS IN, IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA USUALLY JU VENTURE DOWN TO ELLISVILLE FOR ALL OF THEIR ATHLETIC? OR DO THEY DO YOUR STUDENTS VENTURE DOWN TO, UH, ELLISVILLE FOR ALL YOUR ATHLETIC UH, COMPETITIONS? WE HAVE WHAT OUR DISTRICT CALLED REGIONAL FACILITIES.
SO THEY'RE SPREAD THROUGHOUT TO GIVE EVERYONE A SENSE OF HAVING A HOME STADIUM.
SO WE PLAY A LOT OF OUR GAMES AT ELLIS DAVIS.
WE ALSO PLAY AT SPRAGUE, WE PLAY SOME IN PLEASANT GROVE.
WE GO AS FAR NORTH AS, UM, WHAT'S THE NAME OF THE FACILITY.
BUT EVERYBODY GETS A SENSE OF PLAYING NEAR THOSE, UM, REGIONAL FACILITIES.
SO IS IT NOT CORRECT THAT SINCE YOU GUYS DO THE REGIONAL FACILITIES THAT THE NEED FOR STADIUM LIGHTING SOUND IT OR IS
[03:50:01]
NOT A REQUIREMENT AND NOT NECESSARY BECAUSE THERE IS NO COMPETITION ACTUALLY BEING DONE AT YOUR FACILITY? I HAVE A SERIOUS RESPONSIBILITY TO BE FRIENDLY TO MY NEIGHBORS.I'M A PART OF THAT COMMUNITY AND I THINK MR. WHITE WOULD HAVE A FIT IF THERE WERE FLOODLIGHTS.
SO I'D BE THE FIRST ONE TO SAY, NO, YOU CAN'T DO THAT.
UM, I THINK IT'S NECESSARY TO HAVE SOME LIGHTING.
UM, MS. ARD MENTIONED, I HOPE I'M PRONOUNCING YOUR NAME RIGHT.
AND I THOUGHT, YEAH, SAFETY LIGHTING, AS LONG AS IT'S FOR SAFETY, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO, WE DON'T WANNA BE POOR NEIGHBORS.
WE, WE WANT THEM TO SLEEP WELL.
SO WE DON'T WANT LIGHTS GLARING SOMEBODY FORGOT TO TURN 'EM OFF AT 10 O'CLOCK IN.
THERE'RE ALL OVER THE, NO, UM, JUST FOR SAFETY ONLY, I BELIEVE.
BUT I'M NOT AN EXPERT IN THOSE THINGS.
I'M JUST DISCIPLINE AND READING THOSE KIND OF THINGS.
SO THEN, UM, FOR YOUR ARCHITECT MM-HMM.
51 A SO THE, THE, THE THE RE THE, THE CONCERN OR THAT THERE ARE LIGHTS THAT ARE, UM, NON CONDUCIVE TO BEING A GOOD COMMUNITY NEIGHBOR WOULD NOT EXIST BECAUSE IT IS THE STANDARD THAT IS USED THROUGHOUT ALL OF D I S D.
AT PRACTICE FACILITIES, THERE ARE, THERE ARE NO SPORTS LIGHTING.
DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION, SIR? NO.
MR. ERS, BEFORE YOU STEP AWAY, UH, FOLLOWING UP ON THAT QUESTION, IS THAT ANYTHING THAT YOU ALL EVALUATED, INCLUDING IN THE, UM, U CONDITIONS TO CLARIFY WHAT THE INTENT IS ON THOSE ITEMS? I THINK YOU MAY HAVE HEARD, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE CONCERNED WHEN WE DON'T SEE SOME OF THESE ELEMENTS WITHIN EITHER THE SITE PLAN OR THE CONDITIONS THAT IT, UM, CAUSES A, A QUESTION.
AND IF THIS IS FOR MS. THURMAN, I'M, I'M GLAD TO DEFER.
I MEAN THE, THE, THE SUBMITTALS, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE SHOW ANY LIGHTING, UM, ON WHAT'S SUBMITTED.
AND THAT'S WHAT I THINK PARTLY WHAT THE QUESTION WHETHER THE PARKING LOT LIGHTING OR ANYTHING.
SO NO, THERE, THERE IS NOT ANY LIGHTING.
BUT, BUT I CAN CERTAINLY ASSURE YOU THAT, THAT THE INTENT IS NOT, AGAIN, NOT TO HAVE ANY KIND OF ATHLETIC SPORTS LIGHTING ON THOSE FIELDS.
IT WILL BE, AND, AND OUR PARKING LOT LIGHTING IS SAFETY AS WELL.
THAT'S, IT'S ALL YOU NEED TO LIGHT THAT FOR, YOU KNOW, IT'S A LOWER LIGHT LEVEL.
UM, SO NO MA YOU DON'T HAVE ANY AND FOLLOW UP QUESTION.
YOU HAD MENTIONED ON THE LANDSCAPING, YOU ALL ARE COMPLIANT WITH ARTICLE 10.
UM, THERE IS TRADITIONALLY A RESIDENTIAL BUFFER REQUIREMENT, HOWEVER, YOU'RE STILL RESIDENTIAL ZONING.
SO YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU ALL, UH, WILL BE PROVIDING THAT, UM, AS A PART OF YOUR PLAN.
BUT IN YOUR EVALUATION, DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THAT RESIDENTIAL BUFFER WILL APPLY? YES, MA'AM.
MY QUESTIONS FOR PRINCIPAL JACKSON.
SO I WAS CONCERNED WITH THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES JUST BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, GREEN OVER CONCRETE IS USUALLY WHERE I GO.
BUT HEARING ALL THE DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW THIS SCHOOL AND THE FIELDS WILL REALLY BE A COMMUNITY ASSET, I WOULD LIKE YOUR OPINION ON HOW MUCH PARKING YOU NEED.
AGAIN, I'M NOT AN EXPERT, BUT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A COMMUNITY FACILITY BIG ENOUGH TO UM, SAY HOST A COMMUNITY EVENT AND USE ATHLETIC FACILITIES, I REALLY THINK WE HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO BE THE, THE CENTER ATTRACTION FOR THIS COMMUNITY.
SO THE SPACE IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE WE WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYONE CAN GET IN AND GET OUT SAFELY.
AND NOT HAVE, UM,
SO I THINK, UM, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS PLENTY.
UM, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TWO TEAMS SHOW UP.
YOU'RE GONNA HAVE OUR COMMUNITY USE THE FACILITY.
WE HOPE, UM, WE WANT THE FACILITY TO BE USED AS A WALKING PLACE CUZ WE SUFFER WITH ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT HEALTH ISSUES AND WE WANT PROGRAMS WHERE, SO YEAH, PARKING IS A BIG DEAL.
[03:55:01]
WHAT IS THAT MAGIC NUMBER? I JUST THINK THAT, UM, AS LONG AS WE HAVE PLENTY OF IT, YOU KNOW, UM, THAT MAKES SENSE.I, I LIKE THE PROPOSED NUMBER.
I DON'T THINK IT'S TOO FAR OFF FROM WHAT WE HAVE NOW.
JUST WHAT, A FEW MORE SPOTS MAYBE WHAT? 30 MORE THAN WE ALREADY HAVE, RIGHT? SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? HOW MUCH DO YOU CURRENTLY HAVE? ABOUT 108.
AND DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION AS TO WHETHER, RIGHT NOW I HEARD, UM, MS. THURMAN SAY THAT THE CURRENT IS 1 46, WHICH WAS REDUCED BY 20 SPACES, THOSE FACULTY, UM, SPACES ALONG THE SIDE, IN YOUR OPINION, WOULD YOU LIKE THOSE SPACES BACK AND HAVE CLOSER TO LIKE 1 66? I I THINK WE NEED 'EM.
I JUST CAME UP WITH, WHEN WE'RE HAVING BIG PROGRAMS, WE HAVE THE BEST THEATER TEACHER TOO IN THIS DISTRICT.
UM, AND NOW THAT THEY'RE COMING TO THE CAMPUS, UM, THEY USE THE FRONT OF KEYS.
AFTER THE PARKING LOT IS FULL, WE HAVE TO USE KEYS.
SO I WOULD ESTIMATE AT ANY TIME THERE'S 30 TO 50 CARS PARKED ON THE STREET AND IN THE BUS LANE.
SO YES, WE WE'RE CONGESTED WITH WHAT WE HAVE IS NOT ENOUGH.
WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING MAY BE JUST RIGHT.
AND IF WE WANNA LOOK AHEAD, WE MAY NEED EVEN A FEW MORE THAN WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED.
UH, BEFORE WE GO TO THE NEXT QUESTION, COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, WHERE ARE WE GETTING 146 SPACES? THAT'S WHAT MS. THURMAN SAID AT THE BEGINNING WHEN I ASKED HER, SHE SAID THAT THEY HAD TAKEN AWAY ON THE SIDE 20 SPACES THAT WERE FOR FACULTY.
SO THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING, WOULD YOU LIKE THOSE BACK? NO, THE SITE PLAN HAS 183.
THAT'S NOT WHAT MS. THURMAN SAID.
PARDON ME? COUNTING ALL OF THE ACTUAL, THAT'S JUST THE FACULTY PARKING.
THERE'S ALSO SOME PARKING ON THE SIDE OVER 24 OVER THERE.
AND THEN ANOTHER ONE THAT HAS 13 OVER THERE.
THAT WAS JUST THE FACULTY PARKING.
SHE WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT THE WHY, WHY, WHY DID YOU TAKE THE 20 OFF? HONESTLY, WE WERE TRYING TO APPEASE THE FACT THAT WE DIDN'T WANT COMPACT PARKING.
THE COMMUNITY JUST, JUST DOESN'T FIT.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE JUST ELIMINATING THE COMPACT PARKING, BUT IN THE PLACE OF WHERE YOU'RE GONNA HAVE COMPACT PARKING, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE REGULAR PARKING.
NO,
WE DIDN'T WANT COMPACT PARKING, SO WE TOOK OFF 20 SPACES.
WE JUST TOOK OFF THE 20 SPACES TO, YOU KNOW, COLLABORATE AND, BUT THE COMMISSIONER AND COMMUNITY DID NOT WANT THAT.
SO WE'RE WANTING TO PUT THOSE BACK IN.
THEY, THEY DID NOT WANT WHAT COMPACT PARKING OR THE SPACES THAT WE HAD TAKEN OFF.
THEY DIDN'T WANT, THEY DID NOT WANT THE REMOVAL OF OKAY.
SHE SAID THEY WANTED TO REMOVE.
WELL, AND WHAT I HEARD FROM, UH, PRINCIPAL JACKSON AND FROM MR. REEVES IS THAT YOU WANT AS MUCH PARKING AS POSSIBLE.
THERE'S, THERE'S GONNA BE FOLKS COMING.
THERE'S ACTIVITIES WE WANT TO KEEP PARKING FROM, UH, THE STREET AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT I HEARD.
ON ONE SECOND, CLARIFY SOMETHING.
WE HAVE A, WE HAVE EXCESS PARKING DUE TO THE SPECIAL EVENTS.
AND STAFF DOES REALLY GOOD AT PRESERVING GREEN SPACE AND IN AND ENCOURAGING DEVELOPERS TO HAVE AS MUCH GREEN SPACE AS POSSIBLE AND NOT OVER PARKING.
AND SO THE STAFF, UM, WAS CONCERNED THAT WE WERE OVER PARK, THAT WE WERE OVER PARKED AND THE SPACES WERE REMOVED AND IT JUST WORK TOGETHER.
WE'LL TAKE OFF THESE 20 SPACES TO PROVIDE MORE GREEN SPACE.
I THINK MY QUESTION IS IF WE ADD THEM BACK OR ARE WE AT THE 180 3 MM-HMM.
IF WE ADD THEM BACK, I WANTED TO CLARIFY WHAT'S, BUT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT DOING COMPACT ARE THE SPACES SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT SIZES.
SO WE'RE SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE.
THIS, THIS SITE PLAN CURRENTLY HAS 183 SPACES TOTAL.
WE DO NOT WANT COMPACT SPACES ON THIS SITE.
AND WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THE 203 SPACES IF WE GET SO 203 NO COMPACT.
WHERE ARE THE ADDITIONAL 20 GOING? THIS YOU TOOK OUT.
SO THAT IS THE LEFT SIDE ROW THAT IS THE WHITE OUT.
MY, MY TMP DOESN'T HAVE THE LATEST AND GREATEST SITE PLAN.
SO IT'S THE, WHAT'S SHOWN ON THIS.
WE WOULD LIKE WHAT'S SHOWN HERE.
[04:00:01]
ARE AND THAT'S, THANK YOU.SO WHAT IS SHOWN ON THIS TMP IS THE 2 0 3.
SO I WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYBODY ELSE IS ON THE SAME PAGE.
BUT THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, I SUPPORT IT.
DOES THAT WORK, SHARON? I'M SORRY? DOES THAT WORK? YES.
WE, WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE NUMBERS HERE CUZ I, I WANT TO ALIGN WITH WHAT THE NEED OF THE SCHOOL IS, OBVIOUSLY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UM, SO MY CONCERN IS, IS PRACTICE.
UM, AND I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PRACTICE AND WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT FOR A WHILE.
BUT THOSE FIELDS, UM, FOR THE COACHES AND THE STUDENTS, SINCE IT WILL BE DURING THE DAYTIME, IT WILL BE EXTRA HOT OUT THERE.
AND I'D LIKE TO SEE BETWEEN THE BASEBALL FIELDS, JUST SOME DECIDUOUS TREES SO THAT EVERYONE CAN HAVE A CHANCE TO COOL DOWN IN THE SHADE.
UM, OR JUST SOME CONSIDERATION AROUND THOSE FIELDS.
I KNOW THERE WON'T BE COMPETITION, UM, HAPPENING THERE, BUT I'VE PERSONALLY GROWN UP ON THESE FIELDS AT SCHOOLS AND THERE IS NO RELIEF FROM THE SUN.
UM, SO IT'D BE GOOD TO HAVE SOME TREES THAT, THAT, THAT HELP SERVICE.
AND THEN I WOULD JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THE PARKING 203 TOTAL.
SO YOU ENDED UP WITH 166 STAFF AND YOU WANTED TO ADD 20 MORE TO THAT, WHICH BRINGS YOUR TOTAL TO 203.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, I'M SURE WE THERE.
PARDON ME? YOUR NEXT TO THE PRINCIPAL AND TO YOU, UHUH.
WHAT IS YOUR NAME AGAIN? PRINCIPAL
UH, SO I'M ASSUMING THAT YOU ALL HAVING SOME TYPE OF WRAPAROUND SERVICES ALSO.
IS THAT, AND SOME OF THE REASON THAT YOU NEED SO MUCH PARKING, IS THERE GONNA BE, UM, BY BEING MORE THAN A SCHOOL OR SOCIAL JUSTICE SCHOOL, THERE'S GONNA BE PEOPLE THAT COME IN AND YOU ALL ARE GONNA HAVE SOME TYPE OF MINI CONFERENCES OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT? YES.
UM, AND WE'RE PARTNERING WITH ONE OF OUR BIGGER HOSPITAL FACILITIES.
SO WE'RE, IT'S GONNA BE A LOT GOING, A LOT GOING IN THERE.
SO THIS SCHOOL, SO IT'S, IT'S ALREADY BUSY.
SO, SO THIS SCHOOL IS GOING TO HAVE A RAY OF THINGS GOING ON AND MAKE IT, IT'S ALMOST, YOU, YOU, YOU ARE ALL LOOKING AT IT TO BE SOME TYPE OF INCUBATOR, UM, FOR THAT AREA.
BRIGHT NEW LIGHT TO THAT AREA.
IT'S LONG AGO, BUT COMMISSIONER HERBERT, PLEASE, SIR.
UM, AND GENTLEMEN, FOR YOUR, UM, TIME, UH, THE LARGE FIELD NEXT TO THE SCHOOL, HOW ARE WE, ARE WE TAKING SOME OF THAT OR IS IT, ARE WE JUST MAINTAINING THE CURRENT PROPERTY? DO WE KNOW, WHEN YOU SAY LARGE FIELD NEXT TO THE SCHOOL, SO TO THE CLOSER TO KELLOGG, UH, CLOSER TO SUNNYVALE, THERE'S A LARGE LOT AND THEN A WALKING TRAIL.
WE'RE NOT TAKING ANY, WE'RE NOT TAKING ANY OF THAT.
UM, EARLIER SOMEONE BOUGHT UP WORKING WITH OTHER COMMUNITIES TO DEVELOP THAT AREA, UH, ENCOMPASSED THE SCHOOL, THE WALKING TRAIL.
UM, CHEVON RANDALL WAS MURDERED ACROSS THE STREET FROM THAT AREA THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO.
SO TAKING THAT SPACE OR TRYING TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY TO TAKE THAT SPACE, I THINK WILL BE HELPFUL TO BRINGING THAT PLACE TOGETHER.
IS THERE ANY TALKS ABOUT THAT AT ALL? WELL, THAT, THAT AREA RIGHT NOW IS CURRENTLY A ELECTRICAL EASEMENTS OWNED BY ENCORE.
AND THERE'S NOT OPPORTUNITIES THROUGHOUT D I S D WHERE THEY WORK WITH ENCORE FOR THINGS LIKE THAT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN ANSWER THAT SPECIFICALLY.
BUT TYPICALLY THE, THE EASEMENTS, THERE'S VERY LIMITED, UM, AVAILABILITY, WHAT YOU CAN DO WITHIN THAT SPACE, BECAUSE THEY'VE GOTTA GET THEIR EQUIPMENT AND TRUCKS AND WHATEVER IN, IN, UH, EVENTS THAT THEY NEED TO IN THERE WITHOUT NO, I GET IT.
I MEAN, BUT THEN THERE'S LITERALLY AN ACRE ALMOST BETWEEN THE SCHOOL AND THAT.
AND IT'SS HUGE BECAUSE IT'S A MAJOR TRANSMISSION LINE GOING THROUGH THERE.
AND I TH I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT WALKING, I THINK THAT WAS AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS.
BUT IT'S, THAT'S ABOUT ALL YOU CAN DO IN THAT AREA IS DO A LITTLE WALKING TRAIL BECAUSE ANYTHING ELSE IS, IS STARTS, YOU KNOW, GETTING INTO THOSE EASEMENT REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS.
AND THEN MY NEXT QUESTION WAS, UM, REGARDING TRA UH, MAYBE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION.
HAVE WE LOOKED AT OPENING UP KEYS FOR PASSENGERS GOING ACROSS TO THAT LIBRARY?
[04:05:04]
HAVE IT.I KNOW WE HAVE CROSSING GUARDS.
UM, BUT SOMEONE MENTIONED A VERY GREAT IDEA IN OPENING THAT AREA UP, MORE SIGNS THAT SAYS PEDESTRIANS ARE WALKING LIGHTS OR WHATEVER.
CAN WE MAKE IT MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY TO GET ACROSS THOSE SIX LANES? I THINK WE CAN DEFINITELY STUDY HAVING IT BE MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY.
WE'RE FOCUSED ON HAVING ALL OF OUR PARKING AND KEEPING PEOPLE ON OUR SITE BECAUSE WE FEEL LIKE THAT'S THE BEST WAY WE CAN ENSURE STATEMENT.
BUT I KNOW A LOT OF STUDENTS STILL WALK TO SCHOOL CAUSE US THEY DO.
AND THERE'S, THERE'S SOME GREAT CONVERSATIONS.
I KNOW THAT CHIEF ALFRED IS, UM, TALKING TO THE NORTH TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT
SO I THINK THAT THERE MIGHT BE POTENTIAL AND HE CAN TALK THROUGH THOSE ISSUES, PARTNERSHIP POTENTIAL WITH THEM.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? YES, I DO.
AND I HAVE COMMENTS IF I HAVE A SECOND IN THE MATTER.
WAIT, WAIT, I GOTTA GET MY, UM, CASE NUMBERS.
2 23 1 0 7 IN THE MATTER OF 2 23.
107 I MOTION TO APPROVE THE PROJECT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET TO INCLUDE THE SITE PLAN, REVISED SITE PLAN, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND TO PROVIDE 30% PERMEABLE PAVEMENT.
UM, AND ALSO TWO EV CHARGING STATIONS AS WELL AS FOUR MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION STATIONS.
ALSO TO INCLUDE HOURS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SPORTS FIELD ALIGNED WITH THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION TENTATIVELY TO BE FROM 8:00 AM TO 10:00 PM AND ALSO, UM, THE U TO BE APPROVED FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD WITH AUTOMATIC RENEWALS.
AND ALSO, UM, TO INCLUDE A MINIMUM OF 203 PARKING SPACES.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, I THINK WE HAVE, WE HAVE SOME, UH, QUESTIONS ABOUT THE, UH, THE 30%.
COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? YEAH, THE, CAN CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR MOTION? I THINK WE'RE, UH, SO I'D LIKE TO APPROVE THE DOCKET.
I'M SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS LISTED, INCLUDING A REVISED SITE PLAN, REVISED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, A, AN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCE, WHICH COULD BE SOLAR PANELS OR AN ENERGY SOURCE ON THE BUILDING SIMILAR TO EV CHARGING STATIONS.
AND ALSO 30% PERMEABLE PAVEMENT.
IS THAT OVER THE ENTIRE SITE? NO, JUST 30% OF THE CONCRETE PARKING OF THE PARKING.
30% PERMEABLE PAVING FOR PARKING.
I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD DO PAVING IF IT'S NOT PARKING, BUT, OKAY.
AND THEN ALSO OP HOURS OF OPERATION ALIGNED WITH THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION, HOWEVER, TENTATIVELY TO BE BETWEEN EIGHT AND 10 O'CLOCK FOR THOSE FIELDS.
EIGHT TO 10 OR YOU JUST WANNA FOR, HAVE AN OPTION? WHY COULDN'T DO I HAVE THE OPTION OF LETTING THE ADMINISTRATION, UM, DECIDE THE HOURS OF OPERATIONS ON THE FIELD? NO.
SO I'D LIKE TO HAVE A, A MAXIMUM OF 10 O'CLOCK, ESPECIALLY FOR SUMMERTIME.
WE'VE LOST TRACK COMMISSIONERS.
EVERY LINE WE'RE TRYING TO CONSIDER THE, UH, THE REPERCUSSIONS.
AND WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF LAGGING BEHIND.
AND THEN BY THE TIME YOU GET TO THE NEXT ONE, SO I'M, I'M STILL BACK AT THE 30%, BUT I THINK I GOT IT NOW.
ALTHOUGH THE ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PIECE, I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT FITS IN, HOW IT WORKS
[04:10:01]
OR HOW THAT, UH, HOW THE COMPLIANCE PIECE WORKS WITH THAT.WELL, I'LL LET, LET'S SCRATCH THE ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PIECE.
AND I'LL REQUIRE 30% PERMEABLE PAVING FOR PARKING BECAUSE I HAVE FAITH THAT D I S D SUSTAINABLE DEPARTMENT WILL PROVIDE SOME SUSTAINABLE MEASURES PER MINIMUM FOR MINIMUM 30%.
ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT? I AM OKAY WITH THAT IF DAVID AND ANDREA ALREADY.
SO THE ADJUSTMENT IS MINIMUM 30% PERMEABLE FOR PARKING AND MY APOLOGIES.
WHAT'S THE, THE NEXT ADJUSTMENT? TWO EV CHARGING STATIONS.
EV PARKING FOR MULTIMODAL STATIONS.
MULTIMODAL MUL MULTIMODAL MOLE BECAUSE IT'S MIDDLE SCHOOL.
SO THOSE ARE TWO ADJUSTMENTS OR THEY DON'T MISS ANOTHER ONE? POWERS AND THE HOURS CAN, YEAH.
CAN YOU REPEAT THAT ONE PLEASE? MY APOLOGIES.
THE HOURS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SPORTS FIELD WOULD BE BETWEEN EIGHT O'CLOCK AND 10 O'CLOCK.
UNTIL I BE OPEN TO A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT UNTIL 10:00 PM WITH NO LIGHTING.
PRINCIPAL JACKSON, DOES THAT ALIGN WITH THE VISION OF THE SCHOOL? EIGHT TO 10:00 PM NO, THERE ARE SOME EARLY MORNING PRACTICES THAT MIGHT START AT SEVEN.
SO IF I HAVE IT SOME I'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND SEVEN TO 10.
IS THAT OKAY WITH YOU, COMMISSIONER? PARDON ME? I CAN'T HEAR.
THE LATEST WOULD BE A 10:10 PM TEN'S.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S FINE.
OUR, OUR, UH, WE LOCKED THE FACILITY AND CLOSE IT DOWN AT 11.
NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES AND THE 2 0 3 NUMBER OF PARKING? YOU SAID 10 WITH AUTO.
AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD A HEIGHT, RE HEIGHT MAXIMUM AT 42 FEET.
MAXIMUM 10 WITH NO AUTO, EXCUSE ME.
10 WITH AUTO, UH, THE AUTO RENEWAL PERIOD.
DID I MISS ANOTHER ONE? YOU SECOND IT.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE ASK.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, JUST SO I MAKE SURE THAT STAFF GETS THIS CORRECT, UM, ON THE, THE PERMEABLE PAVING, I'M GONNA READ SOMETHING AND WILL YOU TELL ME, PLEASE, IF THIS CAPTURES WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH? I WILL, UM, A, A MINIMUM OF 30% OF THE SURFACE OF AN UNENCLOSED PARKING SPACE, NOT INCLUDING DRIVEWAYS OR AISLES DESIGNATED AS MANEUVERING AREA FOR PARKING, MUST BE CONSTRUCTED OF A PERMEABLE NON-STANDARD MATERIAL AS APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR.
UM, AND I I ADD THAT LAST PHRASE BECAUSE THERE IS ALREADY A PRE-APPROVED LIST OF NON-STANDARD PERMEABLE MATERIAL THAT THEY, THEY COULD THEN USE AND THEY KNOW IT'LL BE APPROVED.
SO IF WE WERE TO WORD IT LIKE I JUST READ IT, DOES THAT CAPTURE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH? YES, IT DOES.
THE, THE 42 FEET HEIGHT AS WE'RE OKAY WITH THE VISION THERE? YES, SIR.
JUST ONE THING FOR COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, BECAUSE HE SAID HE HAD COMMENTS, HE IS GOING TO HAVE TO EXPLAIN HOW THOSE CONDITIONS MAKE THE USE SO THE SCHOOL MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AND CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO, UM, IN, IN CONVERSATIONS WITH SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION, UM, AND AS SHE'S WALKED THE CAMPUS AND DESCRIBED THAT THERE IS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WATER RUNOFF THAT ACCUMULATES ON THE CAMPUS
[04:15:01]
THAT WE HAVE TO DISALLOW TO GET TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY ACCORDING TO CODE.UM, AND THIS PERMEABLE PAVEMENT WILL THWART THE RUNOFF WATER THAT WILL LEAVE THE EXISTING SITE, UM, THAT WILL BE RESULTING FROM THE NEW IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE'RE PUTTING ON THE SITE WITH THE BUILDING AND OTHER, UM, IMPERVIOUS SURFACES.
SO THE ATTEMPT IS TO THWART STORM WATER RUNOFF FROM THE NEW BUILDINGS THAT WE'RE CREATING, WHICH IS A LOT LARGER THAN WHAT WAS EXISTING.
UM, IN ORDER TO DISALLOW THAT WATER RUNOFF TO ENTER INTO THE EXISTING SYSTEM, WHICH WE DON'T KNOW, UM, IF IT IS SIZED APPROPRIATELY TO HANDLE THAT WATER RUNOFF, PLEASE ASK AS MANY AS YOU CAN PLEASE.
ONE MORE CLARIFYING QUESTION FOR FROM STAFF.
UH, YOU SAID REVISED SITE PLAN, IS THAT SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF SHOWING THE ADDITIONAL TW UH, 20 PARKING SPACES THAT WE'RE ADDING BACK THE 20 PARKING SPACES? UM, THE LOCATIONS OF THE PERMEABLE PAVEMENT AND ALSO THE TREES BETWEEN THE FIELDS.
UM, THE, THE TREES, THERE'S A LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT'S GONNA BE REQUIRED AT PERMITTING THAT WILL SUBJECT TO THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.
SO YOU'RE ADDING A LANDSCAPE PLAN.
WELL, I'D LIKE TO ADD A LANDSCAPE PLAN IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE TREES ARE LOCATED BETWEEN THE FIELDS, AND THAT'S THE ONLY WAY I KNOW TO ADD THAT CONDITION.
WE'RE GONNA TAKE A VERY QUICK BREAK.
UH, IN FACT, IT'S, LET'S MAKE IT A 10 MINUTE BREAK.
COMMISSIONERS, IT IS, UH, FIVE 15.
UM, WE'RE GONNA GET BACK ON THE RECORD.
ARE WE RECORDING? WE ARE RECORDING.
I THINK WE'RE READY, UH, FOR A REVISED MOTION.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, YOU HAVE THE FOUR, SIR.
IN THE MATTER OF Z 2023 DASH ONE 17, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE FOLLOWING AND FOLLOWING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO A SUBJECT TO A REVISED SITE PLAN, A TMP AND CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
UH, THOSE CONDITIONS TO INCLUDE MAXIMUM HEIGHT BEING 42 FEET.
THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES IS 203, TWO EV PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED, AND FOUR MULTIMODAL STATIONS ARE UNNECESSARY.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON FOR YOUR MOTION.
CAN I HAVE A SECOND? THANK YOU.
COMMISSIONER ERT FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
UM, SO I, I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT, UM, HOW I FEEL LIKE D I S D AND, AND THE TEAM IS REALLY DOING THE COMMUNITY OF REALLY GOOD JUSTICE AND, AND DEFINING, UM, THIS NEW SOCIAL JUSTICE ACADEMY AND HEARING US OUT FROM THE COMMUNITY STANDPOINT AS WELL AS FROM, FROM MY
[04:20:01]
STANDPOINT AS A COMMISSIONER.I KNOW I'VE THROWN IN A WHOLE LOT OF HURDLES AT THE LAST MINUTE.
AND, UM, I APPRECIATE THE ATTENTIVENESS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE HAD AND THE CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD WITH, WITH PRINCIPAL JACKSON.
UM, AND I HOPE THAT THIS SCHOOL BECOMES THE BEACON THAT I KNOW THAT IT WILL BE.
AND I TRUST THAT WE'LL HAVE THE ONGOING CONVERSATIONS TO CONTINUE IMPROVING, UM, WHAT IS ALREADY A, A GOOD SHOWING.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
AND, AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, COMMISSIONER, YOU DID WITHDRAW THE, THE FIRST MOTION.
AND THE SECOND A POINT OF CLERK PLEASE, PLEASE.
ARE WE, DID YOU HAVE A TIME PERIOD OR IS IT STAFF RECOMMENDATION, SIR? YES, I'D LIKE THE, UM, U P FOR 10 YEARS WITH AUTOMATIC RENEWAL.
WOULD THAT BE A 10 AND 10? 10 AND 10.
COMMISSIONER STANDARD, PLEASE.
YES, I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION.
I'M DELIGHTED THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO REACH A COMPROMISE AND MOVE THESE SCHOOLS ON.
THIS IS SO NEEDED AND I THINK IT'S THE GREATEST TRAFFIC PLANNING I'VE EVER SEEN IN MY LIFE.
AND I LOVE THE FACT FOR MS. JACKSON THAT YOU ARE SERVING A COMMUNITY.
I THINK THE FACT THAT THIS SCHOOL IS NOT JUST SERVING AS AN INS EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION, BUT IS ALSO THERE AS A GATHERING PLACE FOR THE COMMUNITY GIVES IT A DUAL PURPOSE AND A NEED TO GET GOING AND GET BUILT.
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
I JUST WANT TO ADD, I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE MOVIE VERSION OF THE TMP
UM, SO I I, I'M A DISTRICT FOUR RESIDENT AFTER KATRINA, THAT WAS MY HOME.
WHAT, WHAT I LIKE ABOUT OUR SCHOOLS IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR, IT'S AN OLD SCHOOL FEEL.
UM, GROWING UP IN NEW ORLEANS, MY TEACHER WOULD COME KNOCK ON MY DOOR IF SHE HAD TO.
ALL THESE SCHOOLS HAVE THAT FEEL WHEN YOU WALK INTO IT.
AND I KNOW L TALK LISTENING TO, TO PRINCIPAL JACKSON, UM, WHICH IT WAS KIND OF WEIRD THAT WE HAD TO GIVE INSTRUCTIONS TO A PRINCIPAL, BUT NEITHER HEAR THAT.
THANK YOU, UM, FOR MAKING THAT COMMUNITY A HOME FOR SO MANY PEOPLE, NOT JUST THE STUDENTS, BUT THE ADULTS IN THE AREA AS WELL.
THE FEEDER PATTERNS FOR THE SOUTHERN SECTOR AREN'T THAT PRETTY.
UM, WW BUSHMAN'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW, ELI PEACE HAS BEEN DISMANTLED.
ALL THESE SCHOOLS ARE GOING THROUGH SO MUCH.
SO TO SEE THIS STRUCTURE BEING BUILT IN THE HEART OF OH HECK, BREAKING LOOSE, UM, IT'S A POWERFUL MOTION.
UM, I ALSO SUPPORT THE MOTION AND I JUST WANTED TO COMMEND THIS TEAM.
IT REALLY LOOKS LIKE YOU WORK TOGETHER WELL, AND I JUST WANTED TO COMPLIMENT ALL OF YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR HARD WORK.
YEAH, I'M BASICALLY THERE ON SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.
UM, I DO WANT TO SPEAK TO A RECENT TREND THAT WE'VE SEEN ON, ON D I S D CASES.
UM, YOU KNOW, D I S D IS A ITS OWN GOVERNMENTAL BODY WITH ITS OWN ELECTED OFFICIALS AND ITS OWN, YOU KNOW, PURPOSE THAT IT SERVES.
AND AS MS. LENAHAN SAID TODAY, IT HAS ITS OWN, YOU KNOW, SUSTAINABILITY DEPARTMENT THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS VERY DEDICATED TO PROVIDING FOR SUSTAINABILITY AT THESE SCHOOLS.
I GUESS ON THE LA THE LAST SEVERAL D I S D CASES THAT WE'VE SEEN, WE'VE SEEN MORE AND MORE, YOU KNOW, REQUESTS COMING FROM COMMISSIONERS, BOTH IN SUSTAINABILITY AND OTHER AREAS.
AND I THINK THEY'RE COMING FROM A FUNDAMENTALLY GOOD PLACE.
BUT I DO WORRY WITH, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER GOVERNMENTAL BODY THAT THAT ANSWERS TO, YOU KNOW, THAT HAS ITS OWN ELECTED OFFICIALS FOR THE PEOPLE.
TO ANSWER TO THAT WE ARE STARTING TO REALLY MAKE SOME SERIOUS DEMANDS OF D I S D THAT ARE STARTING TO, AND OTHER PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT ARE STARTING TO STEP OUT OF OUR LAND USE ROLE AND STARTING TO, YOU KNOW, ENCROACH ON SCHOOL DISTRICT POLICY.
SO I DO WANT TO BE, YOU KNOW, I HOPE PEOPLE WILL BE CAREFUL AND THOUGHTFUL MOVING FORWARD THAT, THAT D I S D CAN
[04:25:01]
DO A LOT OF GREAT THINGS, BUT I FEEL LIKE I'VE ALWAYS BEEN A MINIMALIST WHEN IT COMES TO PUBLIC SCHOOL CASES.THERE ARE SOME IMPORTANT LAND USE CRITERIA THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE ARE TAKEN CARE OF IN THESE D I S D CASES.
WE'RE STARTING TO MAKE A LOT OF ASKS OF THE DISTRICT.
YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THIS IS A, WE'VE GOTTEN TO A REALLY GREAT POINT WITH THIS ONE, AND I'M VERY HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT, BUT I JUST THINK WE NEED TO THINK LONG AND HARD ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING IN ANY REQUEST THAT WE MAKE OF A PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT.
UM, THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH, WITH THE 10 IN 10, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THIS HAS BEAT BEEN BEATEN TO DEATH, UM, AT THE HORSESHOE, BUT I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND TO A PERMANENT S U AND IF I GET A SECOND, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY COMMENTS.
WAS THAT A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, UH, TO MAKE IT A PERMANENT U DISCUSSION, COMMISSIONERS WOULD DIS DISCUSS THE, UH, THE AMENDMENT TO A PERMANENT U COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, PLEASE.
UM, I, I THINK SINCE THIS IS A BRAND NEW BUILDING AND A NEW CAMPUS, IT'S APPROPRIATE TO HAVE AN U REVIEW PERIOD.
I MEAN, IT WON'T BE BUILT FOR, WHAT, THREE YEARS AT LEAST.
SO IT'S NOT REALLY 10 YEARS OF OPERATION WE'RE LOOKING AT.
AND AFTER THAT, IF EVERYTHING'S WORKING THE WAY IT, IT APPEARS THAT IT'S GOING TO AND THE COMMUNITY'S HAPPY.
UM, I THINK AT THAT POINT IT'S APPROPRIATE TO MOVE TO PERMANENT, BUT WITH ALL OF THESE NEW CAMPUSES AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S ESSENTIALLY INFILL DEVELOPMENT IN ALREADY EXISTING COMMUNITIES AND IT'S A LARGE INFILL DEVELOPMENT, THINGS CAN HAVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
AND IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY WAY TO REVIEW THAT, THEN I, I MEAN, THIS IS PART OF THE, THE CHOICE THEY MAKE WHEN THEY COME FORWARD WITH AN U INSTEAD OF A PD.
IT COMES WITH A REVIEW PERIOD OFTEN.
AND SO, UH, ELIMINATING THAT ELEMENT OF THIS ZONING TOOL SEEMS INAPPROPRIATE TO ME.
UH, I APPROVE THIS, UH, UH, THIS U P AND I DO BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD GO FORTH WITHOUT A, UH, WITH AUTOMATIC, WITH THE PERMANENT U BECAUSE THEY DID COME IN AS WANTING THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
AND IT SEEMS LIKE THE ISD SCHOOLS ARE COMING IN ASKING FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT IN SOME KIND OF WAY.
THEY'RE GETTING PUSHED OVER TO A S U.
BUT IF THIS WAS A BRAND NEW SCHOOL AS FAR AS A, UH, A VERY NEW SCHOOL, INSTEAD OF THEM UPGRADING AND BUILDING A NEW FACILITY ON THE CURRENT LAND, I WOULD BE, UH, UH, MORE IN DEPTH TO SAY WITH A 10 YEAR, UM, AUTOMATIC RENEWAL THAT I COULD SAY.
BUT ON THIS PARTICULAR DAY, I'M ALSO LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING WHAT THIS SCHOOL DOES FOR THIS COMMUNITY.
UM, HAVING A SCHOOL, LIKE A SOCIAL JUSTICE SCHOOL THAT WILL RETEACH OUR CHILDREN, THAT THEY ARE, THEY ARE THE NEXT LEADERS THAT IN SO MUCH THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON IN OUR SCHOOLS AND OUR KIDS ARE FALLING BY THE, UM, WAY AND, AND SO MANY, UM, CHARTER SCHOOLS COMING IN AND, AND HAVING A SCHOOL THAT IS STILL HAS A PRINCIPAL AND STAFF THAT WHEN YOU, WHEN SHE WAS SPEAKING, YOU CAN FEEL THAT NOT ONLY DO SHE LOVE HER SCHOOL, SHE'S INVESTED IN THAT.
SO I'M HAPPILY READY TO WORK WITH THE I S D OR THIS SCHOOL, BUT, UM, DEFINITELY THIS IS A SCHOOL, THIS IST A NEW, THIS IS A NEW PROJECT, BUT IT'S ON AN OLD, IT'S AT A OLD, UM, AT A OLD SCHOOL.
UM, I AM GOING TO SUPPORT THE 10 AND 10 AND, AND WHAT WE ARE SEEING IS A PROCESS CHANGE FROM US WHERE WE, WHERE, UM, WE ARE, WE ARE GOING FROM PDS AND, AND I GET THE STAFF IS, IS, IS LOOKING TO DO A PROCESS CHANGE.
AND WE HAVE NOT HAD THAT ROLLOUT AS OF YET RIGHT.
THAT WE'VE BEEN LOOKING TO GET.
BUT IF YOU, IF YOU, IF THERE'S HALF A DOZEN ONE WAY, HALF A DOZEN ANOTHER, IF YOU SAY D I S D SHOULD BE A S U P, AND IT SHOULD, AND IT SHOULD AUTOMATICALLY GO IN AS A PERMANENT S U P, THEN, THEN YOU OPEN THE DOOR THAT SAYS EVERY S U P THAT WE GET SHOULD COME IN AS A PERMANENT S U P FOR WHATEVER REASON.
AND, AND IN, WELL, IT, IT COULD BE SAID SO, AND, AND THE PURPOSE OF S U IS TO SEE IF IT FITS, TO SEE IF IT WORKS TO BRING IT BACK AND SAY, DOES THIS FIT? IF YOU WANT D I S D NOT TO COME BACK THEN THEY, THEY THEN THERE'S A PROCESS CALLED A
[04:30:01]
PD.BUT IF YOU DON'T WANT THAT AND THEN YOU, AND YOU WANNA USE THE U P, THEN IT'S UP TO, IN MY OPINION, THE, UH, COMMISSIONER AND HIS COMMUNITY OR THEIR COMMUNITY TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION WHICH WAY THEY WANT TO DO IT.
DO THEY WANT AN U P THAT COMES BACK IN 10 OR DO THEY WANT AN U P THAT HAS A PERMANENT, THAT'S PERMANENT.
AND BECAUSE, UM, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON CHANGED THIS FROM AND IN HIS DISTRICT, AND THIS, THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL, BEAUTIFUL PR UH, SCHOOL CAMPUS.
THIS IS, I I LOVE THE TMP HOW MANY TIMES YOU HEAR ME SAY I LOVE THE TMP
UM, SO, AND, AND, AND THIS, AND WE'RE NOT.
AND WHEN, WHEN YOU DO, WHEN WE ARE DOING THIS, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A TMP TO COME BACK.
SO IF THE TMP IS BAD, IF IT, AND, AND IT DOES, AND IT, WE ALLOW IT AND IT DOES NOT COME BACK, WE HAVE NO WAY OF MAKING ANY CORRECTIONS, ALTERATIONS OR CHANGES.
SO I, I AM GOING TO STICK WITH, UM, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON'S 10 AND 10.
I, I, I APOLOGIZE THAT I CAN'T GO ALONG WITH A PERMANENT S U THEY ALREADY GIMME A CHANCE TO GO.
I DON'T, I DIDN'T SPEAK ON THIS YET.
UH, MR. RULE, I MADE THE MOTION, PLEASE.
AND I, AND I SAID I WASN'T GOING TO TO SPEAK BECAUSE I'VE SPOKEN ON THIS ISSUE AT LINK BEFORE, BUT COMMISSIONER BLAIR GOT MY, MY MIND GOING WHEN SHE BROUGHT UP THE COMMUNITY.
AND, AND I DON'T THINK I'M AN ABSOLUTIST WHEN IT COMES TO INSISTING ON PERMANENT SUVS FOR, FOR, YOU KNOW, TRADITIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
BUT I THINK WHAT I WOULD NEED TO SEE AND WHAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT COULD MOVE ME IN THE OTHER DIRECTION IS IF THERE WERE TRULY A PROBLEM SCHOOL IN AN AREA, AND WE SAW SIGNIFICANT FEEDBACK FROM A COMMUNITY WANTING AN S U P FOR A SCHOOL FOR A SHORTER TIME PERIOD, LIKE WE OFTEN SEE WITH CHARTER SCHOOLS.
BUT I, I DON'T SEE ANYONE HERE FROM THE COMMUNITY TODAY, AND I HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANY FEEDBACK IN COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
FEEL FREE IF THERE WAS AN UPSWELL IN YOUR COMMUNITY TO, TO CORRECT ME.
BUT I, I DON'T SEE A DEMAND FOR TIME LIMITS ON SUVS FOR, YOU KNOW, D I S D SCHOOLS AND OTHER PUBLIC SCHOOLS COMING FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
BUT IF THAT WERE THE CASE, I WOULD WOULD STRONGLY CONSIDER IT.
SO THAT, THAT'S ONE OTHER CONSIDERATION THAT THAT GOES INTO MY THINKING ON A PERMANENT S U P FOR THIS ONE.
AND MOST OTHER D I S D SCHOOLS COMMISSIONER STANDARD.
TWO THINGS TO, UH, COMMISSIONER RUBIN'S MOTION.
UH, THE FIRST PART OF, WHEN I TAKE A DIFFERENT STANCE ABOUT SCHOOLS, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE, UH, PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND IT'S D I S D, THESE SCHOOLS CAN POTENTIALLY BE HERE FOR 60 YEARS AND WE ARE IN THE 21ST CENTURY.
AND IF WE ARE GOING, I DO THINK IT'S A LAND USE, UH, SITUATION WHERE IF WE GIVE EXTRA PARKING SPACES AND WE'RE CREATING A HEAT ISLAND AND MORE CEMENT, THAT WE DO HAVE ALMOST AN OBLIGATION WITH OUR CPAC AND WITH THE PUBLIC FUNDS TO FOLLOW THEM AND TRYING IN THE 21ST CENTURY TO REDUCE THAT KIND OF HEAT ISLAND, TO REDUCE WATER RUNOFF, TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN IN THIS CLIMATE CHANGE WORLD TO MAKE SURE 50 YEARS FROM NOW WE HAVEN'T CREATED SOMETHING THAT'S ANTIQUATED.
SO I SEE THAT, BUT I ALSO SEE THAT I JUST DID A SCHOOL WHERE AFTER WE APPROVED THE S U P, AND I DO WANT EVERYONE TO HEAR THIS, AND THIS IS ON THE FAULT, I'M SURE OF THE COMMUNITY, BUT WE ENDED UP HAVING A MEETING WITH 60 PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMING TO A MEETING AFTER IT WAS APPROVED.
NOW, WHERE WERE THEY DURING THIS HEARING? AND SHOULDN'T HAVE THEY BEEN THERE AND SHOULDN'T HAVE, THEY'VE NOTICED, YES.
BUT I THINK THIS THING, WHEN SOMETHING IS NEW, I THINK IT'S A RESPECT FOR THE PUBLIC AND IT'S PUBLIC FUNDS TO SAY, WE'RE GONNA GIVE YOU A TIME, ONCE IN 10 YEARS TO COME BACK WITH A PUBLIC, AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD.
YOU KNOW, NOT TO HAVE TO WRITE SOMEONE, NOT TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER, BUT IS THIS LAND USE THE WAY WE APPROVED IT WORKING FOR YOU.
SO IN THAT SENSE, I WANT THE 10 INTENT TOO.
COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, PLEASE.
I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT TMP HAD SOME SORT OF A REVIEW PROCESS BUILT
[04:35:01]
IN FOR THEM.CAN SOMEONE REFRESH MY RECOLLECTION? I THINK THIS IS A STAFF QUESTION.
SO THEY ARE REQUIRED, UM, EVERY TWO YEARS TO SUBMIT AN UPDATED TRAFFIC STUDY, UM, TO OUR TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, UM, THAT GETS REVIEWED.
AND IF IT'S DETERMINED THAT THE TRAFFIC PLAN IS WORKING, THEY'RE GOOD TO GO.
IF IT'S DETERMINED THAT IT'S NOT, THEN THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT A REVISED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, UH, WITHIN 30 DAYS.
AND IF THEY MISS ANY OF THOSE POINTS, UM, THEN IT, THEY ARE TO BE REPORTED BACK TO YOU ALL FOR NOT HAVING COMPLIED WITH THOSE SUBMITTALS.
SO JUST SO I'M CLEAR, SEPARATE AND APART FROM WHAT WE APPROVE WITH RESPECT TO THE S U P TIMEFRAME, THE TMP PROCESS WILL SEPARATELY GO ON A TWO YEAR CYCLE.
IF THEY MISS SOMETHING AS PART OF THAT SEPARATE CYCLE, IT WILL SEPARATELY COME BACK TO CPC.
AND IT'S NOT EXACTLY SEPARATE FROM WHAT YOU'RE APPROVING BECAUSE THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, ALL THOSE CONDITIONS ARE PART OF THE CONDITIONS, WHETHER IT'S ANS U P OR A PD, WE HAVE BASICALLY THE SAME SET OF CONDITIONS FOR THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND THE REQUIREMENT TO RESUBMIT TRAFFIC STUDIES AND UPDATED TMP IF IT'S DETERMINED TO BE NECESSARY.
SO IF THIS LOVELY TMP THAT WE ALL, LIKE, IF FOR SOME REASON TWO YEARS GO BY, FOUR YEARS GO BY, THEY'RE PART OF THEIR TWO YEAR CADENCE, THEY GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND IT IS DETERMINED BY TRAFFIC STAFF THAT IT'S NOT WORKING, UM, THEN IT WILL COME BACK TO THE CPC.
UM, THE CONDITIONS READ THAT TRAFFIC STUDIES ARE, ARE TO BE SUBMITTED BY X DATE AND THEN EVERY TWO YEARS AFTER.
AND THAT IF THEY DON'T DO THAT, THEY, THE DIRECTOR WILL REPORT TO THE CPC.
AND THEN ALSO AS A PART OF THAT, EVERY TWO YEAR SUBMITTAL, THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT REVIEWS IT PART OF WHAT THEY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT.
THIS IS WHY WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT THE THREE 11 REPORTING SYSTEM BEING SO IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT'S THE PRIMARY WAY THAT WE GET FEEDBACK, BUT HOWEVER FEEDBACK COMES, UM, IT CAN BE IF THERE'S A LOT OF FEEDBACK FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THINGS AREN'T WORKING, IF WE HEAR THAT FROM WHATEVER SOURCE THAT GETS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHEN THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT IS REVIEWING THAT TRAFFIC STUDY.
I AM INCLINED TO SUPPORT, UM, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON'S MOTION KNOWING, OH, SORRY.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN'S MOTION THAT IT'S A PERMANENT S U P, UM, KNOWING THAT THIS COMMISSION WILL, IT'LL BE BROUGHT FORTH TO THIS BODY IF THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE TMP QUESTION.
HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE SEEN A, A PROBLEM WITH A TMP THAT'S EVER BEEN BROUGHT BACK TO US? THE ZERO, I'M, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE HOW I CAN ANSWER THAT AS A STAFF MEMBER THAT'S BEEN WITH THE CITY FOR SIX YEARS, BUT I WILL SAY THAT EVEN JUST IN THE COURSE OF THESE FEW MONTHS THAT I'VE BEEN WORKING ON SCHOOLS, WE HAD A PRIME EXAMPLE OF WHEN THAT PROCESS WORKED.
I CAN'T RECALL THE NAME OF THE SCHOOL, BUT THERE HAD BEEN REPORTS FROM THE COMMUNITY THROUGH THREE 11, AND THAT TRIGGERED THE STUDY.
UM, IT TRIGGERED A NEW TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN.
OH, IT WAS A CHARTER SCHOOL, ACTUALLY A CASE THAT'S ALREADY COME THROUGH HERE THAT THE, THE INFORMATION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT CAME THROUGH THREE 11 TRIGGERED THE NEW TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN.
AND THEN THAT BECAME PART OF THE CASE THAT WE HAD BEFORE THIS BODY.
AND THAT'S WITHIN THE LAST SIX, SIX OR EIGHT MONTHS THAT I'VE BEEN DOING THIS.
WHAT I, I COME BACK AND YOU OKAY.
NO, I'M FINISHED FURTHER, PLEASE.
UM, THE PROCESS ALSO STATES THAT A T IF, IF, UH, TMP IS NOT SUBMITTED IN A TIMELY FASHION, THEN THE DIRECTOR OF IN THAT, THAT IT, THE, IT IS THE DIRECTOR, THERE'S WORK THAT THE DIRECTOR NEEDS TO BE DONE.
AND, AND I KNOW MR. NAVARRES IS NOT HERE.
IS HE ONLINE? HE'S HE'S LISTENING ONLINE, YES.
BUT ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS THAT WE HAVE HAD FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS IS THAT THOSE, THAT THERE, THE MECHANISM THAT
[04:40:01]
TRIGGERS THAT IS NOT ONE THAT IS COM THAT IS ADHERED TO.SO THE ONLY THING THAT WE HAVE HAD IS THE SU IS THE PROCESS IN WHICH THE S U P TRIGGERS THE REVIEW, AND THEN WE RE-LOOK AT THE TMP.
I CASE IN POINT, I HAD A, JUST DID A CASE IN, UM, UM, IN DISTRICT THREE THAT THE TMP, THE REASON IT CAME BEFORE AND ONLY REASON WHY IT CAME BEFORE US, IS BECAUSE THEY NEEDED AN AMENDMENT TO THEIR U BUT THEY HADN'T DONE A T UH, THEY HADN'T DONE THEIR TMP EVER SINCE THE DATE THAT THEY GOT THE, IT WAS SO THEY, THEIR TIMELINE WAS MISSED.
CAN I RESPOND TO THAT THOUGH? ONE, ONE OF THE ISSUES IS THAT AS A RESULT OF EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AND FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED FROM YOU ALL AND OTHER, I MEAN FROM THE COMMUNITY, FROM THE COMMISSION, UM, FROM THE COUNCIL, UM, THE, THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, ALL THESE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS STAFF HAS ADDED ELEMENTS THAT DIDN'T USED TO BE IN THE CONDITIONS.
SO THERE WAS NEVER PRIOR TO THE, THE LAST FOUR OR SIX OR HOWEVER MANY MONTHS, THERE WASN'T ANYTHING IN THE CONDITIONS THAT WOULD HAVE REQUIRED THEM TO BE REPORTED IF THEY DIDN'T TURN IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY.
IT WAS ONLY PART OF THE, IF THEY TURNED IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND THEN, AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT YOU NEEDED A NEW TMP AND THEN YOU DIDN'T TURN THAT IN, THAT WAS WHEN IT GOT REPORTED TO YOU.
WE'VE ADDED THE ADDITIONAL ELEMENT PRIOR AND WE HAVEN'T REALLY HAD A CHANCE TO SEE HOW THAT WORKS.
SO IT'S, WE'VE UPDATED THE CONDITIONS WITHIN THE LAST FEW MONTHS.
AND AGAIN, THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE NO IDEA OF BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THE ROLLOUT CORRECT.
BUT, BUT I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT, I MEAN THAT I, I'M NOT REALLY SEEING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT SCENARIO WHEN THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN IS IN A PD OR AN U P I, I THINK I KNOW, AGAIN, I SAY THERE'S A LOT OF FRUSTRATION AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE 3 23 CPC AGENDA WILL INCLUDE A BRIEFING COME OR HIGH WATER.
IT WILL BE GIVEN BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S SORELY NEEDED.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE, THAT WE NEED TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION.
BUT, UM, THERE'S, THERE'S JUST A LOT OF CONFUSION.
I THINK ABOUT, AND S U AND A PD ARE, ARE MUCH MORE SIMILAR THAN I, I THINK EVERYONE IS UNDERSTANDING.
UM, I WILL VERY HAPPILY BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION FOR A PERMANENT S U P, UH, FOR TWO REASONS.
THE FIRST ONE IS, THE FIRST IS THE ONE I KNOW I HAVE SAID PROBABLY THREE OR FOUR TIMES, WHICH IS IT, I, IT DOESN'T COMPUTE TO ME.
UM, IT, THIS, THIS APPLICATION HERE TODAY AS A PD WOULD'VE HAD NO TIME LIMIT ON IT AND WOULD'VE HAD THE VERY SAME CONDITIONS ON IT.
IT WOULD BE THE EXACT SAME SCHOOL.
THE EXACT SAME SCHOOL WOULD'VE BEEN BUILT.
UH, AND WE WOULD NOT BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION.
AND NUMBER TWO, AND THIS IS AGAIN THE PART THAT I JUST, I, I CAN'T WRAP MY MIND AROUND.
UH, THIS IS A 10 YEAR S U AND SO WE WERE SAYING THAT WE ARE, WE'RE HOPING THAT IF WE'RE GONNA GIVE THE COMMUNITY THIS, THIS BITE AT THE APPLE, WE'RE GONNA HOPE THAT THE PROBLEMS ARISE NINE YEARS FROM NOW, RIGHT? BECAUSE THIS IS HAPPENS 10 YEARS INTO THE FUTURE, WHEN IN FACT WE ALL KNOW THERE'S, THERE'S ANY ISSUE WITH ANY SCHOOL OR ANY APPLICATION, ANYTHING BEING BUILT THAT'S BEING BUILT THE FIRST YEAR, THAT IT'S, THAT IT'S BUILT OUT.
UH, SECOND REASON IS THAT THERE IS NO OPPOSITION TO THIS SCHOOL.
UH, YOU KNOW, IF, IF WE WERE TO, PARDON ME.
DO YOU, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK? YES.
SO THERE, THERE IS NO OPPOSITION TO THIS SCHOOL.
WE'RE SEEING OWEN, AND IN FACT, I DID HAVE THE PLEASURE TO, TO ATTEND THE LAST COMMUNITY MEETING ON THIS SCHOOL.
AND, AND IT'S QUITE THE OPPOSITE.
UH, THE COMMUNITY EMBRACES THIS SCHOOL IS VERY MUCH LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING THE SCHOOL OPEN.
AND IN FACT IT'S A, IT'S GONNA BE A VERY IMPORTANT PIECE OF THIS COMMUNITY.
SO THOSE TWO PIECES TOGETHER, I'M, I'M HAVING A LITTLE ISSUE WITH, YOU KNOW, I, I SUPPORT THE, THE 10 PLUS 10 WOULD BE GREAT, BUT THE PERMANENT, I THINK JUST RATIONALLY MAKES MORE SENSE TO ME.
UH, BUT OF COURSE I RESPECT ALL THE OPINIONS.
ANDERSON, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? UH, COMMENT, SIR, PLEASE.
ON THE, YES, I HAVE A COMMENT.
UM, SO I I, I CONCUR WITH, WITH A LOT OF WHAT EVERYONE SAID, AND FOR ME, THE S U VERSUS THE PD DON'T WEIGH VERY DIFFERENTLY.
HOWEVER, UM, CONSIDERING THIS LOCATION, THIS SCHOOL, MY ATTEMPT AT DOING THE 10 10 WOULD BE TO ALLOW THEM TO DEVELOP THE SCHOOL
[04:45:01]
AND SEE HOW IT OPERATES IN THE COMMUNITY AND THEN ALLOW THEM TO COME BACK AT THAT 10 AND THEN POTENTIALLY GIVE THEM THE UNLIMITED AFTER THAT POINT.BUT I'M NOT SURE HOW IT WOULD NOT COME BACK EVEN IN 10 10.
WILL IT BE AUTOMATIC RENEWALS? UNLESS THEY HAVE A PROBLEM.
LAST STATEMENT AND, UM, NOT LAST STATEMENT, BUT, UM, TRADITIONALLY THE PEOPLE OF THE SOUTHERN SECTOR HAVEN'T BEEN GIVEN A FAIR SHOT, UM, REGARDS TO SCHOOL BUILDINGS, CURRICULUM, EDUCATION, ZONING, THE WHOLE NINE YARDS.
SO, AND WE'RE NOT KNOWN FOR REPORTING TO 3 0 1 AS WE SHOULD.
UM, SO CUZ WE DON'T FEEL LIKE WE HAVE A VOICE, RIGHT? PART OF WHY I'M HERE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT THEY DO.
UM, THAT'S WHY I DON'T SUPPORT THE MOTION.
THE, UH, BRENT, THE MOTION TO, UM, MAKE IT PERMANENT.
I DON'T SUPPORT THE MOTION TO MAKE IT PERMANENT.
THAT SHOULD BE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES, I, I ALSO WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE, UH, MOTION TO MAKE IT PERMANENT.
I NEVER SUPPORT PERMANENT, UM, SUVS.
SO I GUESS I AM AN ABSOLUTIST.
UM, I THINK IT'S A LITTLE UNREALISTIC TO EXPECT THE COMMUNITY TO ANTICIPATE AND ADVANCE WHAT THE POSSIBLE PROBLEMS COULD BE WITH THE SCHOOL WHEN IT HASN'T BEEN BUILT YET.
I KNOW, UM, THERE'S ONE SCHOOL OF THOUGHT THAT THINKS THAT ALL OF THE ISSUES WITH THE SCHOOL ARE TRAFFIC RELATED AND THEREFORE THEY COULD BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE, YOU KNOW, PERIODIC REVISIONS OF THE TMP.
BUT, UM, I THINK, UH, THERE'S POTENTIAL HERE.
WE CERTAINLY SAT THROUGH A NUMBER OF CASES, UH, WHERE ATHLETIC FIELDS CAUSE A GREAT MANY, UM, ISSUES.
AND THERE ARE NO CONDITIONS IN THIS U UH, RELATING TO THE, UM, ATHLETIC FIELD.
SO, I MEAN, I, I, YOU KNOW, MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE WOULD BE A SHORTER PERIOD OF TIME WITH NO, NO AUTO, BUT MY CHOICES ARE PERMANENT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE, LET'S TAKE A RECORDED VOTE, PLEASE, MS. PATINA.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS ON THE, UH, PERMANENTS U MOTION BY MADE BY COMMISSIONER, UM, RUBEN, SECONDED BY WHEELER.
I'M, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT, SIR, ON THIS? I DON'T KNOW IF NO, NO, SIR.
THIS IS A MOTION ON THE PERMANENT S U P.
DISTRICT SIX? NO, BECAUSE IT WON'T COME.
IT FAILS BY WHAT? BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
WE'RE BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
I, I CAN'T READ MY HANDWRITING.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, IT WAS YOU, RIGHT? NO, IT WAS HERBERT.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
FALSE RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO REVISED, UH, SITE PLAN, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS, AS WELL AS THE CONDITIONS AS READ INTO THE RECORD, UH, BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON IN REGARDS TO PARKING AND BUILDING HEIGHT.
AND THE, UH, 10 AND 10 PLUS THE EV AND THE MOBILITY.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? AND THAT'S MICRO MOBILITY.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT COMMISSIONERS.
IT IS COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE READY TO GO BACK ON THE RECORD.
IT'S, UH, FOLKS, ARE ARE ANY OF YOU HERE FOR A PLATZ?
[04:50:01]
YOU ARE.LET'S TAKE CARE OF SOME PLATS.
TAKE CARE OF PLA WE'LL, WE'LL CIRCLE RIGHT BACK TO THE DENTAL DAKOTA AMENDMENTS, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
UM, COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE GONNA DO OUR, UH, SUBDIVISION DOCKET CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. AND I SEE THAT MR. BBAR IS, IS READY.
DON'T, JUST DON'T MIND THE TORNADO SIRENS.
THE CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF EIGHT ITEM ITEM NINE S 2 23 DASH 68.
I'M SORRY, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU MR. BBAR.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? THANK YOU.
YEAH, THE VOLUME IS JUST VERY LOW.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW MR. MR. BORO, ARE YOU GET THAT? LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE JUST RECEIVED AN EMAIL ASKING US FOR ALL OF YOU TO COME DOWN AS CLOSE AS YOU CAN, AS FAR AWAY AS YOU CAN GET FROM THOSE WINDOWS BACK THERE.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? AND WE'RE NOT, YES, MR. BARBAR, YOU MAY JUST HAVE TO GET A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO YOUR MICROPHONE.
THE CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF EIGHT ITEM ITEM NINE S 2 23 DASH 0 68, ITEM 10 S 2 23 DASH SIX NINE, ITEM 11 S 2 23 DASH 70, ITEM 12 S 2 23 DASH 71, ITEM 13 S 2 23 DASH 0 72.
ITEM 14 S 2 23 DASH 0 7 4, ITEM 15 S 2 23 DASH 75.
AND ITEM 16 S 2 23 DASH 76 S 2 23 DASH 72.
CONDITION 15 WAS MODIFIED BY PAVING AND DRAINAGE TO READ AS ON THE FINAL PLAT DEDICATE 25 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY.
WE ARE FEE SIMPLE OR A STREET EASEMENT FROM ESTABLISHED CENTER LINE OF PARNELL STREET AND 22 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY.
WE ARE FEE SIMPLE OR A STREET EASEMENT FROM ALREADY ESTABLISHED CENTER LINE OF PARK STREET TO MAKE A TOTAL OF 50 FEET RIGHT AWAY.
SECTION 51 A 8.602 C 51, A 8.604 C AND 51 A SIX ZERO, UH, I'M SORRY, 8.611 S3 FOUR SEVEN AGAIN, CONDITION 15 WAS MODIFIED BY PAVING AND DRAINAGE TO READ AS ON THE FINAL PLAT.
DEDICATE 25 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY VIA HIS SIMPLE OR A STREET EASEMENT FROM ESTABLISHED CENTER LINE OF BELMONT AVENUE, SECTION 51 A DASH 8 6 0 2 C 51, A 8.604 C, AND 51 A 8.611 C.
THE ABOVE CASES HAVE BEEN ADVERTISED FOR HEARING AT THIS TIME, AND A STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND THE CONDITION, UH, AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
JUST TO CONFIRM THE, THE FIRST ADJUSTMENT WAS TO CASE NUMBER 13 AND THE SECOND ONE WAS TO CASE NUMBER, IS IT 15 THIR? 13 AND 14.
SO IT WAS, UH, 2 3 23 DASH 2 72 AND S 2 2 3 0 7 4 13.
[04:55:09]
GOT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS? CASES NINE THROUGH 16 WILL BE DISPOSED OF IN ONE MOTION UNLESS THERE'S SOMEONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY ONE OF THOSE CASES NINE THROUGH 16 COMMISSIONERS.
QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THOSE CASES? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON PLEASE.
I WAS TRYING TO KEEP UP WITH THE NUMBER.
WHAT WAS THE ADJUSTMENT THAT WAS MADE TO CASE NUMBER 14? CASE NUMBER 14.
CONDITION NUMBER 15 WAS MODIFIED BY P AND DRAINAGE TO READ AS ON THE FINAL PLA DEDICATE 28 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY VIA FEE SIMPLE OR A STREET EASEMENT FROM THE ESTABLISHED STANDARD LINE OF BELMONT AVENUE.
AND THE SECTIONS THAT, UH, REQUIRE THAT IS 51 A 8.602 C 51 A 8.604 C AND 51 A 8.611 C.
AND IF I MAY ASK YOU A FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON THAT CASE? YES MA'AM.
UM, NORTH PRAIRIE AT THE CURRENTLY DEAD ENDS INTO THE BACK OF THAT LOT.
IS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION FOR THIS BODY, FOR THAT ADJACENT TERMINATION? THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD BE, UH, A CONDITION IF THERE WAS SOMETHING TO, UH, CORRECT THAT, THAT WOULD BE A CONDITION BY PAVING AND DRAINAGE OR TRANSPORTATION.
I DON'T HAVE ANY CONDITION, UH, REGARDING THAT MATTER.
AND A FOLLOW UP QUESTION, THE GEOMETRY OF THE SOUTH SIDE OF BELMONT, THERE'S ESSENTIALLY A DIAGONAL LOT LINE THAT, THAT HAS, THESE LOTS VARY, UM, FROM THE BALANCE OF THE SURROUNDING AREA, IS THAT CORRECT? YES MA'AM, THEY ARE.
AND IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR, MAY I ASK A SECOND QUESTION ON CASE NUMBER 15? SO MR. BBAR, ON CASE NUMBER 15 S 2 23 0 75, THIS IS AN MF TWO DISTRICT, HOWEVER, I, THE, UM, EXISTING LAND USES ARE SINGLE FAMILY, BUT THERE'S NO CONSIDERATION AS AN MF TWO STAFF INCLUDED THE LOT AREAS AND THE PROPOSED PLAT IS CONSISTENT WITH YOUR EVALUATION, IS THAT CORRECT? OR YOUR EVALUATION INDICATES IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA? YES, MA'AM.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER YOUNG, PLEASE? UH, YES.
ON CASE NUMBER 10, CASE NUMBER 10, WHICH IS S 2 2 3069, THE PLAT SHOWS A 24 FOOT P A F L U D E AND I HAVE, UH, GOTTEN A HEADACHE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THOSE LETTERS STAND FOR.
I'M GUESSING THE LAST TWO ARE DRAINAGE EASEMENT, BUT CAN YOU ENLIGHTEN ME ON WHAT THE REST OF IT IS? PUBLIC ACCESS, FLOODWAY, LAND USE AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT, LOCAL UTILITY, LOCAL UTILITIES.
OH, PUBLIC ACCESS, FIRE, UTILITY.
UH, AND DE IS DRAINAGE, UH, FIRE DEPARTMENT YOU SAID? SAID, OKAY.
AND WE GOT OUR ANSWER HERE IN THE CHAMBER.
UH, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, UM, MR. BBAR? UH, YES MA'AM.
UM, ITEM NUMBER 16 S 2 23 DASH 0 76.
I SEE WHERE THAT, WHERE THE PLAT THAT IS UNDER QUESTION.
UM, IT LEAVES AIR, UH, UH, QUITE A BIT OF AN AREA ON THE WEST SIDE.
YEAH, ON THE WEST SIDE OF THAT PLAT.
DOES THIS, UH, PLAT NOT, DOES THIS NOT MAKE THAT A LANDLOCKED AR TERRA AREA, UH, OF LAND? NO, MA'AM.
UH, THIS, THIS IS A, THIS USED TO BE A CONCRETE BATCHING PLANT AND, UH, THE ENTIRE PROPERTY FRONTS ON DIF FERRY.
UH, THE LINE TO THE BACK IS, UM, THE DIAGONAL LINE TO THE BACK.
I AM NOT SURE WHY THE ZONING SHOWS THAT IT IS NOT, UH, NOT PART OF THE, THE,
[05:00:01]
UM, THE PARCEL.SO THE, THE BACK PART OF THE, THE, THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY IS ALL IN FLOOD PLAIN.
SO I, I'M, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED.
AND, AND, AND PLEASE FORGIVE ME IF I'M BEING YES MA'AM.
THE PLAT SHOWS THE BEGINNING IN THE FRONT, BUT THERE'S A, THERE'S A LOT OF LAND THAT THIS, THAT IS LEFT AND IT DOESN'T APPEAR AS THOUGH THERE IS DIRECT ACCESS TO DOWDY FERRY.
IF WE PLOT THAT, IF WE PLOT THAT OUT, IT LEAVES A, A LOT OF LAND BE IN THE BACK IN THE REAR OF THAT LANDLOCK BECAUSE IT'S A LOT ON BOTH SIDES OF IT.
AND, AND IT HAS NO DIRECT ACCESS TO ANY TYPE OF STREET.
I DO RECALL SEVERAL, UH, SEVERAL, FEW YEARS AGO WHEN I WAS A, A SENIOR PLANNER WITH CURRENT PLANNING.
THIS WAS ONE OF MY, UH, ONE OF MY, UH, CASES THAT THEY WERE ASKING FOR.
I BELIEVE IT WAS A S U P FOR THE CONCRETE BATCHING PLAN.
AND, UH, THE BACK PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY IS OWNED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS AT THAT TIME.
THE, THE, UH, THIS WAS MY PROJECT THAT I WAS DOING A S U P ON THIS.
AND, UH, I, I'M SORRY, MR. BBAR, I CAN'T HEAR YOU.
THERE'S A LOT OF, A LOT OF TORNADO WARNINGS GOING OFF OVER HERE, SO WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.
CAN YOU GIVE IT A A A MINUTE OR PLEASE? YES MA'AM.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR, IF IT'S ANY HELP, THE AERIAL MAP ON PAGE 16 E APPEARS TO SHOW THAT REMNANT LOT CONNECTING WITH AN UNBUILT STREET RIGHT OF WAY TO THE NORTH 16 E.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR STAFF? SCENE NONE.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
IN THE MATTER OF THE SUBDIVISION CONSENT AGENDA, ITEMS NINE THROUGH 16, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS AS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND AS AMENDED AND READ INTO THE RECORD AT THE HEARING.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND TO, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS, INCLUDING THE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE TWO CASES IS READ UNDER THE RECORD BY MR. WABAR.
ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER YOUNG, PLEASE? UH, YES.
ON CASE 14 S 2 2374 FOR THE RECORD, I FIND THAT THERE IS AN ESTABLISHED LOT PATTERN IN THE AREA, BUT THAT THE PROPOSED PLAT IS REASONABLY CONSISTENT WITH IT.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
UH, MR. BBAR ARE ONE RESIDENTIAL REPLAT? YES, SIR.
ITEM 17 S 2 23 DASH 0 7 3 IS AN APPLICATION TO REPLAT A 1.44 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF P UH, CONTAINING A PORTION OF LOTS 19 AND 20 TO CREATE THREE LOTS RANGING IN SIZE FROM 19,805.
IS THERE NOT A CAMERA ON THIS THING? SORRY, COM COMMISSIONER.
[05:05:01]
TO CREATE THREE LOTS RANGING IN SIZE FROM 19,805 SQUARE FEET TO 20 3064 SQUARE FEET ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON NORTH ACRES DRIVE NORTH OF GRADY LANE.
22 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER BETWEEN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON FEBRUARY 15TH, 2023.
WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLIES IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.
A STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON CASE NUMBER 17 S 2 2373? ALL RIGHT.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF SAYING NONE, MR. CHARITY OF A MOTION? YES, SIR, I DO.
IN THE MATTER OF S 2 20 30 73, I'M MOVE TO CLOSE UP OF THE HEARING ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDIT CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIR, FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY THE CHAIR SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, APPROVE SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS IN THE LOCKED DOCKET.
ANY OPPOSED? NATE, THE MOTION CARRIES.
ARE ARE, ARE YOU UH, GONNA TRY TO GET INTO ANOTHER LAPTOP? YES.
YOU FOLKS ARE NOT HERE FOR THE SIZE.
YOU'RE HERE FOR THE CODE AMENDMENT, IS THAT CORRECT? EXCELLENT.
OKAY, COMMISSIONERS, LET'S GO BACK TO OUR CODE AMENDMENTS CASE NUMBER SEVEN.
UH, ITEM I THINK ITEM SEVEN, I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME.
UM, THIS IS THE BUILDING HEIGHT.
SO, UH, CONSIDERATION OF AMENDING CHAPTERS 51 51 A OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS 51 A DASH 2.102 DEFINITIONS, 51 A DASH 4.408, MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT AND RELATED SECTIONS WITH CONSIDERATION TO BE GIVEN TO MODIFY HOW BUILDING HEIGHT IS MEASURED, HOW GRADE IS ESTABLISHED, AND PROVIDE CLARIFICATIONS.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THIS ITEM IS APPROVAL AS BRIEFED.
AND WE ARE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES SIR.
THERE WAS A LITTLE BUTTON DOWN THERE.
RANDY CARTER 13 1 15 COPEN HILL ROAD, DALLAS, TEXAS 75,002 40.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE AMENDMENT IN THE, TO THE EXTENT THAT I THINK IT FAILS TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE FOR SITES OF ORIGINATION THAT ARE DOWN SLOPED FROM THE RESTRICTED BUILDING SITE.
UH, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE WAY THE FINISHED GROUND SERVICE ELEVATIONS DETERMINED YOU WOULD AUTOMATICALLY PRETTY MUCH EXCLUDE THE LEVEL OF FILL FROM THE CALCULATION OF THE R PS.
SO IF YOU HAVE A 10 FOOT OF FILL, THE BUILDING'S GONNA BE 10 FOOT HIGHER THAN IT NORMALLY WOULD BE, BUT NONE OF THAT WOULD BE CALCULATED INTO THE R P S SITUATION.
I THINK THE MORE NATURAL PLACE TO START ON RPS IS TO START AT THE NATURAL GRADE, OR I BELIEVE THE TERMINOLOGY USED IN THE SYSTEM IS SURFACE ELEVATION, UH, PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE SITE.
I THINK IT'S THE WORDS THAT ARE USED IN THE CURRENT STATUTE.
I THINK IF YOU START AT THE NATURAL GRADE AND CALCULATE THE HEIGHT AT THAT POINT YOU COME OUT WITH A FINDING THAT'S MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENDED PURPOSE OF THE RPS.
I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST THAT EVEN UNDER THE AS BRIEF MODEL, YOU WOULD COULD POSSIBLY START OUT AT THE NATURAL GRADE LEVEL AS WELL IF THE DEVELOPER PUTS HIS RETAINING WALL LESS THAN SIX FEET FROM THE BUILDING.
CUZ CURRENTLY UNDER THAT, AS A
[05:10:01]
MIN OR AS BRIEFED PROVISION, YOU WOULD GO OUT SIX FOOT FROM THE BUILDING TO DETERMINE THE LOWEST LEVEL, WHICH IF THE RETAINING WALLS PRIOR TO THAT SIX FEET, YOU WOULD DROP DOWN TO THE NATURAL GRADE.I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IT'S NOT A BIG CHANGE TO ACTUALLY HAVE THE RPS PROVISION CALCULATED AT NATURAL GRADE.
I SUGGEST THE MOST NATURAL PLACE TO PUT IT ISN'T ACTUALLY IN THE RPS DEFINITION.
UH, THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE HAS DONE SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THIS, UH, LANGUAGE.
UH, COULD ON THIS SUBPOINT COULD BE, UH, FROM GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION OF THE RESTRICTED BUILDING SITE BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION OR ADDITION OF ANY FILM MATERIAL WHEN THE RESTRICTED PROPERTY SITE SLOPES DOWN TOWARDS THE SITE OF ORIGINATION.
UH, ALSO THIS WOULD MAKE THE RPS CONSISTENT BETWEEN FORM ZONES AND UH, PDS.
CAUSE CURRENTLY PDS CAN HAVE THEIR OWN DEFINITION OF HOW HEIGHT IS CALCULATED.
AND AT LEAST THIS WAY FOR THE RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE, IT IS A STANDARD CALCULATION ACROSS THE BOARD THAT'S EASILY APPLIED.
UH, IF I HAVE A COUPLE OF SECONDS LEFT, I'D ALSO LIKE TO JUST SAY THAT OR TO COMMENCE STAFF.
OVER THE PAST YEAR I'VE HAD TO DEAL WITH SEVERAL ZONING ISSUES THROUGHOUT THAT AFFECT MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND STAFF, UH, MR. MULKEY, MR. GOSS, MS. MAY HAVE BEEN, THE PEOPLE I'VE TALKED WITH HAVE BEEN VERY GENEROUS WITH THEIR TIME AND WITH THEIR EXPERTISE AND IT CERTAINLY APPRECIATED.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, PLEASE.
WHAT, WHAT NEIGHBORHOOD IS THAT? WHAT NEIGHBORHOOD ARE YOU FROM? UH, COPEN HILL IS LOCATED JUST NORTH OF LBJ AND EAST OF PRESTON.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR OUR SPEAKER? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? EXCUSE ME, SIR.
AND I APOLOGIZE I MISSED YOUR, UM, NAME.
MR. CARVER, THANK YOU FOR CARVER BEING WITH US AND I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN HERE FOR A LONG DAY WITH US.
SO AS I UNDERSTOOD IT, YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT THE CALCULATION OF RPS AND ITS SITE OF ORIGINATION, WHICH IN THE CURRENT 51 A STARTS AT GRADE AND AS IT'S PROPOSED, UM, AMENDMENT IS NOW LOOKING AT EITHER FINISHED FLOOR OR GRADE, DEPENDING ON THE, THE ELEVATION.
IS THAT, IS THAT THE, I I, DOES THAT CAPTURE? I THINK THAT'S CORRECT.
I, I, I THINK THIS FLAW IS IN THE CURRENT CODE AS WELL AS IN THE AMENDMENT TO BE TRUTHFUL BECAUSE IT ALL KIND OF CENTERS AROUND THE FACT THAT FOR THE MOST PART, THE CITY STAFF IS GOING TO CONCLUDE THAT FILL IS NECESSARY TO LEVEL THE SITE.
AND SO IT'S GOING TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE R P S, I THINK UNDER THE EXISTING CODE OR UNDER THE AMENDMENTS.
SO, UM, I THINK THAT'S WITHIN IN, SO IT'S IN THE CURRENT CODE WITHIN GRADE, IT'S NOW PULLED OUT AS 37.1, WHICH IS FINISHED GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION.
SO THAT'S THE SECTION THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, I, UH, WHICH SECTION WITHIN THE DEFINITIONS? IF YOU HAVE OUR CASE REPORT OF SEVEN TIMES? YES.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING DOWN.
I'M JUST CURIOUS, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ONE OF THE MORE TECHNICAL, YOU KNOW, AMENDMENTS TO 51 AK THAT WE'VE SEEN IN MY THREE PLUS YEARS ON THE COMMISSION.
I'VE HEARD YOU ADDRESS THIS, YOU KNOW, YOUR TECHNICAL CONCERNS WITH IT.
WHAT, WHAT'S MOTIVATING THOSE? THE MOTIVATION IS, FROM MY STANDPOINT, IS I LIVE NEXT TO A PD THAT HAS A SEVERE SLOPE TO IT.
THERE'S PROBABLY FROM PRESTON ROAD DOWN TO THE SIDE OF ORIGINATION, THE BACK OF MY BACKYARD, THERE'S PROBABLY A 35 FOOT SLOPE.
THERE'S CURRENTLY AN LA FITNESS ON THE PROPERTY THAT'S CLOSED DOWN.
THE LA FITNESS HAS A 10 FOOT RETAINING WALL ON THE BACKSIDE OF IT.
UH, SO WHAT'S A 40 FOOT STRUCTURE ACTUALLY APPEARS 50 FOOT TO THE HOMEOWNERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, THERE WAS A RECENTLY LAST YEAR THERE WAS A PROPOSAL THAT MADE OR A ZONING REQUEST TO CONVERT THAT AREA INTO AN APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT WANTED A HEIGHT OF 60 FOOT AND WAS GONNA MOVE THE STRUCTURE FURTHER BACK.
UH, IF YOU LOOKED AT THE ZONING PLAN
[05:15:01]
OR THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED, THEY BASICALLY WERE RAISING THE GRADE ALL THE WAY BACK ALMOST TO THE RETAINING WALL THAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE SITE.UH, AND THEN CLAIMING THAT THE PARKING GARAGE GARAGE STRUCTURES THAT WERE ATTACHED TO THE APARTMENT COMPLEX WERE UNDERGROUND.
BUT THEY ONLY BECAME UNDERGROUND ONCE YOU RAISED THE GRADE ABOUT 20 FEET.
AND SO THAT WAS MY PRIMARY CONCERN ABOUT IT.
MY SECONDARY CONCERN IS THIS ISSUE APPLIES TO EVERY RESIDENTIAL HOMEOWNER WHO'S IN THE SAME SITUATION I AM, WHERE THE PROPERTY SLOPES DOWN TOWARDS THEM.
AND I THINK IT'S ONLY FAIR THAT THE DEVELOPER BASICALLY HAS THE SAME RULE THAT THE, UH, HOMEOWNER HAS, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, THE SLOPE'S THE SLOPE.
AND WE'RE NOT GONNA GIVE YOU HOMEOWNER CREDIT CAUSE YOU SAT DOWN LOWER AND LOWER THE BUILDING.
BUT THE SAME RESPECT, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD SAY DEVELOPER, WE'RE GONNA ALLOW YOU TO INCREASE THE SLOPE AND MAKE YOUR BUILDING TALLER IN RELATION TO THE HOMEOWNERS.
SO JUST, JUST TO FOLLOW UP, YOU'VE EXPRESSED CONCERN WITH THE, THE FILL RIGHT? THAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE PUTTING IN ON THAT ADJACENT PROPERTY TO PROPERTY ADJACENT TO YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND AS I READ IT NOW, YOU KNOW, IT SPEAKS TO, YOU KNOW, FILL MAT, FINISHED GROUND SERVICE ELEVATION, NOT INCLUDING FILL MATERIAL, NOT NECESSARY TO MAKE THE SITE DEVELOPABLE.
SO, SO THE SITE IS DEVELOPED TODAY WITH A LA FITNESS, RIGHT? I I, I AGREE.
BUT FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE? I'M SORRY.
BUT FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, TALKING WITH STAFF, IT'S NOT A GENERAL ISSUE OF WHAT MAKES THE SITE DEVELOPER DEVELOPABLE.
IT'S A SPECIFIC ISSUE WITH RESPECT TO THE PERSON COMING IN SAYING, THIS IS WHAT I WANT TO PUT ON THE SITE.
IF THAT'S THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD.
TALKING WITH STAFF, IS THAT THE FACT THAT YOU COULD DEVELOP IT SOME OTHER WAY? DOESN'T MATTER.
THE ISSUE IS, DOES THIS DEVELOPER TO DO WHAT HE WANTS TO DO WITH HIS CHANGES, DOES HE NEED TO, DOES IT, IS THIS CHANGE NECESSARY? IS THE FEEL NECESSARY? AND I WOULD THINK IT'S GONNA BE PRETTY HARD WHEN THE DEVELOPER'S SAYING WHAT I WANT TO DO IS LEVEL THE SITE AND RAISE IT TO SAY, AH, THAT'S REALLY NOT NECESSARY.
I WILL FOLLOW UP WITH, WITH STAFF WITH A QUESTION.
YOU KNOW, WHAT'S YOUR CONCERN? DO YOU KNOW WHAT PD THE LA FITNESS IS IN? I KNOW, I THINK THAT'S GONNA BE A ZONING CASE THAT'S COMING UP.
BUT DO YOU KNOW WHAT PD IT IS? THAT PD IS PD 16, I BELIEVE.
AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTOOD, THE REZONING APPLICATION NEVER WAS PRESENTED TO ANYONE.
AND IT'S BEEN AN OBEYANCE AND I THOUGHT THE DEVELOPER'S ACTUALLY TRYING TO SELL THE PROPERTY MM-HMM.
MY WIFE USED TO WORK OUT AT THAT ALLEY FITNESS.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SCENE? NONE.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
AND IF THERE'S A SECOND, I'M LIKELY GOING TO HAVE, UM, COMMENTS OR I'LL HAVE COMMENTS EITHER WAY.
UM, IN THE MATTER OF DCA TWO 12 DASH 0 0 6, I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT WE REMAND THIS BACK TO ZO OAC TO EVALUATE FINISH GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION DEFINITION RELATIVE TO GRADE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR YOUR SECOND TOAND ZAK DISCUSSION.
A AS WE'VE HEARD TODAY, AND I KNOW A FEW OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE, UM, BEEN WORKING TO EVALUATE THIS AS WELL.
ZAK SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT GRADE.
UM, WE TOOK A LOT OF TIME TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS.
I THINK WE ARE MOSTLY THERE, BUT AS WAS JUST HIGHLIGHTED BY MR. CARVER, WE DID NOT DISCUSS IN DETAIL FINISHED GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION.
AND THAT SENTENCE IS A CRITICAL COMPONENT TO HOW GREAT IS CALCULATED.
THE, THE DEFINITION TO MOVE IT FROM THE STRUCTURE TO SIX FEET OUT DOES MANY THINGS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
BUT WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE UNDERLYING FINISHED GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION DEFINITION, I'M NOT SURE THAT IT GOT US ALL THE WAY THERE.
AND FOR THAT REASON, I JUST THINK IN DEFERENCE TO EVERYONE AT THIS COMMISSION, TO OUR STAKEHOLDERS AND TO THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, THAT'S REALLY HOW THIS ORIGINATED.
WAS HOW, HOW IS THIS REVIEWED? HOW IS THIS MOVING FORWARD? AND TO BRING A FULL COMPONENT BACK TO THIS BODY IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
AND I WOULD ASK FOR MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER'S SUPPORT.
[05:20:01]
ABSOLUTELY BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.UM, I THINK, UH, IT'S VERY WISE, HAPPY TO SEND IT BACK AND HAVE THE, THE REALLY SMART MINDS THAT ZAC TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THIS.
I, UM, I THINK THIS IS A REALLY COMPLEX ITEM.
UM, AND IN FACT, I WAS DRAWING PICTURES THERE WITH, UH, MS. MAY HERE DURING THE BRIEFING AND PASSING ALONG TO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DOES THIS LOOK RIGHT? AND SHE'S LIKE, YES, IT, IT IS.
AND SO LET'S, LET'S GET IT RIGHT.
UH, COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, THANK YOU CHAIR.
AND THANK YOU RANDY, FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
I DO THINK THIS IS COMPLICATED.
I, FOR ONE, WOULD LOVE MORE PICTURES AND EXAMPLES IN THE MATERIALS BECAUSE I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE FLAT CASE IS THE EASY ONE.
THE HARDER ONES ARE WHERE YOU DO HAVE SLOPE IN THE DIRECTIONS.
SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
WE HAVE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON TO REMAND THE ITEM TO ZAC.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
THE NEXT ITEM IS DCA 212 0 0 7.
IT'S CONSIDERATION OF AMENDING CHAPTER 51 A OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 51 A, UH, 4.701 SUBSECTION D TWO YEAR WAIVER LIMITATION TO REVISE THE APPLICABILITY OF THE TWO YEAR LIMITATION STANDARDS TO GRANT A WAIVER AND RELATED REGULATION.
ZO OAC RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF ZO PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF STAFF'S PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. MAY, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? THANK YOU.
SHE DID, UM, DID I, I KNOW YOU WERE BRIEFED THIS MORNING.
UM, DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, COMMISSIONERS? ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY, WE'LL ROLL THE DICE.
I'LL DEFER MY 19 QUESTIONS FOR SOME OTHER TIME WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE TORNADO.
I MIGHT BE CHASED OUT OF THE BUILDING IF I GO THROUGH THIS STACK OF QUESTIONS I HAVE.
SO, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? UM, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.
IN THE MATTER OF DCA 212 0 0 7, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CHANGES PRO UH, ZONING ORDINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
I JUST WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS IS ONE THAT ZAK SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON.
I THINK WE READ EVERY LINE BEFORE YOU, UM, DISCUSSED AND DEBATED IT.
AND WHERE WE CAME TO AS A BODY REFLECTS THAT CONSENSUS AND HOPE MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WILL SUPPORT THIS.
I'M GONNA MOVE TO AMEND THE MOTION.
UH, FIRST TO FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON SUBSECTIONS, UH, D ONE AND D TWO.
CAN YOU TELL US WHAT THOSE ARE? SO WE, YES.
SO THAT WOULD BE, UM, CHANGING IT SO THAT THE WAIVER IS ONLY REQUIRED AFTER THE DENIAL WITH PREJUDICE NO LONGER AFTER THE APPROVAL.
I WILL SECOND THAT DISCUSSION.
D ONE D D AS IN DAVID, D AS IN D TWO, D ONE, D TWO.
LET'S SAY COMMISSIONER YOUNG, PLEASE.
I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDED MOTION.
UH, AN APPROVAL IS SOMETIMES JUST A STRAIGHT APPROVAL, BUT IN A CONTROVERSIAL CASE, IT IS MORE OFTEN AN APPROVAL IN PART AND A DENIAL IN PART.
AND THERE'S NO BETTER EXAMPLE OF THAT THAN THE FIRST MAJOR ZONING CASE THAT I HANDLED FOR DISTRICT.
BACK IN 1987, WHICH WAS THE DALLAS ARBORETUM, I THINK ALMOST EVERYONE IN THE CHAMBER AND IT WAS PACKED, SUPPORTED A PD FOR THE DALLAS ARBORETUM.
SO THE QUESTION WAS NOT WAS THERE GOING TO BE AN APPROVAL? THERE DEFINITELY WAS, BUT THE ARBORETUM WANTED A LOT OF THINGS LIKE A, AN ENTRANCE
[05:25:01]
OFF OF EAST LATHER DRIVE, A 70 FOOT OBSERVATION TOWER, A DESTINATION RESTAURANT AND SO FORTH THAT WERE BITTERLY OPPOSED BY THE COMMUNITY.AND SO THE APPROVAL IN THAT CASE, WHICH DID NOT INCLUDE THOSE ITEMS, WAS IN EFFECT A DENIAL.
THE ARBORETUM LEFT THE PLAN COMMISSION HEARING, THINKING THAT THEY HAD LOST, EVEN THOUGH THEIR PD WAS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T GET SOME THINGS THEY SORELY WANTED AND THEY DIDN'T GET THEM OUT OF THE COUNCIL EITHER, UH, UNDER THE AMENDED MOTION, NOTHING WOULD PREVENT THEM FROM REAPPLYING THE NEXT DAY ASKING FOR THE VERY SAME THINGS THAT THEY HAD APPLIED FOR ORIGINALLY.
UH, I THINK MS. LEVY WAS CORRECT THIS MORNING IN SAYING THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE TWO YEAR WAIVER IS TO PREVENT TACTICS BY APPLICANTS THAT WOULD WEAR DOWN THE RESISTANCE OF THOSE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY THAT HAD CONCERNS.
YOU KNOW, THERE'S AN IMBALANCE OF POWER HERE.
IF I GO TO THE FRONT DESK WITH MY APPLICATION AND MY FILING FEE, I CAN MAKE A CASE AND FORCE MY NEIGHBORS TO COME DOWN AND CONTEND WITH IT.
BUT SHORT OF A CALLED PUBLIC HEARING, THERE'S NO WAY FOR MY NEIGHBORS TO FORCE ME TO DO ANYTHING.
SO I THINK, THINK THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT, OF THIS, UH, WAIVER PROVISION IS TO PROTECT PEOPLE FROM, UH, ILL-ADVISED, UH, RECONSIDERATION IN EFFECT OF CONTROVERSIAL CASES.
AND I THINK ALLOWING APPROVALS TO BE SUBJECT TO THE WAIVER PROCESS, UH, IS AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF THAT THAT NEED NOT BE ONEROUS.
IN THOSE CASES WHERE THE APPROVAL WAS A STRAIGHT AND UNANIMOUS APPROVAL, AND THEN AT BUILDING PERMIT STAGE, SOMEBODY FINDS OUT THAT A LION IS IN THE WRONG PLACE.
SO, UH, UH, WE DON'T HAVE THAT MANY WAIVER CASES AND I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PROTECTION.
I HEAR COMMISSIONER YOUNG'S CONCERN AND THAT WAS PART OF WHAT MADE ME INITIALLY THINKING THAT KEEPING APPROVALS WITHIN OUR WAIVER STANDARDS WAS THE RIGHT CALL.
BUT AS I TRY TO BALANCE THINGS IN MY VIEW, I THINK THE LIKELIHOOD OF SOMEONE COMING BACK AFTER A CONTROVERSIAL ZONING CASE FOR A SWITCHAROO, SORT OF LIKE IN THE EXAMPLE OF THE ARBORETUM, IF THEY WERE TO COME BACK A WEEK LATER TO ASK FOR THE DESTINATION RESTAURANT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE MET SWIFTLY BY CITY STAFF, BY THE COMMISSIONER FROM THE DISTRICT, AND BY THIS BODY WITH RESOUNDING DISAPPROVAL, AND WOULD HOPEFULLY RESULT IN A QUICK DENIAL WITH PREJUDICE IN LI IN LIGHT OF, YOU KNOW, THOSE SORTS OF TACTICS.
ON THE OTHER HAND, TIME AND TIME AGAIN IN THE, MY, MY FOUR YEAR OR MY THREE AND A HALF YEARS IN THIS BODY, WE DO SEE CASES WHERE APPLICANTS NEED TO COME BACK TO US FOR A SMALL TWEAK BECAUSE OF AN INNOCENT MISTAKE IN THE PROCESS.
AND I, I THINK IT WOULD BE MUCH, I, I THINK THE GAIN THAT WE HAVE IN ALLOWING THEM TO GO BACK INTO THE ZONING PROCESS AND DO IT WITHOUT THAT MONTH OR SO LONG DELAY IS MORE BENEFICIAL THAN WARDING OFF THE POTENTIAL THAT, THAT SOMEONE AFTER A LONG, HARD FOUGHT ZONING CASE COMES BACK TO TRY TO THANK CHANGE THINGS THAT WERE CLEARLY REBUKED BY THE COMMUNITY.
SO I, I THINK I, I I REALLY DO RESPECT COMMISSIONER YOUNG'S CONCERN AND I THINK IT, IT, IT'S A POSSIBILITY, BUT IN MY VIEW IT'S A REMOTE POSSIBILITY.
SO THAT'S WHY I, YOU KNOW, MADE THIS MOTION AND I DID TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT IN MAKING THIS MOTION.
SO HOPE I'LL GET YOUR SUPPORT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.
I'M SURE THIS WILL SURPRISE NO ONE THAT I AGREE WITH.
PART OF THE WAIVER PROCESS IS, WELL THE AMENDMENT THAT COMMISSIONER RUBEN'S SUGGESTION IS JUST GIVING UP OUR CONTROL AND OUR ABILITY TO ANALYZE EACH CASE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS AND DECIDE WHETHER THE WAIVER IS SOMETHING WE WANT TO GIVE.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD DO THAT, PARTICULARLY GIVEN THE VERY FEW WAIVER CASES WE SEE.
AND MY CONCERN ABOUT MAKING IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO COME BACK TO US, OR, OR A COUPLE OF REASONS.
ONE, WE'RE ALREADY SO FAR BEHIND.
I MEAN, THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY IS SCREAMING ABOUT OUR PROCESSES AND HOW LONG IT TAKES, AND THERE'S A DOUBLE EDGED SWORD OF MAKING IT EASIER.
IF THEY THINK THEY CAN GET THROUGH AND CLEAN UP THEIR MISTAKES WITH ANOTHER ROUND, THEN WE'RE JUST GONNA HAVE TO DEAL WITH ALL THOSE OTHER
[05:30:01]
ROUNDS.IF THERE'S A CONSEQUENCE FOR HAVING TO COME BACK TO DO CLEANUP, THEN MAYBE THAT ENCOURAGES 'EM TO BE A LITTLE MORE THOUGHTFUL AND CAREFUL ON THE FIRST ROUND.
AND THE OTHER REASON THAT I, I'M NOT INTERESTED IN GIVING UP OUR ABILITY TO DETERMINE WHETHER WAIVER IS IMPORTANT IS GOING TO BE GRANTED IS BECAUSE EVEN IF WE WERE TO DO SOMETHING LIKE COMMISSIONER RUBEN SUGGESTED, IF SOMEBODY CAME BACK AND WE SNIFFED THAT IT WAS IN BAD FAITH, THE COMMUNITY STILL HAS TO TAKE OFF WORK AND COME DOWN HERE AND GO THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS.
AND THAT'S THE PART OF IT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE WAIVER OFFERS SOME PROTECTION AGAINST THAT.
IF WE SAY NO TO THE WAIVER, THEN MAYBE THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT FOR ROUND.
HOWEVER, NUM MANY NUMBERS IT IS ON WHATEVER CONTROVERSIAL CASE IT IS.
IT'S NOT REALLY A PROTECTION FOR THE INNOCENT MISTAKE THAT IS UNOPPOSED.
IT'S A PROTECTION FOR OUR PROCESSES, OUR STAFF AND RESOURCES AND THE COMMUNITY WHO, AS COMMISSIONER YOUNG SAID, ARE OFTEN NOT IN THE SAME BARGAINING POSITION AS THE OTHER PLAYERS IN THE GAME.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, PLEASE? UM, YEAH, I, I THINK THIS IS, I THINK THERE ARE REALLY GOOD ARGUMENTS ON BOTH SIDES.
I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT JUST BASED ON SOME OF THE HISTORICAL DATA WE HEARD ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE VOLUME THAT COMES THROUGH AND THEY'RE REALLY THESE MINOR CHANGES THAT WE NORMALLY DO APPROVE.
SO TO ME, I THINK THIS IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION OF STREAMLINING SOME OF THE PROCESS THAT HAS GOTTEN REALLY LENGTHY.
AND I, THAT'S THE MAIN REASON I'LL BE SUPPORTING IT.
I WILL ALSO BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT.
UM, I THINK FOR MORE OR LESS THE REASONS THAT I MENTIONED DURING THE BRIEFING, UH, I CAN'T GO BACK 37 YEARS FOR, UH, FOR AN EXAMPLE.
SO ALL MY EXAMPLES ARE OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS.
AND AS I STATED BEFORE, UH, IN SOME VERY, VERY, VERY CONTROVERSIAL CASES HERE AROUND THIS HORSESHOE, MOST OF THE DENIALS THAT I'VE SEEN HAVE BEEN DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
AND, UH, I, I AM SURE THERE HAS BEEN ONE, BUT I CAN'T REMEMBER A SINGLE CASE, CONTROVERSIAL CASE THAT RECEIVED A DENIAL THAT WE HAD NEIGHBORHOODS OUT HERE AND WE HAD THIS PLACE FILLED WHERE THE APPLICANT FILED.
UH, SO I, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS IT? UM, I, I, I HEAR THE ARGUMENT, LIKE I SAID BEFORE, IT SEEMS RATIONAL, BUT IN MY EXPERIENCE IN THE LAST 10 YEARS, IT JUST HASN'T PLAYED OUT THAT WAY.
AND IT SEEMS LIKE SOME OF THESE FOLKS, UH, SOME FOR SOME VERY SMALL MINOR ADJUSTMENTS ARE GETTING US SNARED IN A PROCESS, UH, THAT IS SOMETIMES A LITTLE, UH, UNPREDICTABLE AND TIMELY TIME CONSUMING.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE? WELL, I, UM, WILL JUST SAY THE FIRST CASE WHERE I EVER APPEARED ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS HORSESHOE DID RESULT IN AN APPROVAL AND IT WAS A TWO YEAR NEGOTIATION BY MULTIPLE COMMUNITIES AND NEIGHBORHOODS.
WE WERE AT CITY HALL MORE TIMES THAN I CAN COUNT.
AND THE, THE PIECE OF IT THAT PERSUADED ME THAT KEEPING APPROVALS WAS THE APPROPRIATE PATH WAS WE DON'T KNOW THE NUMBER OF CASES THAT WEREN'T FILED FOR A WAIVER BECAUSE THEY RECEIVED AN APPROVAL.
WE, WE CAN'T MEASURE WHAT ISN'T THERE TO, TO ACHIEVE IN THE, IN THAT REGARD ON THE CONTROVERSIAL CASES.
IT'S NOT THE CONTROVERSIAL CASES THAT RESULTED IN A DENIAL.
IT'S THE CONTROVERSIAL CASES THAT RESULTED IN AN APPROVAL THAT I BELIEVE THAT THIS WAIVER IS INTENDED TO PROTECT.
AND THAT IS WHY I, UM, SUPPORT THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER, CARPENTER? I, I'M NOT GONNA BE SUPPORTING THE ORIGINAL MOTION BECAUSE I, I THINK THAT, UM, IT'S THE ZO OAC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR B THAT VARIOUS, THOSE LISTING OF FACTORS I, I THINK IS UNNECESSARILY, UM, COMPLICATED TIME CONSUMING.
IT'S GOING TO END UP IN EITHER LONGER, LONGER DISCUSSIONS.
WE'RE ON THE AMENDMENT TO, OH, I'M SORRY.
UH, SO CAN YOU PLEASE RESTATE WHAT YOUR, YOUR FRONT, YOUR AMENDMENT DOES, UH, GO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON D ONE, WHICH WOULD REMOVE AN APPROVAL WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO THE TWO YEAR WA WAIT WAITING PERIOD AND D TWO THAT GOES N D TWO THAT GOES WITH IT.
APPROVAL WOULD NOT BE FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON D ONE AND TWO.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? LET'S HAVE A RECORDED VOTE PLEASE.
[05:35:01]
DISTRICT ONE ABSENT, ABSENT DISTRICT TWO I, OR EXCUSE ME.WE'LL GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION COMMISSIONERS.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON YES, COMMISSIONER KINGTON? UM, I THINK I, I AM PROBABLY GONNA SAY WHAT COMMISSIONER CARPENTER WAS GONNA SAY IN THAT I THINK THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ZO OAC MADE WITH THE NUMBER OF FACTORS IN SUBSECTION B IS PROBABLY NOT NECESSARY AND MAY IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, UM, TIE OUR HANDS, OR IF, IF NOT THAT THEN JUST LEAD TO UNNECESSARY TIME SPENT ON THE DISCUSSION, WHICH WE ARE
SO, UM, I, I WOULD, UM, LIKE TO MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO, UM, ADOPT ZOAX PROVISIONS WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF SUBPART B INSTEAD OF XX.
CAN YOU, UH, EXPLAIN FOR THE REST OF THE BODY WHAT, WHAT THAT WOULD LEAD TO? IF YOU DON'T MIND THAT WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE WHILE I FEVERISHLY PULL THIS UP HERE.
YOU WANNA SEE IT HERE? WELL, UM, SUBSECTION B AND MAYBE I'M, MAKE SURE I'M LOOKING AT IT.
IT'S PART THREE, SUBSECTION B, IT'S THE LAUNDRY LIST OF THINGS WE WOULD CONSIDER IN DETERMINING WHETHER TO GRANT A WAIVER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
UM, JUST SAYS IF THERE ARE CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES OKAY.
JUST THE CHANGE OF THAT ONE WORD.
UH, WELL IT'S NOT THE CHANGE OF THAT ONE WORD.
IT'S THE ELIMINATION OF THE LAUNDRY LIST OF FACTORS TO CONSIDER.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES.
THEY HAVE ELIMINATED THE PHRASE REGARDING THE PROPERTY.
SO IT'S ANY CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT'S AWFULLY BROAD.
I THINK THAT GIVES US A LOT OF LEEWAY WITHOUT BOGGING US DOWN IN A LIST OF, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT FALLS INTO SUBSECTIONS B I DON'T KNOW, ONE THROUGH EIGHT AND SOME OF WHICH HAVE SUB SUBSECTIONS.
SUBSECTION TO, TO SUPPORT THE ORIGINAL MOTION WITH A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO CHANGE.
UM, SUBSECTION B FROM ZAK'S, RECOMMENDATION TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER RUBEN, FOR YOUR SECOND TO, UH, FALSE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
CAN I MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT? YOU SURE CAN.
SO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE ON THE AMENDMENT FROM IF THERE ARE CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT A GOOD HEARING TO IF THERE IS GOOD CAUSE TO SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT A HEARING.
IF I HAVE A SECOND, UM, I, I DON'T REALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT CHANGE.
CAN I BRIEFLY EXPLAIN? YOU CAN PLEASE.
SO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AS WRITTEN IN THE DOCKET, CARVED OUT APPROVALS.
BUT BECAUSE MY PREVIOUS MOTION FAILED, THE TWO YEAR WAIVER WOULD STILL APPLY TO BOTH APPROVALS AND DENIALS WITH PREJUDICE.
AND TYPICALLY WE SEE APPROVALS COME BACK TO US FOR TWO YEAR WAIVERS, NOT BECAUSE OF CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES, ANY SORT, BUT BECAUSE SOMEONE HAS SCREWED UP A MEASUREMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
SO I DON'T THINK IT THAT WOULD NECESSARILY, UH, FIT UNDER THE CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES WAGER.
SO I'VE GONE TO GOOD CAUSE IF I SHARE, RUBEN, COULD YOU SAY WHAT YOUR CONDITION WAS ONE MORE TIME? YEAH, I DIDN'T GET IT NOTED.
THE COMMISSION MAY WAIVE THE TWO YEAR LIMITATION IF THERE IS GOOD CAUSE SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT A NEW HEARING.
SO FROM, FROM OUR CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES TO GOOD CAUSE, THERE IS GOOD, CAUSE THERE IS GOOD, CAUSE SUFFICIENT.
THERE IS GOOD COST SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT A NEW HEARING.
WOULD YOU, UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON
[05:40:01]
ACCEPTED THAT ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE DISCUSSION.COMMISSIONER YOUNG, I FIND IT AWKWARD TO BE IN OPPOSITION TO COMMISSIONERS KINGSTON AND CARPENTER WHO ARE, UH, TWO MEMBERS OF THIS COMMISSION THAT I VERY HIGHLY RESPECT, BUT I MUST NEVERTHELESS DO SO.
UH, EVERYWHERE ELSE IN THE CODE, WHEN WE HAVE A DECISION TO MAKE, WE ARE GIVEN GUIDELINES TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
WE CAN PROBABLY ALL RECITE THE FOUR PART S U P TEST IN OUR SLEEP IN ANCIENT GREEK.
UH, RARELY, IF EVER ARE WE JUST TOLD, DO WHATEVER YOU THINK IS BEST.
IF AN APPLICANT HAS A SET OF CRITERIA THAT HE KNOWS HIS WAIVER APPLICATION WILL BE JUDGED AGAINST, THEN HE EVALUATES WHETHER HE CAN SUCCESSFULLY PROVE SUFFICIENTLY MANY OF THOSE CRITERIA TO WARRANT A WAIVER APPLICATION.
IF HE THINKS, WELL, ALL I HAVE TO DO IS CATCH EIGHT PEOPLE IN THE RIGHT MOOD AND FIND SOMETHING THAT TRIGGERS A POSITIVE RESPONSE IN EACH ONE OF THEM, THEN I PREDICT A PROLIFERATION OF WAIVER APPLICATIONS.
I DON'T THINK THE PROPOSED CRITERIA IN ANY WAY TIE OUR HANDS, PARTICULARLY IN LIGHT OF THE LAST ONE, WHICH SAYS OTHER FACTORS IN WHICH GRANTING A WAIVER IS OR IS NOT, I PROBABLY SHOULD SAY, FOR WHICH IS OR IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
SO NOTHING IN THE LIST OF CRITERIA SAYS, WELL, YOU, THERE'S A GOTCHA IN HERE BECAUSE WE MEET THIS ONE, THIS ONE, AND THIS ONE.
WE HAVE TO, UH, APPROVE IT WHEN THERE'S A GOOD REASON NOT TO.
SO I JUST THINK GUIDELINES ARE BETTER THAN NO GUIDELINES.
UH, AND SO I WILL NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF THE AMENDMENT.
COMMISSIONER STAN? YES, I, I, I GUESS I DON'T KNOW WHO TO ASK THIS TO, BUT I DO NEED SOME CLARIFICATION BASED ON COMMISSIONER RUBIN'S MOTION ABOUT THIS.
MY UNDERSTANDING FROM MS. LEVY WAS THAT CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES WAS A TERM THAT WAS SORT OF BROUGHT OUT OF THE CODE BASED ON HOW YOU LOOKED AT WAIVERS.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S CORRECT OR NOT, THAT IT USED THE TERM CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES.
AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT DOING THE WORD CAUSE AS BEING SYNONYMOUS WITH THAT BECAUSE I THINK AN APPLICANT WOULD THINK, OH, I'VE GOT GOOD CAUSE AND THAT IT MAKES IT SORT OF WHERE I THINK THAT EVEN NARROWS IT MORE THAT THERE WOULDN'T BE THINKING, OKAY, WHAT HAS REALLY CHANGED ABOUT THE SITUATION THAT I COULD BRING UP.
SO I DON'T LIKE IT BEING THAT OPEN-ENDED SAYING FOR GOOD CAUSE I, I, I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT, THAT I THINK THAT MAKES IT TOO LOOSEY-GOOSEY.
AND THAT'S NOT A VERY TECHNICAL TERM TO USE, BUT IF YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING, BECAUSE NOW WE'VE GONE FROM THE EXTREME OF THE LAUNDRY LIST OF REASONS TO ME, TO THIS OPEN-ENDED.
YOU CAN DO IT FOR ANY GOOD CAUSE THAT YOU THINK'S A GOOD CAUSE WHETHER IT IS UNDER THE CODE OR NOT.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF I'M CORRECT OR THAT, BUT IT'S, I'M BRINGING THAT TO THE TABLE AS A QUESTION.
SO I I, THAT'S AN INTERESTING POINT, COMMISSIONER STANDARD, WHICH YOU ALWAYS BRING.
UH, BUT WHAT'S INTERESTING TO ME IS I, I KIND OF HAVE ALMOST THE, THE OPPOSITE INTERPRETATION AND THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, APPLICANTS COME 100% OF THE TIME SAYING THEY HAVE A CHANGE IN CIRCUMSTANCE.
SO, UH, AND IT'S STILL UP TO THIS BODY FOR OUR, OUR JUDGMENT, UH, THE WISDOM OF THE MAJORITY TO LOOK AT EACH ONE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS AND, UH, AND MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.
SO I'M, I'M NOT SURE IF OPENING, YOU KNOW, UH, A LITTLE MORE CLARITY ON THAT WORD TO ME GIVES ME MORE CLARITY.
FRANKLY, UH, A CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCE TO ME HAS BEEN ALWAYS BEEN VERY FUZZY, UH, FOR, I APOLOGIZE, I KEEP SAYING THIS, BUT FOR 10 YEARS, 10 YEARS ON THIS BODY, I'VE ASKED WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN? AND I, I DON'T, NOBODY REALLY EVEN GIVES ME A STRAIGHT ANSWER AS TO WHAT EXACTLY WHAT IS THE HARD RULE.
SO THIS TO ME IS A, SEEMS A LITTLE MORE OPEN-ENDED, UM, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON THAN COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
UM, I'M THINKING THAT IF WE LEAVE IT, UM, KIND OF OPEN-ENDED, THEN WE, THE BODY WOULD BE ABLE TO DETERMINE WHAT THE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE IS.
UM, AND, AND THEN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I MEAN, I COULD BE, THIS IS JUST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT.
SO I THINK I WOULD SUPPORT THAT NOTION
[05:45:01]
BECAUSE I THINK IT GIVES US A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY IN TERMS OF, IN OUR OWN INTERPRETATION TO DETERMINE IF WE WANT TO TAKE A CASE OR NOT.UM, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW, YOU KNOW, CONDITIONS SUCH AS, YOU KNOW, THE DEGREE OF UN UNANIMITY IN THE PRIOR DEC DECISION AND WHAT THAT MIGHT ENCOMPASS.
AND IF THAT WOULD GO BEYOND, YOU KNOW, HOW STAFF WOULD REALLY BE ABLE TO EVALUATE THAT.
I THINK MY CONCERN WITH THE MOTION, THE AMENDED MOTION AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION BEFORE US, IS THAT ONE OF THE CHARGES IN AUTHORIZING THIS HEARING WAS TO ESTABLISH A STANDARD AND GOOD CAUSE SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT A NEW HEARING TO ME IS WHILE REMOVING REGARDING THE PROPERTY IS STILL VERY OPEN-ENDED.
AND PART OF WHAT I THINK I HAVE HEARD US CONSISTENTLY AS WE'VE DEBATED SOME OF THESE IS UNDERSTAND WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WHAT ARE WE EVALUATING WHILE PERHAPS THIS BODY WOULD, UM, YOU KNOW, WANT TO CONSIDER REDUCING THE LIST, I'M AFRAID THAT THIS WENT TOO FAR BACK TO ESSENTIALLY WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
AND IF OUR GOAL IS TO BE EFFICIENT IN OUR PROCESS, I'M, I'M NOT SURE THAT THIS GETS US THERE.
MR. TREADWAY, THANK YOU, CHAIR.
I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT.
I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS WITH THIS LAUNDRY LIST.
I THINK IT MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT ON THE APPLICANT.
I THINK IT MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT ON STAFF.
I THINK PEOPLE WILL TRY TO PIGEONHOLE SOMETHING INTO ONE OF THESE AND IT WILL JUST RAISE A LOT MORE QUESTIONS THAN IT ANSWERS.
UM, I DON'T HAVE A STRONG OPINION ABOUT CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES VERSUS GOOD CAUSE, BUT I AGREE WITH, UM, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON WHO SAID, YOU KNOW, WE ARE REALLY THE BODY THAT'S LOOKING AT THIS, AND I THINK IT BEHOOVES US TO HAVE SOME DISCRETION.
I THINK WE DO DELIBERATE THINGS VERY WELL AND CLEARLY VERY LONG.
AND WE, EVERYONE, YOU KNOW, GETS VOICE THEIR OPINIONS AND I THINK THAT'S A VERY HEALTHY PROCESS.
AND I, FOR ONE, WILL BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT BECAUSE I THINK IT SUPPORTS THAT PROCESS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER TREADWAY.
I I FAILED THE, TO SAY THAT I AM SUPPORTING, UH, THE AMENDMENT TO COMMISSIONER KINGSTON'S AMENDMENT, UH, FOR THE VERY REASONS THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER TREAD MENTIONED, AND IN FACT, FOR THE VERY REASONS THAT I, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER STARTED TO MENTION AND THAT, UH, YOU'RE MORE THAN, UH, FREE TO SAY NOW, APPARENTLY.
UH, I DO FIND THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE 29 QUESTIONS THAT I, I DIDN'T TORTURE YOU GUYS WITH IS, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALWAYS SO CONCERNED HERE ABOUT THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES THAT COME OUTTA ZO OAC.
AND IN FACT, THAT'S WHAT ZO OAC REALLY DOES, IS IT'S AN INVESTIGATION ON UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
AND, UH, I THINK THERE ARE SOME HERE THAT COULD RESULT FROM THIS, UH, THIS LONG LIST HERE.
AND IT'S EXACTLY WHAT COMMISSIONER TREAD JUST SAID.
I THINK IT'S GONNA BE ONEROUS ON THE APPLICANT ON THIS BODY AND ON STAFF.
AND IN FACT, THERE ARE SOME OF THESE THAT I, I DON'T EVEN, I I CAN'T IMAGINE HOW YOU WOULD ANSWER THE OTHER FACTORS IN WHICH GRANTING A WAIVER IS OR IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
UH, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD E HOW THAT EVEN GETS ARTICULATED IN THE CASE REPORT.
UM, SO FOR ALL THOSE REASONS, I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT WHAT SEEMS TO BE, UH, COMPROMISE VICE CHAIR RUBEN.
UH, WITH THE CURRENT WAIVER STANDARD CHANGE CONDITIONS REGARDING THE, THE PROPERTY OF EVERY COUPLE MONTHS WE SEE AN APPLICANT, APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE GET THEMSELVES UP TO THE PODIUM AND TIE THEMSELVES IN KNOTS TRYING TO EXPLAIN HOW SOMETHING IS A CHANGE CONDITION REGARDING THE, THE PROPERTY.
WHAT I WANNA SEE IS THE GOD'S HONEST ANSWERS FOR WHY SOMEONE IS COMING BACK HERE FOR A WAIVER.
AND I FEAR THAT WITH THESE ZO OAC FACTORS, WE ARE JUST GOING TO HAVE MORE TRYING TO FIT ROUND PEGS INTO SQUARE HOLES.
I, I, I THINK, I HOPE THAT GOOD CAUSE WILL GET US INTO HAVING A FRANK DISCUSSION ABOUT WHY A WAIVER IS NEEDED.
I KNOW THAT THERE'S THE OTHER FACTORS IN THERE, BUT AS A GOOD LAWYER, WHEN I SEE A LIST OF FACTORS THAT I NEED TO CONSIDER, I'M GONNA TICK THROUGH ALL SEVEN OF THOSE BEFORE I FINALLY GET TO THE OTHER FACTORS AND MAKE MY POTENTIAL REAL AND AND SUBSTANTIAL ARGUMENT.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER STANDARD, PLEASE.
[05:50:01]
KNOW HOW TO ASK THIS, BUT I GUESS I WOULD SAY, AND I DO RESPECT WHAT YOU JUST JUST SAID, COMMISSIONER RUBEN, I REALLY DO, IT BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT, BUT THEN I'M THINKING, AND I'M THINKING OUT LOUD, WHAT CRITERIA THEN WHEN SOMEONE COMES UP, ARE WE USING, IF THERE IS NO CRITERIA AND IT'S JUST FOR CAUSE, THEN WHAT, WHAT ARE WE BASING IT ON? AND IF YOU HAVE AN ANSWER, I'D LOVE TO HEAR IT.DO THEY HAVE A GOOD REASON AT THE END OF THE DAY TO, TO COME BACK AND EACH INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONER CAN TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHAT THEY CONSIDER IMPORTANT, BUT THEY DON'T CONSIDER IMPORTANT.
WE'VE SEEN SOME DEBATE BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN STAFF AND MEMBERS OF THIS BODY ON THINGS LIKE UNANIMITY AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND EACH INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONER CAN WEIGH IT, WEIGH IT, WEIGH THEIR OWN PERSONAL JUDGMENTS, AND VOTE ON IT AS THEY SEE FIT.
MAY I SAY ONE THING, PLEASE TO THAT, THE ONLY THING I WOULD SAY TO THAT IS THIS.
IF I'M AN APPLICANT COMING IN TO PUT IN AN APPLICATION FOR A WAIVER, I THINK ALMOST EVERYTHING ELSE WE DO HERE, THERE IS SOME CRITERIA YOU CAN PUT AN APPLICATION IN IF YOU MEET THIS, IF YOU MEET THIS REQUIREMENT KIND OF THING.
AND JUST TO SAY, I WANT A WAIVER AND I WANT TO TRY FOR IT, AND I DON'T HAVE TO HAVE ANY REASON, EXCEPT I'M GONNA COME TRY TO CONVINCE YOU.
THAT KIND OF CONCERNS ME THAT THERE'S NO CRITERIA FOR FOR MAKING, PUTTING AN APPLICATION IN FOR A WAIVER.
I DON'T, I I'M, I'M NOT SURE I HAVE AN ANSWER FOR YOU.
I I'M GONNA GIVE IT ONE LITTLE SHOT AND THEN I'M GONNA GO TO YOU.
UH, I DON'T, I'M NOT SURE THAT WHAT I HAVE IS A CRITERIA, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING YOU CAN CONSIDER, WHICH IS THAT IN FACT, IF AN APPLICANT COMES, UH, TO REAPPLY FOR A WAIVER FOR A CONTROVERSIAL CASE, A CASE THAT IN FACT HAD FOLKS HERE IN OPPOSITION AND MAYBE THE APPLICANT GOT THE S U P AND HAD TO COME BACK, WELL THEN THAT IS SOMETHING YOU CAN CONSIDER EXACTLY THE EXAMPLE THAT COMMISSIONER YOUNG STATED.
THAT WOULD BE A FACTOR THAT YOU AS A COMMISSIONER CAN SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, THIS WAS AN APPLICANT THAT WAS THE APPLICATION THAT WAS CONTROVERSIAL THE FIRST TIME AROUND, AND I'M GONNA USE THAT AS A BASIS THAT MAY, WE'RE NOT GONNA GIVE HIM A SECOND BITE AT THE APPLE HERE THIS SOON.
AND THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING YOU CAN CONSIDER.
WELL, I WAS GONNA SAY, WHEN SUPREME COURT JUSTICE STEWART WAS ASKED TO DESCRIBE THE TEST FOR DETERMINING WHETHER SOMETHING WAS OBSCENE IN 19 16 4, HIS ANSWER WAS, WELL, I KNOW IT WHEN I SEE IT.
AND MR. CHAIR, THE POTTER STEWARD TEST FOR OBSCENITY HAS BEEN WIDELY CRITICIZED FOR ITS OPEN-ENDEDNESS AND UNPREDICTABILITY.
I'M NOT GONNA DECIDE ANY, ANY SUPREME COURT DECISIONS, BUT I AM GONNA SAY, I, I THINK, I THINK THIS WILL BECOME READILY OBVIOUS WHEN WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED.
THERE'S A MISTAKE, THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S A VERY CLEAR REASON WHY SOMEONE'S COMING BACK BEFORE THIS BODY.
I THINK IT'LL BE REALLY CLEAR.
AND IF THERE'S NOT A GOOD REASON THAT SOMEONE'S COMING BACK BEFORE THIS BODY, I THINK THEY'LL DANCE AROUND THE ISSUE.
AND I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER RUBEN.
I, I LOOK FORWARD TO THE APPLICANT BEING UPFRONT ABOUT WHY THEY'RE WANTING, YOU KNOW, THIS PART, A PARTICULAR CHANGE AND NOT JUST KIND OF DANCING AROUND THE ISSUE TO FIT IT INTO, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES MEAN.
I THINK IT WILL DEPEND ON THE APPLICANT AND I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT MAKES A VALID CASE, THEN THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
IF THEY DON'T, THEN THAT JUST ANSWERS THE QUESTION ANY FURTHER? DISLIKE COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? NO.
UH, MR. MOORE, JUST ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE.
DOES, UH, DOES WHAT WE'RE GONNA VOTE ON IS, UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON AMENDMENT, DOES THAT KEEP ANY PART OF THE ORIGINAL MOTION? IT DOES.
IT KEEPS, UH, PARAGRAPHS ONE AND TWO AS THE ZO OAC RECOMMENDATION AND THE NON-SUBSTANTIVE AMENDMENTS TO THREE A THREE AND THREE A THAT THAT'S CORRECT.
BUT BECAUSE THEY'RE THE SAME, IT'S, IT'S PARAGRAPHS ONE AND TWO, D ONE AND D TWO WOULD FROM ZAK'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD REMAIN.
UH, COMMISSIONERS THIS TAKE A RECORDED VOTE.
THIS IS ON, UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON'S
[05:55:01]
AMENDMENT.COMMISSIONER KINGSTON'S AMENDMENT, AMENDMENT, INCLUDING, UH, UH, SHE ACCEPTED COMMISSIONER RUBIN'S ADJUSTMENT TO THE LANGUAGE.
SO SHE ACCEPTED CAUSE JUST FOR CLARIFICATION.
SO NOW WE'RE VOTING A GOOD CAUSE, OKAY.
DISTRICT ONE ABSENT DISTRICT TWO? NO.
SO WE GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
D AMEND D TWO TO ADD, IF THE CITY, IF THE COMMISSION OR CITY COUNCIL RENDERS THE FINAL DECISION OF DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE, OR IF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVES A ZONING CHANGE PURSUANT TO AN AUTHORIZED HEARING, THE LANGUAGE APPROVES PER, IF THE CITY COUNCIL PURSUES A ZONING CHANGE PURSUANT TO AN AUTHORIZED HEARING, THAT WOULD WAIVE THE TWO YEAR WAITING PERIOD FOR ZONING CHANGES, UM, ARISING FROM AUTHORIZED HEARINGS.
OH LORD, MR. CHAIR, WOULDN'T THAT BE A CONDITION? YES, I EXHIBITION CHAIR CONDITION.
AND IF I MAY, VICE YOUR RULING, YOUR INTENT IS TO ADD, UH, ESSENTIALLY THE WAIVER IS NOT REQUIRED IF IT'S A CITY AUTHORIZED HEARING.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION? WAIT, DID COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DID YOU GET YOUR QUESTION? YOUR QUESTION ANSWERED.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? I WAS CONFIRMING WITH VICE CHAIR RUBEN, HIS INTENT, AND I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHERE IT'S GOING IN D ONE AND IN, I THINK IT'S GOING IN D TWO TWO.
SO IT'S WAIVING IT FOR AUTHORIZED CITY INITIATED AUTHORIZED HEARINGS.
IS THE CITY IN, YOU DIDN'T SAY CITY INITIATED, IS THE CITY INITIATED AUTHOR? SURE.
ARE YOU GONNA READ IT WITH A LANGUAGE INCLUDED? YEAH, I, I WOULD LIKE TO, IN AFTER DENIAL, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, INSERT THE FOLLOWING.
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVES A CHANGE IN ZONING CLASSIFICATION OR BOUNDARY AS THE RESULT OF A CITY INITIATED AUTHORIZED HEARING, COMMA, UH, CAN I PLEASE HELP WITH THE, ANY HELP WITH THE LANGUAGE IS APPRECIATED? YEAH, MAYBE A THREE, I'M SORRY.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE LANGUAGE AUTHORIZED HEARING IN THE CODE ANYWHERE, SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO WORK IT A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE WE HAVE THE LANGUAGE ZONING AMENDMENT.
SO IT'S A CITY INITIATED ZONING, A AMENDMENT, A CITY INITIATED ZONING AMENDMENT I'M TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH.
YEAH, YOU, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GIVE THE EXACT LANGUAGE.
IF THE INTENT IS CITY WHAT'S INTENT YEAH, WE CAN, WE CAN WORK WITH THAT.
A CITY INITIATED ZONING AMENDMENT.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE INTENT? YES, PLEASE.
SO, UH, WHEN, WHEN AN AUTHORIZED HEARING TAKES PLACE, IT'S NOT NEC IT'S, IT'S NOT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY WHO'S, YOU KNOW, INITIATING THEIR OWN ZONING CHANGE AN AUTHORIZED HEARING.
SO ONE, YOU KNOW, ORDINARILY THE OWNER OR APPLICANT WOULD BE IN CONTROL.
WHEREAS HERE, IT'S TO SOME EXTENT, AS GOOD AS IT MAY BE TO HAVE AN AUTHORIZED HEARING, IT'S INVOLUNTARY.
AND TWO, OFTEN THE, THE SCOPE OF AN AUTHORIZED HEARING, YOU KNOW, COVERS TENS IF NOT OVER, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED ACRES.
AND AS MUCH AS WE TRY TO GET IT RIGHT IN AUTHORIZED HEARINGS, WE'RE, WE'RE NEVER GONNA GET IT PERFECT.
SO IF, IF AN AUTHORIZED HEARING HAS SOME SORT OF UNINTENDED EFFECTS THAT WOULD ALLOW A, A PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN THE AREA TO COME BACK TO ADJUST THE ZONING.
AND JUST SO I'M CLEAR, CURRENTLY AN AUTHORIZED
[06:00:01]
HEARING, IF YOU, IF THERE'S AN AUTHORIZED HEARING IN 2020, YOU'D HAVE TO, ANYBODY WOULD HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL 2022 TO BRING, UM, A, A CHANGE THAT'S IN THE SAME AREA THAT WAS IMPACTED BY THE AUTHORIZED HEARING.I DIDN'T APPRECIATE THAT THIS COVERED THAT JUST CUZ THE LANGUAGE, THERE'S NO DISCUSSION ABOUT AUTHORIZED HEARING.
WELL, IT'S A ZONING, IT'S A ZONING CHANGE.
IT'S ONE TYPE OF ZONING CHANGE.
SO IT WOULD BE AN APPROVAL OF A ZONING ZONING.
SO IT'S A, IT WOULD CLASSIFY AS A CHANGE IN A ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION OR BOUNDARY.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, I THINK TWO OR THREE YEARS AGO WE HAD A CEDARS AUTHORIZED HEARING WHERE WE PRETTY COMPREHENSIVELY REWORKED THE ZONING AND THE, THE CEDARS PURSUANT TO A LONG PROCESS.
AND, YOU KNOW, THAT IS A ZONING CHANGE FOR THAT ENTIRE CEDARS COUNTS AS A ZONING CHANGE FOR THAT ENTIRE CEDARS AREA, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY.
SO, AND, AND IF I MAY, VICE CHAIR RUBEN, WE THEN HAD A SUBSEQUENT WAIVER BECAUSE A PROJECT WORKED TO GO THROUGH ENGINEERING AND THEY NEEDED TO CHANGE, NOT RELATED TO THE ZONING, AND THEY HAD TO COME BACK AND GET A WAIVER TO GET A CORRECTION TO THEIR SUB AREA.
THAT IS AN EXAMPLE OF, I BELIEVE WHAT VICE CHAIR RUBEN IS SEEKING TO COVER AND TO NOTE WAS IN INDEED TWO.
THANK YOU MS. MAY, I THINK YOU, YOU WANTED TO GIVE A SHOT AT ARTICULATING WHAT, WHAT THIS, UH, LANGUAGE IS GOING TO ME TOO.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE THE PROFESSIONAL HERE.
I, I THINK YOU DID A GREAT JOB.
SO, UM, SO JUST A, JUST A REVIEW OF, UH, THE SECTION WE'RE IN.
SO D ONE SAYS THAT EXCEPT FOR IN D TWO AND D THREE, YOU HAVE A WAITING PERIOD RIGHT AFTER A, A ZONING CHANGE HAS BEEN APPROVED OR DENIED, UH, IS WHAT, WHAT D ONE SAYS.
SO D TWO ARE THE EXCEPTIONS TO YOUR WAITING PERIOD.
SO, UH, VICE CHAIR RUBEN WAS, UM, SUGGESTING THAT A NEW CONDITION IN WHICH THE WAITING PERIOD IS DEFAULTED, UH, EXEMPTED IS FOR IN THE CASE OF WHEN THE PREVIOUS, UM, ZONING CHANGE WAS FOR A CITY INITIATED OR WHAT WE COMMONLY CALL AN AUTHORIZED HEARING, SUCH AS THE CEDARS COMMISSIONER YOUNG, PLEASE, UH, HAS THE MOTION BEEN SECONDED? NO, I WILL SECOND THE MOTION.
I'M GOING TO SPEAK AGAIN IN OPPOSITION TO THE AMENDMENT.
UH, VICE CHAIR RUBEN SPOKE ABOUT A SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE A CITY INITIATED MATTER AND REACH AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE.
THERE MAY ALSO BE INSTANCES WHERE WE DO THAT AND REACH AN INTENDED CONSEQUENCE THAT A PARTICULAR PROPERTY OWNER DOESN'T LIKE.
YOU CAN IMAGINE, FOR EXAMPLE, IN ELM THICKET, THAT WAS A VERY HARD FOUGHT MATTER.
THANKFULLY I HAD A CONFLICT OF INTEREST
AND YET THE COMMISSION, AND I BELIEVE THE COUNCIL ULTIMATELY, UH, APPROVED, AT LEAST IN LARGE PART THE, UH, STEERING COMMITTEE PROPOSAL FOR THAT REZONING AFTER, UH, A LOT OF CONTROVERSY, A LOT OF CONTENTION, AND A LOT OF TIME SPENT BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY.
WHAT THIS AMENDMENT WOULD SAY IS THE VERY NEXT DAY, ONE OF THOSE DISGRUNTLED PROPERTY OWNERS COULD APPLY FOR HIS ZONING CHANGE ON HIS OWN PROPERTY AND SAY, I KNOW THAT THE ELM THICKET VOTE WENT AGAINST ME, BUT IT WAS WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.
AND MY PROPERTY RIGHTS HAVE BEEN DESTROYED AND I'M MAD AS HECK ABOUT IT AND I WANT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM WITH WHETHER THE ZONING CHANGE APPROVAL WAS CITY INITIATED TO BE ONE OF THE CRITERIA.
PERHAPS ONE OF THE IMPORTANT CRITERIA BECAUSE I AGREE THERE ARE CASES SUCH AS THE ONE THAT COMMISSIONER HAMPTON MENTIONED WHERE THERE WAS AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF A CASE FOR A MUCH BIGGER AREA.
BUT THIS WOULD SAY WE DON'T EVEN GET INTO THAT.
IF IT WAS CITY INITIATED, THEN PER SE, NO WAIVER IS NEEDED.
AND I THINK THAT, UH, THAT'S VERY MUCH OVERKILL.
MAY I ADD SOMETHING? PLEASE, PLEASE.
UM, PLEASE DO KEEP IN MIND THAT AUTHORIZED HEARINGS MAY FEE FOR COMMERCIAL AREAS, RIGHT? THEY MAY HAVE SUVS.
SO BASICALLY AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE WOULD BE THAT YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO APPLY FOR AN U FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS.
IT'S NOT SUVS ARE REZONINGS AS WELL.
[06:05:01]
KINGSTON, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT THE EQUILIBRIUM IS BACK AND I SUPPORT WHAT COMMISSIONER YOUNG JUST SAID.COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR A MOMENT, BUT SHE'S BACK.
UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, PLEASE.
SO IS THIS SAYING THAT, UM, THAT ANY TYPE OF ZONING CHANGE THAT IS, THAT IS IS A DENIED OR APPROVED CAN'T COME BACK FOR TWO YEARS AND AND THERE'S NO EXCEPTION TO THE RULE? I I MEAN NO EXCEPTION TO IT.
SO THE, UM, SO THE CURRENT RULES SAY THAT, UM, ONCE THE ZONING CHANGE IS APPROVED OR DENIED WITH PREJUDICE, EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T SAY THAT, UM, IT MUST WAIT TWO YEARS AND THE ONLY EXEMPTION IS TO GET A WAIVER GRANTED BY CPC.
SO, UM, WAS, WAS THAT YOUR QUESTION? WHAT THE ORIG, SO WHAT IS THE, WHAT IS THE AMENDMENT AGAIN? OH, OKAY.
SO THE AMENDMENT IS, UM, IS TO ALLOW CITY AUTHORIZED HEARING.
SO THESE ARE HEARINGS THAT ARE EITHER AUTHORIZED BY A CITY PLAN COMMISSION OR CITY COUNCIL INSTEAD OF BROUGHT IN BY A PROPERTY OWNER WITH A FEE PAID.
UM, SO FOR THOSE LARGE REZONINGS THAT THE CITY IS AUTHORIZING AND CHAMPIONING, CHAMPIONING WHATEVER THAT IS, UM, THEN, UH, IF IT'S APPROVED, WHICH OFTEN THEY ARE, THE NORMAL OUTCOMES OF AUTHORIZED HEARINGS ARE EITHER APPROVED, APPROVED WITH CHANGES OR NO CHANGE.
IT'S JUST A INTERESTING OUTCOME OF THOSE.
SO IF THEY ARE APPROVED THAT, THAT'S WHAT, UM, COMMISSIONER, UH, UH, RUBEN IS SUGGESTING, LIKE IF AUTHORIZED HEARINGS ARE APPROVED, THEN THE AMENDMENT IS TO EXEMPT THEM FROM A TWO YEAR WAITING PERIOD FOR PROPERTIES IN THAT, IN THOSE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS AREAS.
SO THAT WOULD, IF SOMETHING HAPPENED, THEY WOULD'VE BE ALLOWED TO COME BACK.
WHICH WITHOUT, I, I, I AND, AND IN SOME INCIDENTS AND, AND BECAUSE I WOULD HATE FOR PD 5 95 TO COME BEFORE HERE AND SOMETHING HAPPENS AND WE CAN'T COME BACK IT FOR TWO YEARS CUZ THERE ARE SOME PDS THAT ARE, THAT NEED ZONING CHANGES IN HEARINGS THAT SUCK, THAT THERE ARE THEY THAT NEED.
AND WHEN WE GET INTO THE NITTY GRITTY OF IT MIGHT NEED SOME ADJUSTING AND NOT BEING ABLE TO COME BACK.
UM, AND PARTICULARLY THE ONE IN MY DISTRICT IS DEFINITELY EVERYONE THAT HAS EVER HEARD OF PD 5 95 KNOWS IS PROBABLY NEEDS SOME ADJUSTING OR SOMETHING.
BUT I, I THINK IF IT'S A STAFF ORIENTED, UM, TYPE OF, I MEAN, UH, CITY ORIENTED PUBLIC HEARING, WE MIGHT DO NEED TO HAVE THAT, THAT THAT, THAT, UM, JUST A, A SAFE HAVEN.
IT MIGHT NOT, IT MIGHT DEAL, BUT JUST TO HAVE THAT SAFE HAVEN COMMISSIONER YOUNG, THEN COMMISSIONER STAT AFTER TWO YEARS, COMMISSIONER REAGAN, THERE WOULD BE NO RESTRICTION.
THIS ONLY APPLIES FOR THE FIRST TWO YEARS AFTER AN APPROVAL.
SO THAT MEANS, FIRST OF ALL, THAT AFTER THE TWO YEARS, YOU CAN JUST MAKE ANY CHANGES YOU WANT DURING THE FIRST TWO YEARS.
IF YOU CAN SHOW GOOD, GOOD CAUSE FOR REOPENING IT, THEN YOU CAN MAKE ANY CHANGES.
YOU'RE SAYING I, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET CLARIFICATION BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT.
WELL, FOR EXAMPLE, P PD 5 95 WAS PASSED IN 2001.
THIS WAIVER PROCESS DOESN'T EVEN COME CLOSE TO APPLYING TO IT.
SO, BUT PD 5 95 IS UP FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
IT'S, IT'S BEEN APPROVED IN OCTOBER FOR A PUBLIC IN OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR, IT WAS APPROVED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
ALRIGHT, SO, SO WHEN IT COMES FORWARD, UH, WHENEVER IT COMES FORWARD MM-HMM.
NO, THIS AMENDMENT WOULD SAY YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO JUSTIFY IT.
MY THING IS, I, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER YOUNG ON THIS AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY A LOT OF TIMES AUTHORIZED HEARINGS AREN'T FOR
[06:10:01]
A GREAT BUNCH OF ACRES.I MEAN, LIKE, I CAN GIVE YOU PD 15, YOU KNOW, WE HAD THIS PRIME LAND THAT WAS SITTING THERE THAT AN AUTHORIZED HEARING, YOU KNOW, HAPPENED.
AND WHAT IT WAS TO DO WAS TO DO MAKE UNIFORM ZONING.
THEY KNEW THEY WERE GONNA HAVE EIGHT DIFFERENT DEVELOPERS COME INTO THE AREA AND BUILD.
OKAY? SO THEY WANTED TO HAVE A CRITERIA THAT WOULD ALLOW THAT AND HOW THEY WERE TO INTERACT TOGETHER.
OKAY? THERE'S A PURPOSE IN THESE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS, AND I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER YOUNG, IF ALL OF A SUDDEN, AND I'VE ALREADY BEEN DEALING WITH THIS WITH MY DEVELOPER'S BUILDING THERE, IF ALL OF A SUDDEN RIGHT AFTER THAT WAS PASSED, THIS PROCESS WAS USED AS WELL.
I DON'T LIKE WHAT THE AUTHORIZED HEARING DECIDED AND I'M COMING DOWN FOR A WAIVER BECAUSE I WANT THAT, THAT'S OF CONCERN TO ME THAT IT'S JUST GONNA BE TO GET AROUND WHAT WAS JUST DECIDED.
AND QUITE FRANKLY, MOST THINGS DON'T GET COMPLETELY BUILT.
YOU'RE PUTTING IN DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND ALL WITHIN THAT TWO YEARS.
SO I'M NOT SURE THAT DOESN'T KIND OF COVER THAT.
AND THEN THEY CAN COME UP AND ASK FOR SOMETHING, BUT I DON'T LIKE OPENING IT UP TO WHERE MEMBERS OF AUTHOR PEOPLE THAT ARE IMPACTED IN FROM AUTHORIZED HEARINGS CAN IMMEDIATELY ASK FOR A WAIVER FROM WHAT THE AUTHORIZED HEARING WENT FROM TWO YEARS FOR DECIDING.
MS. MORMAN, DID YOU WANT TO ADDRESS ANYTHING IN, IN, IN REGARDS TO AUTHORIZED HEARINGS IN TERMS OF THE, THE SIZE AND COMPLEXITIES? OKAY.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT? OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RUBEN.
UH, SECOND, BUT MYSELF, UH, LET'S TAKE A RECORDED VOTE.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS FOR THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE.
WE GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION, UH, MADE BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, UH, INCLUDING THE ADJUSTMENT MADE BY, UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON'S AMENDMENT, INCLUDING THE LANGUAGE THAT SHE ACCEPTED FROM VICE CHAIR RUBEN.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? NO.
COMMISSIONER? NO, I'M, YOU'RE CORRECT.
I'M, IT, IT DID NOT COMPLETELY VACATE.
UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON'S MOTION BECAUSE IT INCLUDED THE FIRST PIECE.
ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS SEEING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES.
IT'S GONNA BE ONE, BUT I'LL DO THE BEST I CAN.
JASON POOL MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
I'LL GET IT TO YOU, MR. CHAIR.
CAN I MOVE TO SUSPEND THE RULES PLEASE? TO DISPENSE WITH THE BRIEFING OF THE CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR SIGNS.
DOES I NEED A SECOND OR WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE PROTOCOL? MR. MOORE, YOU HAVE A SECOND? ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? DO YOU, YOU OKAY WITH THAT? COMMISSIONER KINGSTON'S OKAY WITH THAT? WHO'S GOT THE FIRST ONE? OH, THEY'RE ALL 14.
YOU OKAY WITH THAT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? YEAH.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE.
CAN YOU REPEAT THEM UNDER THE, IT'S THE MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES, RIGHT? SUSPEND THE RULES, YES.
[06:15:01]
TO VOTE FOR SUSPEND THE RULES.SO, MR. POOL, CAN YOU PLEASE READ THEM UNDER THE RECORD? ALL FOUR, PLEASE.
ITEM NUMBER 18, AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY MONICA ORTIZ OF BARNETT SIGNS INC.
ELIMINATED ATTACHED SIGN AT 3 0 2 SOUTH HOUSTON ON THE NORTH ELEVATION, BOTH STAFF AND SS D A C RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
THE CA NUMBER ON THAT WAS 2 3 0 1 0 5 0 0 4.
ITEM NUMBER 19, APP, UH, CA NUMBER 23 0 1 1 6 0 0 0 1.
AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY PATRICK RYLAND OF PETRI ELECTRIC, INC.
FOR A 238, OR EXCUSE ME, 273.8 SQUARE FOOT ILLUMINATED ATTACHED SIDE AT 2000 MCKINNEY AVENUE, SUITE EIGHT 10 ON THE NORTHWEST ELEVATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND S S D A C RECOMMENDATION ARE APPROVAL ITEM NUMBER 20, APPLICATION NUMBER 23 116 0 0 2 AT APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATENESS BY PATRICK RYLAND AND PETRI ELECTRIC, INC.
FOR A 273.8 SQUARE FOOT ILLUMINATED ATTACHED SIGN AT 200 MCKINNEY AVENUE, SUITE EIGHT 10 ON THE SOUTHEAST OF ELEVATION, BOTH STAFF N S D A C, RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
AND FINALLY, ITEM NUMBER 21, APPLICATION NUMBER 2 3 0 1 1 6 0 0 0 0.
OR EXCUSE ME, 0 0 0 3 3 ZEROS.
AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY PATRICK RYLAND, PETRI ELECTRIC, INC.
FOR A 96 SQUARE FOOT NON ILLUMINATED TAX SIGN AT 2000 MCKINNEY AVENUE, SUITE EIGHT 10 ON THE SOUTHWEST ELEVATION, BOTH STAFF AND SS D A C RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. POOL.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? NO.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? SORRY, UH, WITH REGARD TO MATTERS 23 DASH 7 0 7 MATTER, 23 DASH 7 0 8 MATTER, 23 DASH 7 0 9 MATTER 23 DASH SEVEN 10 A MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC RECORD AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGS FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND TO, UH, FALL STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS, ANY DISCUSSIONS? AND NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
HAVE IT, UH, 7 43 10 MINUTE BREAK COMMISSIONERS.
IT IS 8:03 PM WE'RE BACK ON THE RECORD.
COMMISSIONERS, WE DO HAVE A QUORUM, UH, FOR THE RECORD.
COMMISSIONER TREADWAY AND CARPENTER ARE ONLINE.
UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT IS LOGGED ON, BUT HE IS OUT OF THE, UH, OFF CAMERA.
WE'RE GOING BACK TO THE, UH, APPORTIONMENT PLEASE.
ITEM NUMBER 2223 DASH SEVEN 11.
CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF THE DIRECTORS APPORTIONMENT DETERMINATION ASSOCIATED WITH PLAT NUMBER S 1 78 DASH 2 88 TO IMPROVE LOS ANGELES BOULEVARD ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT LOS ANGELES BOULEVARD IF EXTENDED SOUTH OF BLUE RIDGE BOULEVARD WITH AN APPROVED ALL-WEATHER PAVING MATERIAL TO A WIDTH OF 20 FEET, DEDICATION OF AN ALLEY EASEMENT CONSTRUCTION OF A DETENTION POND THAT WILL SERVE THE DRAINAGE NEEDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW OFFSITE WATER AND WASTEWATER EXTENSIONS THAT ARE NECESSARY TO ADEQUATELY SERVE THE DEVELOPMENT.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS AN APPEAL AND APPORTIONMENT OF EXACTION, WHICH WAS FIRST CONSIDERED BY THE CITY PLAN COMMISSIONER ON FEBRUARY 16TH, 2023.
DURING THAT MEETING, THE APPELLANT WAS REPRESENTED BY ADRIAN COLE AND THE DIRECTOR WAS REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY GARY POWELL.
AFTER BOTH SIDES PRESENTED THEIR EVIDENCE AND MADE THEIR ARGUMENT, CITY PLAN COMMISSION HELD THIS APPEAL UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL TODAY.
NOW THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY RESERVE OR AFFIRM IN WHOLE OR IN PART OR MODIFY THE DECISION OF THE DIRECTOR OR THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY REMAND THE CASE TO THE DIRECTOR FOR FURTHER EVIDENCE.
I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY.
UH, FIRST LOOKING AT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE THAT SAYS THAT THE APPEAL OF AN APPORTIONMENT DECISION IS TO THE GOVERNING BODY, WHICH IN DALLAS IS THE CITY COUNCIL, BUT OUR, OUR DEVELOPMENT CODE SAYS IT IS TO THE PLAN COMMISSION WITH A FURTHER APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
WOULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW THOSE TWO PROVISIONS INTERACT AND HOW IT IS THAT WE ARE CONSIDERING THIS,
[06:20:01]
UM, THIS APPEAL? CERTAINLY, COMMISSIONER YOUNG, THERE'S NOT A CONFLICT BETWEEN LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION TWO 12 DASH 9 0 4 OR CHAPTER 51 A 1.109 BECAUSE AN APPLICANT MUST APPEAL TO THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION BEFORE GOING TO THE CITY COUNCIL.FAILURE TO FIRST APPEAR BEFORE THIS BO APPEAL TO THIS BODY WOULD RESULT IN A WAIVER TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO WE ARE A PRELIMINARY STEP LEADING TO THE APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
UM, MUCH HAS BEEN MADE BY THE PARTIES ABOUT THE EFFECT OF THE 30 DAY DEADLINE IN SECTION TWO, 12,904 AND DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE 1.109.
CAN YOU DESCRIBE THE EFFECTI, IF ANY, OF A FAILURE TO RESPOND TO THE APPORTIONMENT REQUEST WITHIN 30 DAYS? NEITHER ONE OF THOSE SECTIONS STATE A CONSEQUENCE FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE TIMEFRAMES IN THOSE SECTIONS.
UM, THIRDLY, AND SIMILARLY, WHAT IS THE LEGAL EFFECT OF A VIOLATION OF THE 30 DAY DEADLINE IN SECTION 8.404 E AND F FOR THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION REGARDING SUBMITTED ENGINEERING PLANS SECTION? LIKEWISE, SECTION 51 A 8.404 DOES NOT STATE A CONSEQUENCE FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE TIMEFRAME SPECIFIED IN SUBSECTIONS E R F.
UH, NEXT, UM, DOES THE 30 DAY DEADLINE FOR THE PLAN COMMISSION, OR EXCUSE ME,
SECTION 1.109 F TWO SAYS THAT CPC MUST HEAR THE APPORTIONMENT APPEAL WITHIN 60 DAYS AFTER THE DATE THE APPEAL IS FILED.
NOTICE HERE WAS SENT ON DECEMBER 22ND, CPC FIRST HEARD THIS APPEAL ON THE 16TH OF THIS YEAR.
THAT'S WITHIN THE 60 DAY PERIOD.
AND I THINK MY FINAL QUESTION, DEVELOPMENT CODE 8.403 A SIX SAYS THAT ANY PROPOSED CHANGE TO A PRELIMINARY PLAT CONDITION MUST BE RESUBMITTED TO THE PRO COMMISSION AS A PRELIMINARY PLAT.
DOES THE STAFF HAVE DISCRETION TO WAIVE OR DELETE A PRELIMINARY PLAT CONDITION ONCE APPROVED BY CCPC? AND IF SO, WHERE DOES THAT DISCRETION COME FROM? STAFF DOES HAVE THAT ABILITY AND IT COMES FROM THE APPORTIONMENT PROCESS.
STAFF HAS TO MAKE A ROUGH DETERMINATION TO SEE IF THE CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY CPC ARE ROUGHLY PROPORTIONAL.
IF NOT STAFF UNDER NOLAN AND DOLAN ARE CONSTITUTIONALLY REQUIRED TO REMOVE THOSE CONDITIONS RATHER THAN CONSTITUTIONALLY REQUIRED TO BRING THEM BEFORE THE COMMISSION FOR, UH, REMOVAL STAFF HAS THE DISCRETION UNDER SECTION 1.109 TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.
AND IT COMES BACK TO C P C THROUGH THE APPEAL PROCESS.
THAT THAT WOULD NOT BE RESUBMITTAL TO THE COMMISSION AS A PRELIMINARY PLA BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT'S NOT REQUIRED WHERE, UH, APPORTIONMENT IS AN ISSUE? THAT IS CORRECT.
MR. CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES MY QUESTIONS OF THE ATTORNEY.
DO I HAVE MOTION COMMISSIONER YOUNG? OH, PARDON ME.
COMMISSIONER TREADWAY DIDN'T SEE YOU THERE, PLEASE.
I MISSED THIS BRIEFING AND JUST WANTED IF I COULD GET A VERY QUICK SUMMARY OF EXACTLY WHAT IS IT THAT THE CPC IS BEING ASKED TO DO AND WHAT IS THE STANDARD UNDER WHICH WE MAKE OUR DECISION? WE'RE GIVING YOU THAT ANSWER.
CPC STANDARD IS THE SAME STANDARD THAT THE DIRECTOR USED AND THAT IS THAT EXACTIONS MAY NOT BE IMPOSED UNLESS THE EXACTIONS ARE RELATED TO THE NEEDS CREATED BY THE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND A RU AND ROUGHLY PROPORTIONATE TO THE IMPACT OF THE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT.
NO PRECISE MATHEMATICAL CALCULATION IS REQUIRED, BUT THE CITY MUST MAKE AN INDIVIDUALIZED DETERMINATION THAT THE REQUIRED EXACTION IS RELATED TO BOTH THE NATURE AND
[06:25:01]
EXTENT TO THE IMPACT OF THE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT.AND SO JUST TO PUT THAT IN ENGLISH, THE, UM, APPLICANT IS WANTING THE CITY TO PAY FOR MORE OF THE APPORTION METHOD.
AND SO WE, THE C P C HAVE TO DETERMINE WHETHER WE AGREE WITH THE CITY OR WHETHER WE AGREE WITH THE APPLICANT'S ARGUMENT THAT THE CITY SHOULD BE PAYING MORE FOR THESE OFFSITE WATER AND WASTE WATER FACILITIES.
THAT IS A FAIR CHARACTERIZATION, COMMISSIONER.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, DO I HAVE A MOTION MR. CHAIR? YES, SIR.
FIRST, I MOVE TO AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE DIRECTOR'S APPORTIONMENT DETERMINATION ASSOCIATED WITH PLAT S 1 78 2 88 INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO THE DEDICATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF LOS ANGELES BOULEVARD.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER, UH, YOUNG FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER, THE APPLICANT IS PROCEEDING IN MY VIEW FROM A FALSE PREMISE THAT APPORTIONMENT IS NECESSARY ANYTIME SOMEONE ELSE IS GOING TO USE AN IMPROVEMENT IN THE FUTURE.
EVERY IMPROVEMENT MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC IS AT SOME POINT OR OTHER GOING TO BE USED BY SOME SUBSET OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC GOING FORWARD.
THE TEST, AS I SEE IT, IS WHETHER THE IMPROVEMENT IS NECESSITATED BY OTHER USERS AS WELL AS BY THE APPLICANT.
IT IS NOT THE CURRENT USE OF THE UNIMPROVED SOUTHERN END OF LA OF LOS ANGELES BOULEVARD TO ACCESS THE PARK IS DE MINIMUS AND DOES NOT REQUIRE IMPROVEMENT OF THE STREET.
AND THE USER'S NORTH OF THE SITE APPEAR TO BE GETTING ALONG FINE WITHOUT ACCESS VIA LOS ANGELES BOULEVARD.
ON THE OTHER HAND, IMPROVEMENT OF LOS ANGELES BOULEVARD IS MANIFESTLY NECESSARY TO SERVICE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
THE PLAT SHOWS THAT SIX TO NINE LOTS WILL BE ACCESSIBLE ONLY FROM LOS ANGELES BOULEVARD.
MOREOVER, UNLESS LOS ANGELES BOULEVARD IS IMPROVED, AT LEAST AS FAR AS PIERRE STREET, THE SUBDIVISION WILL HAVE ONLY ONE MEANS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS, WHICH IS UNDESIRABLE FROM A PUBLIC SAFETY PERSPECTIVE.
AND UNLESS IT'S IMPROVED, AT LEAST AS FAR AS JUNO AVENUE, THE NORTHWESTERN PORTION OF THE SITE WILL HAVE AN AWKWARD AND CRAMPED CIRCULATION PATTERN TO SERVE THE RESIDENTS OF THAT AREA.
IN SUMMARY, THERE'S NO REASON THE CITY WOULD BE IMPROVING LOS ANGELES BOULEVARD IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE, BUT FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, I THEREFORE BELIEVE THAT 100% OF THIS IMPROVEMENT IS REASONABLY PROPORTIONAL TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANY THE OPPOSED MOTION PASSES.
I MOVE TO AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE DIRECTOR'S APPORTIONMENT DETERMINATION ASSOCIATED WITH PLAT S 1 78 2 88 INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO STORMWATER DRAINAGE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER YOUNG FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG HERE, HERE AGAIN, THE APPLICANT MISTAKENLY ASSUMES THAT IF OFFSITE WATER IS GOING TO BE ACCOMMODATED BY THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS, APPORTIONMENT SHOULD BE MADE.
BUT HERE AGAIN, THE TEST IS WHETHER THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE NECESSITATED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
RIGHT NOW, THERE'S NO INDICATION IN THE RECORD THAT THE EXISTING SURFACE FLOWS ARE NOT BEING ACCOMMODATED BY THE PERMEABLE GROUND SURFACE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OR THAT THEY'RE CREATING FLOODING OR RUNNING OFF THE PROPERTY IN A WAY THAT WOULD VIOLATE THE WATER CODE OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER'S RIGHTS.
IF THERE WAS A PREEXISTING PROBLEM, IT WAS THE APPLICANT'S BURDEN TO PROVE IT AND THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
BUT THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO BUILD 73 HOUSES AND FOUR STREETS AND THEREBY TO SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE THE NONPERMEABLE COVERAGE OF THE SITE.
THIS NECESSITATES DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS NOT ONLY TO ACC ACCOMMODATE THE WATER FALLING ON THE NONPERMEABLE SURFACES, BUT TO ACCOMMODATE THE SURFACE FLOWS OF WATER THAT WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE BEEN ACCOMMODATED BY THE PERMEABLE SURFACES THAT ARE BEING REPLACED.
IN SUMMARY, THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE SITE, WERE IT NOT FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
I THEREFORE BELIEVE THAT 100% OF THIS IMPROVEMENT IS REASONABLY PROPORTIONAL TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
I'M FASCINATED BY THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THE COMMUNITY OPEN SPACE BEING CREATED AS PART OF THE COMMUNITY UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS MAY OR MAY NOT BE USED FOR DETENTION
[06:30:01]
OR RETENTION OF STORM WATER.AND I CAN SEE ARGUMENTS BOTH WAYS ON THAT QUESTION, BUT MY ULTIMATE CONCLUSION IS THAT IT'S IMMATERIAL TO THIS APPEAL.
IF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL IS WRONG IN TAKING THE POSITION THAT USE OF PROPERTY BOTH FOR COMMUNITY OPEN SPACE AND FOR DETENTION OR RETENTION IS IMPERMISSIBLE.
THE APPLICANT HAS RECOURSE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OR TO THE COURT.
BUT IN ANY EVENT, THE QUESTION DOES NOT CHANGE THE REASONABLE PROPORTIONALITY ANALYSIS.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
MR. CHAIR, I MOVE TO AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE DIRECTOR'S APPORTIONMENT DETERMINATION ASSOCIATED WITH PLAT S 1 78 2 88 INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO OFFSITE WA WATER AND WASTEWATER MAINS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER YOUNG FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG HERE AGAIN, THE TEST IS WHAT IMPROVEMENTS ARE NECESSITATED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, NOT WHAT FUTURE USE OTHERS MIGHT MAKE OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, NOR IS THE TEST WHAT THE, WHAT IMPROVEMENTS MIGHT OR SHOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED OF PAST DEVELOPMENTS.
THE APPLICANT TAKES THE CURRENT SITUATION AS IT FINDS IT AND MUST PROVIDE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE NECESSITATED BY ITS DEVELOPMENT BUT NOT NECESSITATED BY OTHER DEVELOPMENTS.
AS WITH THE PREVIOUS ITEM, THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR OFFSITE WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENTS WERE IT NOT FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
I THEREFORE BELIEVE THAT 100% OF THIS IMPROVEMENT IS REASONABLY PROPORTIONAL TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
ANY DISCUSSION? SEE NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
MY FINAL MOTION IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN IT WOULD BE BASED ON THE ATTORNEY'S ANSWER TO SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I MOVE TO AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE DIRECTOR'S APPORTIONMENT DETERMINATION ASSOCIATED WITH PLAT S 1 78 2 88 INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO ALI DEDICATION.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER YOUNG FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG, UH, I HAD INITIALLY INTENDED TO MOVE TO REMAND THIS ISSUE TO THE DIRECTOR FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION IN LIGHT OF THE CODE PROVISION THAT REQUIRES THAT ANY CHANGE TO A PRELIMINARY PLAT CONDITION MUST BE RESUBMITTED TO THE COMMISSION AS A PRELIMINARY PLAT.
UH, BUT THE ATTORNEY ADVISES ME AND I AM BOUND TO FOLLOW THAT DETERMINATION THAT THE STAFF, IN FACT, NOT WITHSTANDING THE CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THIS COMMISSION, HAS THE, UH, DISCRETION TO WAIVE THAT CONDITION INSOFAR AS IT'S NECESSARY TO DO SO, TO AVOID, UH, AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL, UH, FAILURE OF APPORTIONMENT.
SO HERE WE HAVE NO, UH, EXACTION AT ALL CAUSE THE CITY IS NO LONGER REQUIRING ADDITIONAL ALLEY DEDICATION AND HENCE THERE IS NO, UH, EXACTION TO BE APPORTIONED.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
PLEASE, MR. MOORE, ITEM 23 C A 212 DASH 5 7 4, AN APPEAL OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION OF ONE DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO PAINT EXTERIOR BODY BLUE, TRIM WHITE, AND TWO, DENIAL WITH PREJUDICE TO REPLACE 31 ALUMINUM WINDOWS WITH WOOD COMPOSITE WINDOWS STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR ITEM ONE AND APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS FOR ITEM TWO, LANDMARK COMMISSION.
RECOMMENDATION, DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR ITEM ONE AND DENIAL WITH PREJUDICE FOR ITEM TWO.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. MOORE.
COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS AN APPEAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, WHICH WAS DENIED BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AT ITS HEARING ON OCTOBER 3RD, 2022.
THE DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS REFLECTED IN ITS OFFICIAL MINUTES, WHICH ARE PART OF THE RECORD FOR THIS APPEAL.
THE APP, THE APPELLANT IS A REPRESENTED, IS REPRESENTED BY, AND I THINK, UM, REPRESENTATIVE IS ONLINE.
[06:35:03]
OKAY.THE APPELL IS REPRESENTED BY MR. LUNA AND THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY KATHLEEN PHONES FONZ.
UH, AT THIS TIME WE WILL, WE'LL SWEAR IN THE SPEAKERS IF YOU WOULD, UH, STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
DO YOU SWEAR AND AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE COMMISSION? PLEASE SAY I DO.
ANY COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED BY THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MEMBERS PENDING THIS APPEAL HAVE BEEN COLLECTED BY THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION SECRETARY AND MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PARTIES FOR INSPECTION.
IF ANY PLAN COMMISSIONER HAS RECEIVED ANY COMMUNICATIONS ON THIS MATTER, PLEASE DISCLOSE IT FOR THE RECORD NOW.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION HAS RECEIVED AND REVIEWED THE RECORD OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND EACH PARTY'S BRIEF ON THE APPEAL.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY HEAR NEW TESTIMONY AND CONSIDER NEW EVIDENCE ONLY TO DETERMINE IF THAT TESTIMONY OR EVIDENCE WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE HEARING BEFORE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
DOES EITHER PARTY HAVE ANY NEW EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY TO SUBMIT TO THE COMMISSION TODAY? I HAVE A STATEMENT I WOULD LIKE TO READ.
DOES IT CONCERN NEW NEW EVIDENCE, SIR? YES.
GOOD, GOOD EVENING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
I AM THE CURRENT OWNER OF QUADPLEX.
WE'RE FORMERLY KNOWN AS 45 12 SYCAMORE STREET.
I CONSIDER MYSELF A CONS, CONSERVATIONIST AND A WHOLEHEARTEDLY BELIEVE HISTORIC DISTRICT SHOULD BE PRESERVED THAT THE PROPERTIES ARE IN THE STATE OF THIS MANAGEMENT.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO PRESERVE THESE COMMUNITIES IN A WAY THAT ALLOWS FOR WORK TO BE DONE IN A TIMELY AND COSTLY EFFECTIVE MANNER.
MY INTENTIONS WITH THE WORK I PROPOSED TO BE DONE ON 45 12 WAS TO BRING THE PROPERTY BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL GLORY WITHIN, WITHIN THE MR. BONATTI PART.
THERE, THERE WILL BE A, A TIME, UH, FOR THIS HEARING FOR YOU TO OFFER TESTIMONY, BUT THIS PARTICULAR SPACE IS ONLY, UH, TO ASCERTAIN IF THERE'S ANY EVIDENCE THAT WAS NOT AVAILABLE DURING YOUR HEARING WITH THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
SO THAT, THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO DETERMINE FIRST BEFORE WE GET TO, UH, THE SECOND PIECE THAT I THINK YOUR STATEMENT IS MORE APROPO FOR, FOR LATER IN THE HEARING AT THIS POINT.
UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY, ANY NEW EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY TO SUBMIT TO THE COMMISSION TODAY THAT WAS NOT AVAILABLE FOR THE TIME OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HEARING? PLEASE COMMISSIONER MR. CHAIR, IF WE COULD ASK MR. LE TO GET CLOSER TO THE MICROPHONE OR TURN UP HIS VOLUME, THAT'D BE HELPFUL.
SIR, I WILL TURN ON MY
YOU MAY HAVE TO REALLY SPEAK UP.
UH, SO MR. LE AT THIS, AT THIS POINT, LIKE I SAID, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO DETERMINE IF YOU HAVE ANY NEW EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY THAT WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
THE, THE ONLY NEW EVIDENCE THAT I COULD COME UP WITH IS THE FACT THAT THE PROPERTY HAS AN EFFECTIVE BILL OF 1990 AND THE COM AND THE, UH, PEAK HISTORIC DISTRICT DID NOT COME INTO EFFECT UNTIL 1995, WHICH MEANS THAT IT PROPERTY WOULD HAVE TO BE, HAVE TO HAVE BEEN GRANDFATHERED IN ALONG WITH THOSE ALUMINUM WINDOWS AND MAKING THE ALUMINUM WINDOWS THE DEFACTO, UH, CRITERIA BY WHICH WE HAVE TO APPLY THE NEXT SET OF WINDOWS.
WE ALSO LEARNED THAT ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS ON THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS A NEIGHBOR AND SHOULD HAVE RECUSED HIMSELF BECAUSE OF HIS IMPLICIT BIAS.
SO AT, AT THIS POINT, COMMISSIONERS THE COMMISSION IS A BODY MUST DECIDE IF WE CONSIDER THAT NEW EVIDENCE COMMISSIONER YOUNG? UH, I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S NEW EVIDENCE, SO I DON'T THINK A MOTION IS IN ORDER EITHER WAY.
UH, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
I THINK THIS, UH, THE, THE EVIDENCE IN FACT IS INCLUDED IN THE RECORD.
DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE A DIFFERENT, UH, POSITION? OKAY.
ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE, UH, THE PARTIES WISH TO PROVIDE TODAY SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY
[06:40:01]
PLAN COMMISSION SECRETARY.IF ANY NEW TESTIMONY IS TO BE PRESENTED, THE WITNESS MAY BE SWORN IN BEFORE TESTIFYING.
IF THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION DETERMINES THAT NEW TESTIMONY OR NEW EVIDENCE EXISTS THAT WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HEARING, THE CITY CLAIM COMMISSION SHALL REMAND THE CASE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
SO BOTH SIDES HAVE PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED A COPY OF THE PROCEDURES WE'LL FOLLOW TODAY.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION WILL NOW HEAR AND CONSIDER TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE CONCERNING THE PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTIONS OF THE CITY STAFF AND THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND ITS TASK FORCES.
EACH SIDE WILL BE ALLOWED 20 MINUTES SCHWAR PRESENTATION, AND THE APPELLANT WILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL FIVE MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL PRESENTATIONS WILL BE MADE BY THE APPELLANT AND THE COUNCIL FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION ONLY.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY ASK QUESTIONS AFTER THE PRESENTATIONS.
TIME TAKEN BY THE QUESTIONS WILL NOT BE DEDUCTED FROM THE TIME ALLOTTED.
EACH COMMISSIONER WILL BE ALL ALLOWED, ALLOWED FIVE MINUTES TO ASK QUESTIONS DURING THE FIRST ROUND.
BE AWARE THAT THOSE FIVE MINUTES INCLUDE ANSWERS.
THREE MINUTES WILL BE ALLOTTED IF A SECOND ROUND IS NEEDED.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION SECRETARY WILL KEEP TRACK OF THE TIME.
IF A PARTY REQUIRES ADDITIONAL TIME TO, TO PRESENT ITS CASE, THE PARTY SHALL REQUEST THAT ADDITIONAL TIME BE GRANTED BY THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
IF THE COMMISSION GRANTS ONE PARTY ADDITIONAL TIME, THE OPPOSING PARTY SHALL ALSO BE GRANTED AN EQUAL TIME EXTENSION.
DO THE PARTIES HAVE ANY PRELIMINARY MATTERS TO RAISE AT THIS TIME? I DO.
I HAVE MY PROPERTY MANAGER AND, UH, ANDERSON WINDOWS REPRESENTATIVE AS PANEL MEMBERS WHO CAN TESTIFY TO ANDERSON WINDOWS.
CAN CAN YOU GIMME THEIR NAMES AGAIN, SIR? UH, TOM DIVE ON THE PANEL.
AND AMBER KWAI AS MY PROPERTY MANAGER.
WE DIDN'T CATCH THE SECOND NAME.
MR. DIVERS AND MS. KOWAI? AMBER KWAI.
MR. MR. OWA? MR. ARE THEY ONLINE RIGHT NOW? YES, THEY ARE ON THE PHONE.
DO THEY HAVE THEIR CAMERAS ON? YES.
I'M HAVING A HARD TIME GETTING MY CAMERA TO TURN ON.
IS THERE A SETTING I SHOULD BE AWARE OF? WE, WE DO NOT SEE YOU.
WE SEE MR. DIVER, WE DON'T SEE YOU.
YOU MIGHT WANT TO TOGGLE THE, UH, THE CAMERA ICON A COUPLE OF TIMES.
FOR SOME REASON IT'S NOT TURNING THE CAMERA ON.
IT'S SHOWING THAT MY CAMERA IS WORKING, BUT IT'S NOT GIVING ME A PICTURE.
MS. KOJI, WE, WE, UH, IN FACT, STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT WE SEE YOU IN ORDER TO HEAR FROM YOU.
SO WE WON'T BE ABLE TO TAKE YOUR TESTIMONY IF WE CAN'T SEE YOU AND GET, GET THE CAMERA WORKING.
UH, LIKE I SAID, I'M TRYING TO GET THIS TO TURN ON.
FOR SOME REASON IT'S NOT TURNING ON IS THIS ON A LAPTOP OR YOUR PHONE? IT'S ON A LAPTOP.
I'M HITTING THE START VIDEO AND IT'S NOT DOING ANYTHING.
I CAN SEE THE GREEN LIGHT, BUT IT'S NOT GIVING ME A PICTURE.
YOU MIGHT TRY JUST LOGGING ON WITH YOUR PHONE.
I CHECK AND SEE IF YOUR CAMERA'S COVERED.
IS THAT COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT? I THINK HE LOGGED OFF.
OH, THAT'S COMMISSIONER TREADWAY
I COULDN'T GET MY LAPTOP CAMERA TO WORK EARLIER.
HAVE EVERYONE HEARD? YEAH, MY MS. CARDI, I I WOULD GIVE THE PHONE A SHOT.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M ATTEMPTING TO DO AT THE MOMENT.
[06:45:39]
MR. CHAIR AS YES, SIR.WE TAKE TIME TO WORK OUT THE TECHNICAL ISSUES.
WE, THIS IS AN APPEAL SO WE'RE NOT ABLE TO CONSIDER NEW EVIDENCE.
IS THAT RIGHT, MR. CHAIR? MR. MOORE? THAT IS CORRECT.
SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS THE, THE TWO INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE JOINING BESIDES MR. LINDI, ARE THEY HERE TO TESTIFY OR ARE THEY HERE IN SOME OTHER CAPACITY? BECAUSE IF THEY HERE JUST SIMPLY TO TESTIFY, THEN I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S, IF THEY CAN, I WOULD AGREE THAT IF THEY ARE HERE TO TESTIFY, THAT WOULD NOT BE EVIDENCE THAT THIS BODY COULD CONSIDER IF THEY'RE HERE TO, I I WOULD DEFER TO THEM AS TO WHAT THEIR INTENTION IS.
BUT IF THEY ARE TRYING TO TESTIFY, THAT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED UNDER CPC RULES.
MR. CAN I ASK MR. MR. LE, WHAT, WHAT CAPACITY OR, OR MR. DIVER AND MS. KAWACHI KAWAI HERE, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT DO YOU HAVE THEM HERE TO DO, DO THIS EVENING? MR. DIVER IS HERE TO EXPLAIN THE, THE WAY THE WINDOWS ARE A LIKE FOR LAKE IN APPEARANCE AND THE FACT THAT NONE OF THIS WAS, UM, SPOKEN ABOUT WHEN THE INITIAL MR. COMMISSION WAS DISCUSSING IT.
MR. CHAIR, THAT SOUNDS LIKE NEW TESTIMONY TO ME.
YOU KNOW, RESPECTFULLY, I I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO HEAR FROM MR. DIVER AT THIS, THIS POINT IF THAT'S THE CAPACITY IN WHICH HE'S HERE.
WHAT ABOUT MS. KWAI AND WHAT ABOUT MS. KWAI? WHAT, WHAT CAPACITY? OH, SHE IS, IS MS. KWAI HERE? I GUESS THAT'S A QUESTION FOR YOU, MR. LUK.
UH, MS. KWAI IS HERE AS, UH, UH, UH, SUPPORTING, UH, TESTIMONY TO THE FACT THAT NONE OF THESE CONVERSATIONS WERE HAD ABOUT THE WINDOWS.
MR. LE, CAN YOU SPEAK UP A LITTLE BIT AND REPEAT WHAT YOU JUST SAID? IT'S VERY HARD TO HEAR YOU.
MS. KAWAI IS A, UH, WITNESS TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S MEETING ON OCTOBER 3RD WHERE NONE OF THE WINDOWS PROPERTIES WERE ENTERTAINED BY ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS DUE TO MR. JIM ANDERSON'S THE COMMISSIONER, JIM ANDERSON'S, UH, TRYING TO DERAIL THE ENTIRE CONVERSATION AND BRINGING PAST, UM, PAST VIOLATIONS TO A LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING ABOUT ONLY WINDOWS AND THE PROPOSED WORK THAT WE HAD.
IT'S MR. CHAIR, IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE HERE TO, TO TESTIFY AS TO EITHER WHAT HAPPENED AT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION OR, OR REGARDING THE, THE MATERIALS IN QUESTION.
SO I WOULD RESPECTFULLY SUGGEST THAT WE CAN ONLY HEAR ARGUMENT FROM MR. LUDI OR, OR SOMEONE REPRESENTING HIM.
I THINK WE'RE ABOUT TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION.
THANK YOU, MR. RU, MR. MOORE? THAT'S CORRECT.
IF THE, IF, IF THEY'RE HERE JUST TO TESTIFY, THAT WOULD BE NEW EVIDENCE THAT WAS AVAILABLE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
IN FACT, THEY BOTH APPEARED BEFORE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, SO THAT WOULD NOT BE SOMETHING THAT C P C COULD HEAR THAT.
WE COULD ONLY HEAR FROM MR. LUDI ON, UM, WHETHER OR NOT LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DEC, WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION.
UH, SO ONE QUICK POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
SO THE FACT THAT ONE OF THE TWO IS IN THE RECORD, THEY CAN'T TESTIFY IN REGARDS TO WHAT, UM, THE, THEIR PIECE IN THE RECORD THEY TESTIFIED
[06:50:01]
TO FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, IF THAT YEAH, THAT WOULD BE EVIDENCE THAT WAS AVAILABLE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, AND THEREFORE IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THIS BODY CAN HEAR FROM HIS IN, IN TERMS OF TESTIMONY.UH, SO MR. LEI, UH, SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE DETERMINED THAT IT WILL BE YOU, SIR.
SO WE'LL HEAR FROM YOU AND YOU ALONE ON THIS CASE.
UM, SO WE WILL NOW HEAR FROM, UH, MR. LEI, THE APPELLANT FOR UP TO 20 MINUTES.
IF, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, WOULD THEY, WOULD THEY ALLOW THE COMMISSION TO HAVE THEM IN THE CAPACITY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? BE EVIDENTIARY, MR. CHAIR, IF THE QUESTIONS WOULD BE TRYING TO SOLICIT EVIDENTIARY RESPONSES, THAT WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE NEW EVIDENCE.
COMMISSIONER TRAYER, I THINK YOU HAD A QUESTION.
DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? NO, I WAS GONNA RAISE, I WAS GONNA RAISE THAT SAME THING IF THEY WERE JUST ANSWERING QUESTIONS ABOUT THINGS THAT THEY WERE THERE FOR AS BACKUP TO, UM, MR. LUDI, I, AGAIN, I'VE NEVER BEEN THROUGH THIS PROCESS BEFORE, BUT JUST TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THINGS THEY WERE THERE THAT ARE ALREADY IN THE RECORD.
NO, UH, WHAT I MEANT IS ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM YOUR PANEL.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS THAT I MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ANSWER, MAYBE ONE OF MY SUPPORTING MEMBERS MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER IN A, IN A BETTER CAPACITY THAN I WOULD.
MR. LUDI, THE ONLY THING CITY CCPC CAN DO IS CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD WHETHER OR NOT LANDMARK COMMISSION EX VIOLATED A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE PROVISION EXCEEDED ITS AUTHORITY, OR THERE LANDMARK'S DECISION WAS NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
AND SO TESTIMONY FROM ANY WITNESSES IS NOT SOMETHING THAT CPC CAN CONSIDER.
IF THIS IS NEW EVIDENCE, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S NOT BECAUSE THEY TESTIFIED BEFORE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, BUT IF THERE IS NEW EVIDENCE, IT WOULD HAVE, THIS WOULD HAVE TO BE REMANDED BACK TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION TO CONSIDER, NOT FOR CPC TO CONSIDER.
UM, I THINK THAT MOST OF MY EVIDENCE IS COMING IN THE FORM OF A STATEMENT I HAVE WRITTEN DOWN.
IF, IF THAT IS WHAT IS REQUIRED, THEN I, I AM OKAY WITH THAT.
MR. LUDI, IF EVERYTHING YOU HAVE, IT WAS WRITTEN DOWN IS A PART OF THE RECORD, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT CPC HAS, WILL CON HAS CONSIDERED AND WILL BE ABLE TO ASK YOU ABOUT.
BUT THE FLOOR IS YOURS FOR 20 MINUTES TO EXPLAIN WHAT YOU EXPLAIN YOUR ARGUMENT.
MY INTENTIONS WITH THE WORK I PROPOSED TO BE DONE AT 45 12 SYCAMORE WAS TO BRING BACK THE PROPERTY TO ITS ORIGINAL GLORY WITHIN THE GUIDELINES SET FORTH BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PAINT ON THE BRICKS WERE TO PAINT THEM AN EARTH TONE COLOR CONSISTENT WITH CODE 51 A DASH 4.501, AND IF APPROVED, WE WERE GOING TO REPAINT THE BRICK VENEER AN EARTH TONE GRAY.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO REPLACE THE WINDOWS WAS TO APPROVE THE RE TO APPROVE THE REPLACEMENT WINDOWS FROM ANDERSON WINDOWS.
GRANTED, WE PAINT THE EXTERIOR NMOS FRAME A COMPLIMENTARY ACCENT COLOR.
WE INTENDED ON COMPLYING WITH THESE RECOMMENDATIONS BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE TWO CON BEEN CONSISTENT WITH CITY CODE 51 A DASH 4 5 0 1.
FURTHERMORE, THE CITY CODE DOES ALLOW FOR WINDOWS TO BE WOOD OR WOOD-LIKE IN MATERIALS, NOT STRICTLY AND ONLY WOOD.
REGARDLESS OF PERSONAL PREFERENCE, WE BELIEVE
[06:55:01]
THE OPEN BIAS BY LANDMARK COMMISSION, JIM ANDERSON, LET THE COMMISSION TO DENY A REQUEST.DURING THE OCTOBER 3RD HEARING, MR. ANDERSON WAS INSISTENT ON BRINGING PASSCODE VIOLATIONS UP, WHICH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH OUR PROPOSED CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, AND VIOLATIONS WERE UNKNOWINGLY INHERITED WHEN PURCHASING THE PROPERTY.
MR. ANDERSON BROUGHT UP THE PASS VIOLATIONS REPEATEDLY TO THE POINT THE COMMISSION'S REPRESENTATIVE LAWYER HAD TO STOP HIM AND REMIND THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
THOSE CODE VIOLATIONS WERE NOT THE ISSUE AT HAND AND TO D AND TO DISREGARD PASS CODE VIOLATIONS.
I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER ANDERSON HAS A VESTED INTEREST IN STONEWALLING ANY AND ALL MAINTENANCE TO THE PROPERTY AT 45 12 SYCAMORE AND SHOULD HAVE RECUSED HIMSELF LIKE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION CHAIRWOMAN DID, BECAUSE HE IS A NEIGHBOR TO THE PROPERTY AND HAS CONFLICTED INTEREST.
WE BELIEVE THAT HIS BIAS PROHIBITED THE COMMISSION TO COME TO A REASONABLE CONCLUSION WHILE ADHERING TO THEIR OWN REGULATIONS, BECAUSE NONE OF THE FACTS REGARDING CITY CODES OR HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY HAD THE CHANCE TO BE DISCUSSED.
FURTHERMORE, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AS A WHOLE FAILED TO HONOR THEIR OWN GUIDELINES AND CHOOSE TO FOLLOW MR. ANDERSON'S PERSONAL BELIEF THAT WINDOWS SHOULD BE WOOD, THAT SHOULD BE WOOD ONLY, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE CODE STATES, WE ARE FINDING THAT DESPITE OUR CONSTANT COOPERATION AND FOLLOWING THE VERY GUIDELINES SET FORTH, WE ARE BEING REPEATEDLY DENIED FROM DOING ANY TYPE OF MAINTENANCE THAT IS DESPERATELY NEEDED.
THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS NOT AN ACTUAL HISTORIC BUILDING, AS THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE WAS DEMOLISHED AND REBUILT IN 1990, NOTHING ON THE BUILDING IS TECHNICALLY HISTORIC IN NATURE, AND IT IS NOT, AND IT IS ONLY CONCERTED AS SUCH DUE TO THE BOUNDARY LINES AND THE PROPERTY BEING GRANDFATHERED IN AFTER THE LANDMARK COMMISSIONS START FIVE YEARS LATER.
THE FACT THAT THE PEAK SUBURBAN EDITION WAS NOT FORMED UNTIL 1995 AND THE EFFECTIVE BUILD OF THE CURRENT STRUCTURE WAS FIVE YEARS EARLIER IN 1990, MAKING THOSE ALUMINUM WINDOWS THE STANDARD BY WHICH PROPOSED WINDOWS SHOULD BE COMPARED TO ALREADY SHOWS.
OUR GOAL WAS NOT TO KEEP THE ALUMINUM WINDOWS, BUT TO ACTUALLY HONOR THE HISTORIC LOOK BY REPLACING THEM WITH WOOD COMPOSITE WINDOWS.
THE CURRENT CODE STATES WINDOWS MUST BE WOOD OR WOOD-LIKE IN APPEARANCE, AND IT BE THE DEFACTO CRITERIA ALL PROPOSED WINDOWS MUST FOLLOW, WHICH WE FULLY COMPLIED WITH.
WE ALSO FIND IT HIGHLY PREJUDICIAL WHEN WE FIND PROPERTIES ON THE SAME STREET WITH VINYL OR PLASTIC WINDOWS AND ARE REQUESTS BE DENIED WHEN WE ARE HONORING WOOD WINDOWS WITH ANDERSON WOOD COMPOSITE REPLACEMENTS, WHICH ARE SPECIFICALLY MADE FOR HISTORIC HOMES.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, ALL I ALL WE ARE ASKING IS, IS FOR AN APPROVAL OF WORK THAT WILL BRING THE PROPERTY BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL GLORY, SO THE PEAK SUBURBAN EDITION CITIZENS CAN BE PROUD, BE RESIDENTS AT OUR PROPERTY WHILE HAVING SAFER AND BETTER FUNCTIONING WINDOWS THAT WILL LAST YEARS TO COME.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONER MEMBERS WITH A REMINDER THAT EACH COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS WITH THE ANSWERS ARE LIMITED TO FIVE MINUTES? ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. LEONARD? THE COMMISSIONERS? NO.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT, PLEASE, SIR, I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE, THE, UM, MR. ANDERSON, NOT RECUSING HIMSELF.
IS THAT A VIOLATION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION OR IS THAT EVEN OUR PURVIEW TO EVEN DISCUSS? WELL, IT'S QUESTIONS FOR MR. LE AT THIS TIME.
I JUST HAVE ONE, UM, POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
MR. NO, LATTI, I BELIEVE I HEARD YOU SAY THAT THE STRUCTURES WERE REBUILT IN 1990, BUT, UM, INFORMATION IN OUR TRANSCRIPT INDICATES THAT THESE WERE STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTED IN 1923.
THE STRUCTURES WERE ORIGINALLY CONSTRUCTED IN 1923, BUT REBUILT AND HAVE AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF 1990.
BUT THE EFFECTIVE DATE, I GUESS I'M, I'M STRUGGLING AND UNDERSTAND THE STRUCTURES.
ARE THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTED IN 1923? NO, THEY ARE NOT.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONERS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR YOUR APPELLANT? COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, PLEASE.
UM, YES, I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAY THAT THE RELEVANT CODE SECTIONS
[07:00:01]
PERMIT WOOD OR WOOD COMPOSITE MATERIALS FOR THE WINDOWS.IS THAT CORRECT? YES, WOOD OR WOOD LIKE SO ANYTHING THAT HAS TO MAKE THE APPEARANCE OF WOOD-LIKE WINDOWS IN OUR, THE WINDOWS THAT WE PROPOSE WITH ANDERSON WINDOWS WE'RE WOOD COMPOSITE.
SO THEY ARE A BLEND OF WOOD AND A COMPOSITE MATERIAL THAT MAKES THEM ROCK PROOF.
THEN MY SECOND QUESTION IS, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE BUILDING IS CURRENTLY PAINTED BLUE.
SO, I GUESS, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT YOU ARE SEEKING APPROVAL FOR? IS IT THE BLUE CURRENT PAINTING OR IS IT THE EARTH TONE THAT YOU INTEND TO PAINT IT? NO, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS WERE TO WERE TO KEEP THE BLUE, BUT THE WOOD VENEER THAT WAS ON THERE, WHICH IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING MATERIAL THAT WASN'T THERE TO BEGIN WITH, SHOULD BE STRIPPED AND PAINTED BACK TO A RED, A RED OR AN EARTH TONE COLOR, WHICH WE, WE, WE WERE GONNA DO TO BEGIN WITH.
I'M SORRY, I'M, I'M NOT CLEAR THEN.
I THOUGHT THAT WHAT WE WERE BEING ASKED TO EVALUATE WAS THE DENIAL OF YOUR REQUEST TO PAINT THE EXTERIOR, THE EXISTING BLUE COLOR? NO, THE LANDMARK MORE COMMISSION KIND OF, THEY WEREN'T VERY, UH, SPECIFIC WHEN IT CAME TO TALKING ABOUT THE WOOD VENEER AND THE PAINT SURROUNDING THE WOOD VENEER OR THE WOOD OR THE SIDING.
THAT IS, AND SORRY, YOU'RE GETTING A LITTLE HARD TO HEAR.
SO JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR, THE APPEAL BEFORE US IS TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES.
ONE IS THE WINDOWS THE SECOND SAYS IN OUR MATERIALS, DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO PAINT THE EXTERIOR BODY BLUE TRIM WHITE.
SO ARE YOU ASKING FOR US TO EVALUATE THAT DECISION WHETHER YOU CAN LEAVE THE BUILDING BLUE? NO, I THINK THE LANDMARK COMMISSION INTENDED US TO PAINT THE WOOD VENEER.
I MEAN THE, UM, THE STONE VENEER, THE BRICK VENEER THAT IS RIGHT UNDER THE, UH, THE WOOD SIGHTING, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO OH GOD.
MAY MAYBE CHAIR, I'LL RESERVE MY, MY QUESTIONS FOR, FOR STAFF AT SOME POINT THAT THAT IS NOT MY READING OF WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US.
THANK YOU, UH, CHAIR RUBEN? YES.
ONE, LOOKING AT YOUR BRIEF, YOU SAY THAT YOU WILL CONCEDE THAT, THAT THE PAINT ON THE BRICK AND PAINTED A MORE APPROPRIATE GRAY EARTH TONE, DOES THAT MEAN YOU'RE NO LONGER CHALLENGING THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISION ON, ON THE PAINT FOR THE BRICK VERNE? YES.
ARE YOU CHALLENGING IT IN ANY OTHER WAY? NO.
SO, SO THAT ISSUE IS NO LONGER ON THE TABLE THAT'S WAIVED, CONCEDED, CORRECT? YES.
THEN ON, IS THIS A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE? IS THIS A COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE? IT'S RESIDENTIAL.
AND IS THIS IN THE GASTON COMMERCIAL TRACT? I BELIEVE IT MIGHT BE.
I, I DON'T KNOW IF, UH, SUBURBAN ADDITION FALLS IN THE GAS.
THE, THE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE RELYING ON PROVISION 5.4, RIGHT? YES.
UH, IS IT YOUR INTENTION TO GO BEFORE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WITH A NEW APPLICATION TO PAINT THE STRUCTURE AN EARTH TONE COLOR? YES.
THE BRICKER, RIGHT, BECAUSE YOU REALIZE THAT ALL THEY'VE DONE SO FAR IS DENY THE BLUE, THEY HAVEN'T APPROVED AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE BLUE? YES.
NOW, ARE YOU STILL APPEALING THE REQUIREMENT THAT YOU STRIPPED THE PAINT OFF THE BRICK? YES.
CUZ THAT MIGHT CAUSE MORE DAMAGE THAN, OKAY, BECAUSE YOU DON'T INTEND TO DO THAT.
YOU INTEND TO PAINT OVER THE BLUE? YES.
[07:05:01]
YOU.ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
WE'LL NOW HEAR THE LANDMARK COMMISSIONER'S CASE FOR UP TO 20 MINUTES.
UM, SO JUST TO SORT OF ADDRESS SOME OF THE QUESTIONS, I THINK THOSE HAVE BEEN CLARIFIED, BUT OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT AS TO THE FIRST REQUEST RELATED TO THE PAINT, THAT IT HAS BEEN CONCEDED THAT THE, THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WAS CORRECT TO NOT ALLOW THE PAINT THE PROPERTY TO BE PAINTED BLUE.
THERE WOULD NEED TO BE AN ADD ANOTHER REQUEST FOR A CA IN ORDER TO PAINT THE PROPERTY A DIFFERENT COLOR.
UM, HOWEVER, IN OUR BRIEF, WE'VE ALSO CONCEDED THAT THERE WAS NO BASIS FOR LANDMARK TO, UH, TO ORDER AN ADDITIONAL WORK TO STRIP THE PAINT.
UM, THERE, THERE IS NOTHING IN A DENIAL UNDER 51 A THAT WOULD ALLOW LANDMARK TO ALSO TO DO A DENIAL WITH CONDITIONS.
THERE CAN ONLY BE AN APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
UM, AND SO THERE, THERE IS NOTHING IN 51 A THAT WOULD ALLOW THAT.
UM, AS TO THE WINDOWS, UH, AS WAS NOTED, THE UM, SECTION THAT WAS REFERENCED IN APPELLANT'S BRIEF 5.4 RELATES TO THE GASTON COMMERCIAL TRACT.
THERE IS, UM, A MAP ON PAGE 1 68 OF THE RECORD THAT SHOWS WHERE THAT SHOWS, UM, PEAK SUBURBAN EDITION, AND THERE ARE SORT OF DOTTED AREAS THAT SHOW WHERE THE GASTON COMMERCIAL TRACT IS.
UH, AND THEN AT THE FAR LEFT, YOU CAN SEE SYCAMORE STREET RUNNING, AND IT DOES NOT RUN THROUGH THOSE AREAS.
IT IS NOT IN THE GASTON AVENUE COMMERCIAL TRACT.
AND SO THAT SECTION OF, OF THE, UM, OF THE CODE PROVISION DOES NOT APPLY.
UH, AND THE PROVISIONS THAT DO APPLY, SAY, WOULD, UH, AND AS WAS DISCUSSED ON THE RECORD, THE, UM, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, MULTIPLE MEMBERS SAID THAT THEY LOOKED AT THE WINDOWS.
THEY DID NOT BELIEVE THAT THEY RESEMBLED WOOD.
THEY COULD TELL THAT THEY WERE NOT WOOD, AND THEREFORE THAT WAS WHY THEY WERE VOTING TO DENY THE APPLICATION WITH PREJUDICE.
UM, AS YOU'RE AWARE, THE, THE, UM, THE BURDEN FOR THE APPELLANT IS VERY HIGH.
HERE, THE COMMISSION IS REQUIRED TO GIVE DEFERENCE TO LANDMARK AND MAY NOT SUBSTITUTE ITS JUDGMENT FOR LANDMARKS, LANDMARK'S DECISION MUST BE AFFIRMED UNLESS THE CPC FINDS THAT THE DECISION VIOLATES A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE PROVISION EXCEEDS THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY OR WAS NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD, UH, ON THE RECORD THAT EXISTS, THE APPELLANT HAS NOT MET THIS BURDEN.
UM, THE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE REVIEW IS VERY LIMITED, AND IT REQUIRES ONLY THAT MORE THAN A SCINTILLA.
THE EVIDENCE SUPPORTS LANDMARK'S DECISION, WHICH IS THE CASE HERE EXCEPT FOR THE, THE CONDITION THAT WAS PUT PLACED ON THE DENIAL RELATED TO THE PAINT.
UM, THE BUILDINGS AT ISSUE, AS THE APPELLANT HAS STATED, ARE NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE LANDMARK PROCESS.
AND THAT LANDMARK DOES NOT HAVE TO, UM, MAKE A DECISION.
IT HAS TO DETERMINE THAT THE PROPOSED WORK IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT.
THE DETERMINATION WAS THAT THIS WORK WAS NOT COMPATIBLE, UH, AND IT WAS APPELLANT'S BURDEN TO, TO ESTABLISH THAT IT WAS, IT DID NOT MEET THAT BURDEN AS TO EITHER THE REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY TO PAINT THE BUILDING OR TO INSTALL NEW WINDOWS, AND THEREFORE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION SHOULD BE AFFIRMED.
SO THE REMINDER THAT QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ARE LIMITED TO FIVE MINUTES PER EACH COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS VICE CHAIR RUBEN, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY WHEN WE GO TO WHAT, WHAT PROVISION CONTROLS HERE.
SO, YOU KNOW, IN THE LANDMARK STANDARDS, I GUESS IT'S SECTION 3.10, SAYS, WHEN A REPLACEMENT OF AN ORIGINAL DOOR WINDOW IS NECESSARY DUE TO DAMAGE OR STRUCTURAL DETERIORATION,
[07:10:01]
THEY MUST MATCH THE ORIGINAL DOORS AND WINDOWS.IS THAT THE APPLICABLE PROVISION OR IS IT SOME OTHER, SORRY.
IS THIS A, IS IT UNDER FALLEN UNDER THAT PROVISION OR DOES IT FALL UNDER THE PROVISION THAT, THAT I THINK YOU CITE IN YOUR BRIEF IN THE, THE 51 P CHAPTER 63? WELL, BECAUSE THIS IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, THE, THE ISSUE IS TO MAKE IT LOOK, MAKE IT COMPATIBLE WITH THE DISTRICT.
IF THEY WERE GOING TO PUT IN WOOD WINDOWS RATHER THAN ALUMINUM, THAT WOULD MEET THE CRITERIA FOR THE DISTRICT.
IT WOULD BE MORE COMPATIBLE AND IT WOULD BE APP, IT LIKELY WOULD'VE BEEN APPROVED, NOT, EXCUSE ME.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER TREADAWAY, PLEASE.
UM, SO FOLLOWING UP ON VICE CHAIR RUBEN, SO JUST TO MAKE SURE I'M FOLLOWING.
SO THE, THE CODE THAT THE, UM, APPLICANT WAS CITING THAT WOOD OR WOULD LIKE WINDOWS WERE PERMITTED, IS THAT, DOES THAT ADDRESS WHAT'S IN THE GASTON COMMERCIAL TRACT? YES, THAT IS, THAT IS A PROVISION THAT IS SPECIFIC TO THE GASTON AVENUE COMMERCIAL TRACT.
AND THIS PROPERTY IS NOT IN THAT PORTION OF THE PEAKS SUBURBAN ADDITION HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SO IT DOES NOT APPLY TO THIS PROPERTY.
AND THEN I THINK YOU, YOU RESPONDED TO VICE CHAIR RUBEN'S QUESTION WITH THE STANDARD THEN IS NOT THAT STANDARD THAT WAS CITED, BUT INSTEAD IS A COMPATIBILITY STANDARD, IS THAT CORRECT? THE, SO THE STANDARD THAT IT NEEDS TO BE, THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS NEED TO BE REPLACED WITH THE SAME WINDOWS THAT ARE THE SAME RELATES TO, UH, BUILDINGS THAT ARE ORIGINAL TO THE DISTRICT, SO THAT ARE CONTRIBUTING, THIS IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING.
IF THERE WAS A CHANGE TO MAKE THE BUILDING MORE COMPATIBLE TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF WOOD WINDOWS, THEN THAT WOULD'VE LIKELY, I, I CANNOT SAY WHAT LANDMARK WOULD DO WITH ANY CERTAINTY, OF COURSE, BUT THAT WOULD LIKELY HAVE BEEN APPROVED BECAUSE IT WOULD'VE BEEN, UH, IN KEEPING WITH THE, UM, THE RULES ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PERMITTED FACADE MATERIALS.
RIGHT NOW THE WINDOWS ARE ALUMINUM, WHICH IS NOT A PERMITTED FACADE MATERIAL.
DO YOU KNOW WHEN THOSE ALUMINUM WINDOWS WENT IN? I DO NOT.
SO I'M HEARING IT'S NONCONFORMING, SO IT'S NOT TECHNICALLY SUBJECT TO THE PEAK SUBURBAN DISTRICT REGULATIONS, IS THAT CORRECT? IT, IT IS SUBJECT TO THE PEAK SUBURBAN DISTRICT REGULATIONS.
THERE IS A LOWER STANDARD FOR A BUILDING THAT IS NOT, SORRY, I SAYING NONCONFORMING, I MEANT NON-CONTRIBUTING.
THERE'S A LOWER STANDARD FOR A BUILDING THAT IS NON-CONTRIBUTING AS FAR AS THE STANDARD THAT HAS TO BE MET FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
BUT, UH, ALL, ALL BUILDINGS WITHIN THE PEAK SUBURBAN ARE REQUIRED TO GO TO LANDMARK AND FOLLOW THE, THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PEAK SUBURBAN EDITION DISTRICT.
BUT WHAT I'M HEARING IS FOR A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING, THE STANDARDS ARE LESS THAN WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR PEAK SUBURBAN DISTRICT, BUT THERE ARE NO STANDARDS THAT YOU CAN CITE TO FOR WHAT MATERIAL? THE WINDOWS SHOULD BE MADE OUT OF THE, UH, WHAT WE CITED IN OUR BRIEF WAS 51 P DASH 63 1 16, 1 J ONE.
THE ONLY PERMITTED FACADE MATERIALS ARE BRICK, WOOD, SIDING, STONE AND STUCCO.
AND THEN THE FRAMES OF THE WINDOWS MUST BE TRIMMED IN A MANNER TYPICAL OF THE STYLE AND PERIOD OF THE BUILDING, WHICH IS 51 P DASH 63.1 16, ONE P SIX DD.
BUT WHEN YOU SAY TYPICAL OF STYLE, THERE IS SOME DISCRETION AND WHAT THAT STYLE TYPICALITY WOULD BE.
SO IT WAS JUST THE DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION THAT WOULD COMPOSITE DIDN'T MEET IT, BUT YOU WEREN'T ACTUALLY LOOKING TO A PARTICULAR STANDARD THAT SAID IT MUST BE WOOD.
THEY, THEY WERE LOOKING FOR THE, AT THE STANDARDS AS TO WHAT THE PERMITTED FACADE MATERIALS ARE.
BUT WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY IS THERE'S NO, IT SAYS TYPICAL OF STYLE, THAT IS, THAT IS WHAT THE FRAMES OF THE WINDOWS MUST BE TRIMMED.
THAT IS WHAT THE, THE RULE SAYS.
BUT SAYS THERE'S A LESSER STANDARD FOR A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING SUCH AS THESE, WHICH IN MY LAYMAN'S BRAIN IS THINKING IT'S
[07:15:01]
NOT AS STRICT AS JUST A, B, C, D.YOU LOOK MORE TO THE TYPICAL OF STYLE.
IT MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND IT'S CURRENTLY ALUMINUM? YES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE.
I HAVE TWO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS ON THAT.
UM, WITHIN THE INFORMATION INCLUDED, UM, IN OUR, UM, MATERIALS, I'M GONNA ASK THIS QUESTION AGAIN.
IT NOTES THAT THE STRUCTURES WERE ORIGINALLY, UM, CONSTRUCTED.
NOW I'VE LOST MY PAGE, BUT THAT THEY WERE ORIGINAL, UM, BUILDINGS.
THEY HAVE AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF 1990, AND IT'S NOTED THAT THAT WAS A SUBJECTIVE ADJUSTMENT, UM, OF THE AGE OF THE PROPERTY BY A PROPERTY APPRAISER.
ARE THESE ORIGINAL STRUCTURES WITHIN THE DISTRICT? THAT WOULD LIKELY BE A BETTER QUESTION FOR STAFF.
OKAY, THEN I, I CAN HOLD THAT AND COME BACK TO THAT BECAUSE, UM, WHILE THEY ARE LISTED AS NON-CONTRIBUTING, I BELIEVE IT WAS ALSO NOTED WITHIN THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND WITHIN YOUR BRIEF THAT, UM, STRATEGIES SHOULD MAKE OR ANY, ANY CHANGES IN THE STRATEGIES IMPLEMENTED SHOULD MAKE IT LESS NON-CONTRIBUTING.
THAT IS ALWAYS THE GOAL AND ANY CHANGES TO A BUILDING IN A LANDMARK DISTRICT.
AND THEN I DID WANNA MAKE ONE CLARIFICATION.
UH, IT APPEARS WE HAVE TWO ORDINANCES WITHIN OUR, UM, DOCKET THAT WAS INCLUDED.
THE PEAKS EDITION ORDINANCE STARTS ON PAGE, UM, NINE OH, UH, FIVE, UM, THAT NOTES THE PEAKS EDITION ORDINANCE.
AND THEN WITHIN ITS REQUIREMENTS FOR FENESTRATION AND OPENINGS ON PAGE 22 DASH 1 53, UM, IT NOTES ORIGINAL DOORS AND WINDOWS IN THEIR OPENINGS MUST REMAIN INTACT AND BE PRESERVED WHERE REPLACEMENT OF AN ORIGINAL DOOR WINDOW IS NECESSARY DUE TO DAMAGE OR STRUCTURAL DETERIORATION, REPLACEMENT DOORS OR WINDOWS MUST EXPRESS MULIAN SIZE, LIGHT CONFIGURATION AND MATERIAL TO MATCH THE ORIGINAL DOORS AND WINDOWS.
AND THEN THAT BRINGS BACK THE QUESTION ABOUT THE, WHETHER IT'S WOOD OR WOOD, LIKE, AND THE, UM, I THINK YOUR, UM, INFORMATION STATED THAT WOOD WAS NOT DE WOOD, LIKE WAS NOT DETERMINED TO BE WOOD IN THE, UM, REVIEW BY LANDMARK COMMISSIONER.
AND, AND ORIGINAL WOULD NOT GO BACK TO THE EXISTING ALUMINUM, BUT WHAT WOULD BE ORIGINAL TO THE TIME.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONERS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? WE, WE CAN.
I JUST WANT TO, UM, CONFIRM THAT THE STANDARD FOR A NON-CONTRIBUTING ST UH, STRUCTURE IS THAT THE ONLY PERMITTED FACADE MATERIALS ARE BRICK, WOOD, SIDING, STONE AND STUCCO.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS THE STANDARD THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WAS USING? YES.
AND THAT WOOD COMPOSITE IS NOT CONSIDERED TO BE WOOD.
CORRECT? THERE IS A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT, BUT THAT ONLY APPLIES TO THE GASTON COMMERCIAL DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS THE WOOD LIKE THAT DOES NOT APPLY FOR THE REST OF THE DISTRICT.
BUT THIS STANDARD IS THE STANDARD FOR NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.
MR. TREADWAY, PLEASE JUST TO CONFIRM, BRICK, WOOD SIDING AND STUCCO IS FOR THE EXTERIOR.
CAN YOU REPEAT THE LANGUAGE FOR THE WINDOWS PLEASE? THE FACADE DOES INCLUDE THE WINDOWS.
THE WINDOWS ARE A POR PART OF THE FACADE.
UM, BUT THE, IT SAYS THE FRAMES OF WINDOWS MUST BE TRIMMED IN A MANNER TYPICAL OF THE STYLE AND PERIOD OF THE BUILDING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
UH, WE'LL NOW HEAR REBUTTAL FROM MR. LENTI.
WHEN WE FIRST, UM, APPLIED FOR THE CA WE WERE UNAWARE OF THE CODE THAT SHE'S REFERRING TO WHEN IT COMES TO THAT TRACK.
WE WERE ONLY GIVING, GIVEN THE ORDINANCE OF THE 51 A DASH 4.501 TO REFER TO AS TO WHAT TYPE OF MATERIAL WE CAN USE FOR WINDOWS.
[07:20:01]
BUT NONE OF THIS INFORMATION REGARDING THAT CODE OR THAT ORDINANCE WAS EVER GIVEN TO US BY OUR REPRESENTATIVE THAT WAS ASSIGNED TO US.DOES NOT DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENT, SIR? YES, THANK YOU.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY, UH, MAY CHOOSE TO DEBATE AND DECIDE THIS MATTER TODAY OR MAY HEAR THE PRESENTATIONS AND DELAY THE DEBATE OR THE VOTE ON THE MATTER.
IF ADDITIONAL TIME IS REQUIRED TO PROPERLY DECIDE THE CASE, A MOTION TO UPHOLD OR OVERTURN THE LANDMARK COMMISSION REQUIRES A MAJORITY VOTE.
WHEN THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAKES THIS DECISION ON THIS APPEAL, A RESOLUTION UPHOLDING OR OVERTURNING THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WILL BE ENTERED INTO THE MINUTES AS PART OF THE RECORD.
NOW THAT WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES, WE MUST MAKE A DECISION.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY REVERSE OR AFFIRM IN WHOLE OR IN PART, OR MODIFY THE DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION OR THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY REMAND A CASE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MUST GIVE DEFERENCE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISION AND MAY NOT SUBSTITUTE ITS JUDGMENT FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S JUDGMENT.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MUST AFFIRM THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISION UNLESS IT FINDS THAT IT ONE VIOLATES A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE PROVISION EXCEEDS THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY OR WAS NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE IN THE, CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD.
AND, UH, JUST A QUICK NOTE, UH, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE REFERS TO EVIDENCE THAT A REASONABLE MIND COULD ACCEPT AS ADEQUATE OR SUPPORTIVE OR SUPPORT A CONCLUSION SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IS MORE THAN A NEAR SCINTILLA.
QUESTIONS FOR COMMISSIONER TREADWAY? YES.
CAN WE HAVE STAFF ADDRESS THEIR RECOMMENDATION AND THE REASONS BEHIND IT? BECAUSE I, I WHAT I'VE HEARD IS THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AS TO WHICH STANDARD APPLIES.
WE DO HAVE A, A MEMBER FOR STAFF.
UH, LET ME, LET ME SORT YOU IN REAL QUICK.
IF YOU COULD PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
DO YOU SWEAR AND AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE PLAIN COMMISSION? YES, I DO.
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS ON THE FIRST REQUEST REGARDING THE PAINT, THE COLOR WAS THE ISSUE ON THE SECOND REQUEST.
I APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS BECAUSE IT IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
AND FOR OUR NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE WE USE IN THE PEAK SUBURBAN EDITION, THE SITE AND SITE ELEMENTS ARE BUILDING IN LANDSCAPE SECTION, BUT NOT NECESSARILY THE SECTIONS THAT REFER TO THE HISTORIC BECAUSE WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING IT AS AN ORIGINAL HISTORIC BUILDING.
SO THAT'S WHY MY CONCLUSION WAS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS.
BUT MAKE SURE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY THAT WHEN SOMEONE'S LOOKING AT IT, YOU CAN'T, IT, IT'S NOT INCONGRUENT WITH THE REST OF THE DISTRICT.
SO THAT WAS WHAT MY DECISION WAS BASED ON.
AND CAN YOU DESCRIBE THE CONDITIONS PLEASE? UH, THE CONDITIONS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS, MY CONDITIONS WERE ONE IN TERMS OF, BECAUSE WE SORT OF HAD AN, HAD AN UNDERSTANDING THAT HE WAS GOING TO GO BACK AND DO SOME REPAINTING.
SO MY CONDITION ONE WAS THAT THE PAINT AROUND THE EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR FRAME MATCHED THE PAINT ON THE REST OF THE BUILDING.
IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU LOOK AT THE WINDOWS THAT MR. DIVER BROUGHT TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, THEY KIND OF HAD A SEMI BROWN TYPE COLOR.
IN OTHER WORDS, YOU COULD BASICALLY SEE THAT IT WAS NOT WOOD PER SE WHEN HE BROUGHT THE DEMONSTRATION.
BUT MY IDEA WAS IF HE DIDN'T HAVE THE GRILL AND THE OTHER CONDITION WAS THAT IT'D BE ONE OVER ONE, SO HE WOULDN'T HAVE A GRILL, YOU WOULD JUST HAVE AN EXTERIOR FRAME OVER EXTERIOR FRAME.
SO MY CONDITIONS WERE ONE OVER ONE AND THEN PAINT TO MATCH THE ACCENT COLOR, SO THAT WAY FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY, IT WOULD NOT BE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE REST OF THE DISTRICT.
I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
HOW ARE YOU? I'M VERY WELL, THANK YOU.
AND THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.
[07:25:01]
CONSTRUCTION DATE FOR THE STRUCTURES IN YOUR CASE REPORT ON PAGE, UH, D 31.IT NOTES THAT THIS WAS ERECTED IN 1923 WITH AN EFFECTIVE YEAR OF 1990, AND THE NOTING THAT IT WAS A SUBJECTIVE DATE ASSIGNED BASED ON OTHER IMPROVEMENTS.
IS THIS AN ORIGINAL STRUCTURE TO THE DISTRICT? IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT IT IS IN, BECAUSE IT IS ON THE, UH, SANDBORN MAPS, THE FOOTPRINTS ARE THE SAME.
IT'S JUST THAT, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OR MY INTERPRETATION THAT IN 1990 OR SHORTLY BEFORE 1990, SUCH MAJOR RENOVATIONS OR MAJOR RENOVATIONS WERE DONE SUCH THAT IT DID NOT RESEMBLE THE ORIGINAL BUILDING TO THE POINT THAT THEY COULD STILL CONSIDER IT AS THE ORIGINAL OR HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT.
SO THAT'S WHY IT IS CLASSIFIED AS NON-CONTRIBUTING, WHOEVER UNDERSTOOD TO POTENTIALLY BE AN ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
AND, UM, IS, WOULD 1923 BE WITHIN THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE DISTRICT? THAT WOULD BE CORRECT.
COMMISSIONER HARBERT, PLEASE, SIR.
SO THE, THERE WERE TWO ISSUES.
ONE WAS, UM, THE LAND, THE COMMITTEE ADVISED HIM TO, UM, STRIP THE PAINT, WHICH WE DECIDED THEY COULDN'T.
AND THEN THERE'S, HE BROUGHT UP THE POINT ABOUT, UH, MR. ANDERSON, NOT RECUSING HIMSELF.
HAS, HAS THAT BEEN LOOKED AT? DOES HE HAVE A POINT THERE OR OKAY WITH RESPONSE TO STRIPPING THE PAINT? I WOULD SAY THAT'S NOT A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK CLOSELY AT THE BRICKS, THERE'S SOME DAMAGE TO THE BRICKS.
AND I THINK STRIPPING THE BRICKS WOULD DEFINITELY BE, IT WOULD CAUSE MORE DAMAGE.
WOULDN'T BE BENEFICIAL TO THE BRICK.
I'D SAY THAT BECAUSE OF THE LIST OF, THAT WE GOT TO JUDGE THIS SITUATION OFF WAS THAT THE LANDMARK COMMITTEE COULD HAVE MADE A DECISION BY OVERREACHING.
UM, AND TO ME THEY TOLD HIM THAT THAT WAS A DECISION, THAT WAS A PART OF THE DECISION THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO STRIP THE PAINT BEFORE PAINTING IT.
UM, AND THEN THE OTHER VIOLATION THAT HE MENTIONED THAT MR. HEBERT YES.
COMMISSIONER HER? YEAH, I, I THINK WE'RE, I'M BEING ADVISED AND I THINK I AGREE THAT WE'RE GETTING INTO NEW EVIDENCE.
AND, UH, APPARENTLY WE CANNOT DO THAT.
UM, COMMISS YOUR, SO I KNOW THAT THIS NEW PLEASE MIGHT BE GETTING INTO NEW EVIDENCE, BUT I'M CONFUSED BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT THIS UP DURING, EARLIER WHEN HE'S, ONE OF THE MAIN THINGS THAT HE SAID IS THAT THERE'S A POSSIBILITY OF, UH, ETHICS VIOLATION OR HIM SO ON.
SO HOW, WHERE WERE WE SUPPOSED TO ADDRESS THAT? UM, IF SOMEONE, IF IT WAS ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAD A, UH, HAD A, MR. MOORE HAS A QUESTION FOR YOU, MR. MY BRYANT JUST WANNA LAST NAME? WHAT? NO, I, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THAT ANY ETHICS VIOLATION THAT IS ALLEGED IS FOR THE ETHICS ADVISORY COMMISSION.
THAT, THAT, THAT'S BEYOND YOUR PURVIEW.
SO THAT WOULD BE, SO THAT'S HIS ANSWER THAT HE NEEDS TO ADDRESS IT WITH THE ETHICS VIOLATION.
THAT, THAT'S A, THAT'S A MATTER FOR THE ETHICS ADVISORY COMMISSION.
IT IS BEYOND, IT'S NOT FOR YOU ALL TO CONSIDER.
CAN I GET SOMEONE TO READ THE LIST OF THINGS THAT WE ARE TO CONSIDER AGAIN? YES.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MUST AFFIRM THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISION UNLESS IT FINDS THAT IT VIOLATES A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE.
PROVI PROVISION EXCEEDS THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY OR WAS NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD AND, UH, WITH A NOTE THAT WAS, UH, WAS NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE WITH EVIDENCE.
THE DEFINITION REFERS TO EVIDENCE THAT A REASONABLE MIND COULD ACCEPT AS ADEQUATE TO SUPPORT A CONCLUSION.
AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IS MORE THAN A ME SCINTILLA.
COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, PLEASE.
I'M GONNA GO BACK TO THE ETHICS QUESTION.
IF WE DO THINK THERE'S A REASON THAT'S NOT ONE OF THOSE THREE LISTED THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE APPROVING, THIS LANDMARK COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IS OUR ACTION TO DEFER EVIDENCE.
EVIDENCE, DOESN'T IT? COMMISSIONER
[07:30:01]
TREADWAY, YOU HAVE THE, THE CODE REQUIRES CPC TO GIVE A HIGH DEGREE OF DEFERENCE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION.AND THIS BODY CAN ONLY OVERTURN LANDMARK IF THOSE THREE, IF ONE OF THOSE THREE THINGS ARE MET.
THAT'S THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION VIOLATED A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE PROVISION THAT LANDMARK EXCEEDED ITS AUTHORITY, OR THAT LANDMARK'S DECISION WAS NOT REASONABLY SU SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
ABSENT ONE OF THOSE THREE THINGS, YOU HAVE TO, YOU, YOU HAVE TO GIVE A HIGH DEGREE OF DEFERENCE TO LANDMARK.
I AM HIGHLY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE INFORMATION THAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO MAKE THIS DECISION ON.
SO MY QUESTION IS, WHAT IS OUR ABILITY TO DO OTHER, WHAT CAN WE DO OTHER THAN APPROVE IT? CAN WE DEFER IT? CAN WE PUSH IT TO ANOTHER DATE? AND IS THAT JUST SOMEBODY MAKES A MOTION? WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A REASON, WE JUST DO IT.
C P C COULD DEFER TO A LATER DATE IF THAT'S WHAT THE BODY WANTED TO DO.
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE TO A DATE CERTAIN, AND THEN IT WOULD COME BEFORE THE BODY AGAIN AT THAT DATE.
WE HAD OUR ETHICS BRIEFING AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THIS PLUS 12 HOUR MEETING.
AND I THINK IF SOMEONE DOESN'T KNOW THEIR RIGHTS ABOUT HOW TO FILE AN ETHICS COMPLAINT, I FEEL A LOT BETTER AS A COMMISSIONER KNOWING SOMEBODY KNOWS WHAT THEIR, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE IN THIS CASE THAN APPROVING SOMETHING THAT COULD BE TAINTED BY AN ETHICS ALLEGATION.
MR. MOORE, CAN YOU, UM, IT SAYS VIOLATES A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE PROVISION WHEN THE WORD STATUTORY, THE, THE ETHICS PIECE HERE, WHICH DOESN'T FALL WITHIN OUR PURVIEW, DOESN'T, DOES IT FALL WITHIN THE WORD STATUTORY? NO, BECAUSE CHAPTER 12 A, IT'S THE ETHICS ADVISORY COMMISSION THAT GETS TO MAKE THE CALL ON WHETHER OR NOT AN ETHICS VIOLATION OCCURRED.
I'M GOING OUTSIDE OF THE THREE THINGS.
I'M NOT TRYING TO FIT INTO ONE OF THOSE, YOU KNOW, SQUARE HOLE, YOU KNOW, SQUARE IN A ROUND HOLE.
I'M, I'M LOOKING AT WHAT OTHER OPTIONS DO WE HAVE? AND SO WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING IS THAT SOMEONE COULD MAKE A MOTION TO DEFER UNTIL ANOTHER DATE CERTAIN TO PICK THIS BACK UP.
IS THAT YES, CORRECT IS CORRECT.
WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING THAT UP, UH, COMMISSIONER TREAD, LET ME JUST READ YOU THIS ONE LITTLE PIECE THAT SAYS THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY REVERSE OR AFFIRM IN WHOLE OR IN PART OR MODIFY THE DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION OR THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY REMAND A CASE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS, BUT IT ALSO SAYS THAT THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MUST GIVE DEFERENCE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISION.
IT MAY NOT SUBSTITUTE ITS JUDGMENT FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S JUDGMENT.
AND THEN IT GOES INTO THE, THE THREE FACTORS THERE, MR. MOORE, I WAS JUST GOING TO, TO ADD THAT IF THIS BODY DECIDES TO HOLD IT OVER TO A DATE CERTAIN, IT WOULD COME BACK BEFORE THIS BODY AND IT WOULD BE THE SAME REQUIREMENT THAT WITH, WITH THE SAME INFORMATION THAT CPC HAS TO GIVE A HIGH DEGREE OF DEFERENCE AND CAN ONLY OVERTURN LANDMARK IF THOSE THREE, IF ONE OF THOSE THREE THINGS ARE MEANT.
SO WHAT'S THE STANDARD FOR MODIFICATION? SAME OR DIFFERENT? CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION PLEASE, COMMISSIONER? OKAY, SO WE HAVE BEFORE AS A LANDMARK COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND A STAFF COMMISSION, I MEAN A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AS PART OF OUR ABILITY TO TAKE ACTION.
YOU JUST SAID ONE OF THE THINGS WE CAN DO IS MODIFICATION OF WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US.
SO AS PART OF THAT, CAN WE APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IN PART AND LANDMARK COMMISSION? IN PART, THERE'S CLEARLY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
I DON'T KNOW THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG HERE.
[07:35:02]
YOU CAN HEAR ME, RIGHT? YES.MY PHONE'S DYING, SO I HAD TO STAND UP A CHART COM.
SO THIS IS THE EXACT LANGUAGE OF THE CODE.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION SHALL AFFIRM THE LANDMARK DE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION UNLESS IT FINDS THAT A, A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE THAT THE SI, SORRY, THAT LANDMARK HAS VIOLATED A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE PROVISION B EXCEEDS ITS EXCEEDS THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY, OR C WAS NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD.
SO IT SAYS THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION SHALL AFFIRM UNLESS THOSE THREE THINGS.
BUT I THOUGHT CHAIR, UM, JUST READ OUT SOME DIFFERENT LANGUAGE THAT WAS LIKE AFFIRM, REJECT, MODIFY.
IT SAYS THE PLAINTIFF COMMISSION MAY REVERSE OR AFFIRM IN WHOLE OR IN PART OR MODIFY THE DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION OR THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY REMAND A CASE BACK, WELL SHOULDN'T SAY BACK, BUT REMAND THE CASE TO LANDMARK COMMISSION FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.
UH, I I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER YOUNG CAN CLEAN THIS UP A LITTLE BIT, BUT I I BELIEVE THAT THAT LANGUAGE IS UNLOCKED IF WE FIND ANY OF THE THREE CONDITIONS THAT WE READ BEFORE IN REGARDS TO VIOLATE TO THE STATUTORY OF EVIDENCE, EXCEEDS THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AUTHORITY OR WAS NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, CONSIDERED THE EVIDENCE, CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD.
SO, I I, MY UNDERSTANDING OF THIS LANGUAGE, MR. MOORE, YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF IS THOSE THREE ITEMS, ANY OF THOSE THREE THEN UNLOCKS THE PREVIOUS LANGUAGE IN TERMS OF THE OPTIONS THAT ARE OPEN TO THIS BODY? TH THAT'S CORRECT.
THAT UNLESS YOU FIND ONE OF THOSE THREE THINGS, YOU SHALL AFFIRM.
IF YOU DO FIND ONE OF THOSE THREE THINGS, THEN LIKE YOU SAID, YOU CAN UNLOCK SOME OF THOSE OTHER OPTIONS.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG, I THINK YOU HAD, UH, UH, SIMPLIFIED.
I, I THINK MR. MOORE SAID IT PERFECTLY.
WELL, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
UH, COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? NO, I'M, I'M GOOD.
UM, I'LL, I'LL LISTEN FOR A WHILE.
I THINK THAT EVERYONE IS GETTING, I MEAN, I THINK THAT THEY WERE GETTING HUNG UP ON, SO MAYBE THE STATUTORY WORD, AND MAYBE THAT IF HE'S SAYING THAT BASED OFF OF, IF YOU LIVE IN A AREA THAT YOU MAKE A DECISION, RIGHT? I'M SLEEPY.
UM,
THE, I THINK THE HANGUP IS THAT, AND, AND, AND IT'S ALMOST SAYING GO AHEAD AND PASS IT AND HOPE THAT ETHICS CATCH IT.
BUT IF
DON'T, SO WHY DID IT EVEN COME? WHY DO, WHY DOES IT COME TO US IF WE JUST REALLY PASS IT? BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY THING, AND I CAN SEE THAT'S SIGNIFICANT, IS THE FACT THAT HE'S SAYING THAT HE LIVES WITHIN PROXIMITY.
SO BASED OFF OF WHAT YOU ALL, AND I THINK IT ALSO IS BECAUSE WE HAD A WHOLE CLASS THIS MORNING, AND SO WHEN IN A NEW CLASS, A FRESH CLASS, YOU PICK UP WHAT YOU PICK UP AND YOU USE IT, WE'RE YOU'RE USING IT IN REAL TIME.
SO, SO YOU, YOU, YOU CATCH IT PROBABLY WOULD'VE WENT OVER OUR HEAD OR TWO WEEKS, TWO, TWO OR THREE MEETINGS.
BUT YOU HAD AN ETHICS VI YOU HAD AN ETHICS.
WE SIGNED DOCUMENTS THIS MORNING AND ONE OF THEM SAID, IF YOU LIVE IN PROXIMITY THAT YOU SHOULD RECUSE YOURSELF.
AND YOU HAD, SO WHAT HAS SAID HE DID RECUSE HIMSELF AND HE WAS A DRIVER AND THAT PARTICULAR COMMISSIONER WAS A DRIVING FORCE.
SO SHOULD WE KICK IT BACK AND LET THEM HAVE AN ETHICS CLASS? BUT
THAT IS A QUESTION PURELY FOR THE ETHICS ADVISORY COMMISSION.
SOMEONE HAS TO MAKE A COMPLAINT, OR THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S OFFICE HAS TO PROSECUTE A COMPLAINT BEFORE THE ETHICS ADVISORY COMMISSION SAYING THAT SOMEONE HAS VIOLATED CHAPTER 12 A AND SO WOULD AT THAT TIME.
SO AT THAT TIME THEN HE COULD RESUBMIT, UH, AN APPLICATION AGAIN OR DOES WHAT WE JUST APPROVED, DOES THAT ALSO APPLY THE HE LANDMARK OR JUST TO, TO THIS COMMISSION? SO WE JUST APPROVED SOMETHING SAID THAT IF SOMETHING COMES UP, THERE'S, THERE'S NO TWO YEAR WAIVER AT LANDMARK
I'M JUST, LISTEN,
[07:40:01]
JUST REAL TIRED.UM, CUZ OTHER THAN THAT WE JUST, WE JUST PRETTY MUCH WHAT WAS THE REASON THAT IT CAME TO US THEN IF WE HAVE TO KICK IT BACK? CAUSE THE ONLY THING THAT I REALLY CAUGHT WAS MAYBE THE PAINT COLOR, UM, AND THE WOOD AND, YEAH.
THIS BODY IS THE APPELLATE BODY FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
AND SOMEONE WHO IS DISSATISFIED OR WHO THINKS THAT LANDMARK HAS VIOLATED ONE OF THOSE THREE THINGS CAN APPEAL TO CPC BEFORE I COME TO YOU, COMMISSIONER, MAYBE YOU CAN CLEAN IT UP, MR. WARREN, JUST TO BEAT THE DEAD HORSE POSSIBLE.
EVEN ON MY PART, UH, THE, THE WHOLE ETHICS ISSUE, WHETHER THERE WAS OR WAS NOT AN ETHICS VIOLATION IS NOT FOR THIS BODY TO DETERMINE WE HAVE NO CAPACITY TO DO SO.
AND THAT, UH, THAT POINT DOES NOT FOLLOW, DOES NOT, PARDON ME, DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE THREE CRITERIA THAT WE LOOK TO DECIDE WHAT TO DO WITH THIS CASE.
IT'S, AND IN FACT, AS YOU MENTIONED, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DOES NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION THEMSELVES.
SO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION CANNOT POLICE ITS OWN MEMBERS.
IT'S THE ETHICS ADVISORY COMMISSION THAT DETERMINES WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S BEEN A VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 12.
AND THAT'S, NO, IT'S NOT PART OF OUR, THAT'S JUST LIKE, IT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE FOR, FOR THIS BODY TO DECIDE THAT ONE OF OUR MEMBERS HAD A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND COULDN'T PARTICIPATE.
IN FACT, WE DON'T EVEN DISCUSS IT.
WHAT YOU JUST SAID CLINGED IT UP.
THAT THAT'S NOT A STA THAT'S NOT THE RULE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
SO IT'S, SO THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO CLARIFY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER? NO.
UH, COMMISSIONER TREAD WRIGHT.
SO THE RECOMMENDATION BEFORE US HAS DENIAL WITH PREJUDICE ABOUT THE WINDOWS.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? IS THAT APPEALABLE ABOVE US OR WHAT WOULD THE NEXT STEP BE IF WE APPROVE THIS CPC? YOU COULD, SOMEONE WHO IS DISSATISFIED WITH CITY PLAN COMMISSIONS MAY APPEAL TO STATE DISTRICT COURT, BUT THIS IS THE FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY.
THERE'S A JUDICIAL REMEDY UNDER THE CODE, IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR, PLEASE.
IS IT CORRECT THAT THEY ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY TO REAPPLY TO LANDMARK COMMISSION? YES, THEY DO.
UH, COMMISSIONER TRAY, DID YOU MAY, SHOULD I, ARE WE DONE WITH THE QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY.
CAN YOU START, CAN YOU READ OUT THREE PRONGS, THE FIRST ONE AGAIN AND MORE SLOWLY? YES.
IT VIOLATES A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE PROVISION EXCEEDS THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY OR WAS NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD.
SLOWLY VIOLATES A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE PROVISION.
MR. CHAIR, IF WE'RE RE WHEN WE'RE READY.
HAVING FULLY REVIEWED THE DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IN CA, 212 DASH 5 7 4 RD AT FIVE, EXCUSE ME, 4,512 DASH 4,508 SYCAMORE STREET.
AND HAVING EVALUATED THE RECORD AND HEARD ALL THE TESTIMONY PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY, I MOVE CITY PLAN COMMISSION AFFIRM THE DEF DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG, UH, I HAVE WHAT I HOPE WILL BE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, WHICH IS, UH, ON PAGE 2285 TO STRIKE FROM THE LANDMARK'S DECISION.
THE LAST SENTENCE OF PARAGRAPH ONE, WHICH READS THE PAINTING OF THE BRICK IS TO BE REMOVED.
WE HEARD THE COUNCIL FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, AL BUT CONCEDE THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HAD NO AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE THAT.
YES, THE, UH, FRIENDLY HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON AND COMMISSIONER BLAIR.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION, WHICH IS TO, UH, FOLLOW THE STA STAFF AND LANDMARK RECOMMENDATION WITH THE ADJUSTMENT TO THE LANGUAGE ON 2285 WAS RIGHT INTO THE RECORD BY COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
ANY COMMENTS? ANY COMMENTS, DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[07:45:01]
ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES.CAN I MAKE ANOTHER, CAN I MAKE A DIFFERENT MOTION? WE, THAT ONE IS JUST, YEAH, THAT CLOSED IT DOWN.
CAN I MAKE ANOTHER A DIFFERENT MOTION NOW? NO, THE, THE, THE MATTER HAS BEEN DISPOSED.
NOW I GUESS THE, THE ONLY MOTION YOU COULD MAKE IS TO RECONSIDER.
COULD THAT BE WHOA, WHOA, WHOA.
I THOUGHT WE WERE VOTING ON THE AMENDMENT.
THE, THE AMENDMENT WAS ACCEPTED.
SO THE AMENDMENT WAS ACCEPTED, BUT THE MOTION ITSELF NOW HAS TO BE HEARD.
THAT WAS WHAT THE, THE VOTE WAS FOR THE MOTION BECAUSE IT WAS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT WAS ACCEPTED.
NO, IT'S JUST ONCE BECAUSE OF THE AMENDMENT.
THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS WAS ACCEPTED BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
AND COMMISSIONER BOARD IS THE DETRIMENT OF NOT BEING IN THE ROOM.
PARDON ME? I SAID THIS IS THE DETRIMENT OF NOT BEING IN THE ROOM RIGHT NOW.
NOT REALLY, CUZ I WAS CONFUSED TOO.
IT, IT'S, IT MAY BE A NEW THING, NOT THAT YOU'RE NOT IN THE ROOM.
I THOUGHT THERE WAS GONNA BE A SECOND VOTE AS WELL, SO IT'S NOT YEAH, I, SORRY.
I WOULD'VE MADE A MOTION TO DEFER THIS, JUST SO AT LEAST THE APPLICANT HAS THE CHANCE TO FILE WITH ETHICS IF HE WANTS TO.
I, I, AGAIN, I WILL JUST SAY ON THE RECORD, I HAVE SOME SERIOUS CONCERNS WITH THE RECORD BEFORE US.
YEAH, I BELIEVE GO AHEAD, MR. MOORE.
THE, THE APPLICANT CAN FILE AN ETHICS COMPLAINT TODAY AT ANY POINT IN TIME.
I, I WOULD NOT HAVE, UM, I WOULD'VE VOTED NO HAD I KNOWN THIS WAS THE ENTIRE MOTION.
ALSO, I'M OKAY WITH COMMISSIONER JONES'S MOTION, LIKE THE AMENDMENT, BUT I THOUGHT WE WOULD HAVE A DIFFERENT VOTE ON THE MOTION.
I GET IT, BUT I JUST WANTED ON WE HAVE A MOTION TO RECON.
COMMISSIONER CHAIR, WE HAVE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER.
I'LL, I'LL SECOND TO RECONSIDER.
UH, WE'RE GONNA RECONSIDER THE ITEM TO ESSENTIALLY RE-VOTE IT.
ANY, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
KINGSTON KING, WHO? THIS IS ON THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER.
THIS IS THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER.
OH, THIS IS, YES, THIS IS TO RECONSIDER.
TO RECONSIDER ESSENTIALLY TO TAKE A REVOTE TO ALLOW, UH, COMMISSIONER TREADWAY.
ANYONE? COMMISSIONER KINGSTON VOTED NO TO RECONSIDER MOTION PASSES.
AND, AND DEBORAH AND DEBORAH CARPENTER.
UH, CAN I HAVE A MOTION? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? YES.
IN, UM, HAVING FULLY REVIEWED THE DECISION OF LANDMARK COMMISSION AND CA 212 DASH 5 74 R D AT 45 12 SLASH 45 18 SYCAMORE STREET.
AND HAVING EVALUATED THE RECORD AND HEARD ALL THE TESTIMONY PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY, I MOVE THAT THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION AFFIRMED THE DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IN STRIKE.
THE LAST SENTENCE ON PAGE 22 DASH 85 PERTAINING TO THE REMOVAL OF THE PAINT ON BRICK.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION.
I THINK HAD COMMISSIONER JUNG NOT MADE HIS AMENDMENT THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HAD OVERSTEPPED THEIR ABILITY BY REQUIRING THE PAINT TO BE REMOVED, WHICH DIDN'T COME UP UNTIL WE WERE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION THIS EVENING.
I ALSO THINK, BASED ON WHAT STAFF SAID OF THEIR RATIONALE THAT THEY, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION MAY HAVE VIOLATED THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS THAT THEY WERE REQUIRED TO BE LOOKING AT WHEN DETERMINING THE WINDOWS THEMSELVES.
SO FOR THOSE REASONS, UM, I AM NOT COMPLETELY CONVINCED THAT THIS IS A STRAIGHT UP AND DOWN, SO I WILL BE VOTING AGAINST IT.
COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, ANY OTHER OBJECT? THE PREVIOUS QUESTION? PARDON ME? I'M TRYING TO CUT OFF THE BANKRUPTCY.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? NAY, NAY, NAY TO IN OPPOSITION.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, THERE ARE NO OTHER MATTERS THAT I KNOW OF.
UDRA, IS THERE ANYTHING IN OTHER MATTERS? NO.
THANK YOU FOR WORKING WITH US, FOR ALL, STICKING AROUND FOR ALL THE CHALLENGES.
[07:50:01]
UH, MEETING WITH ALL THE THANK YOU.WE, WE DO HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN BY COMMISSIONER BLA IER, MY COMMISSIONER RUBEN COMMISSIONERS, THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK.